Suppr超能文献

二尖瓣再次修复与初次修复失败后的替换:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Mitral valve re-repair vs replacement following failed initial repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, National University Heart Centre, National University Health System-NUHS, 1E Kent Ridge Road, 9th Floor, Tower Block, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.

School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.

出版信息

J Cardiothorac Surg. 2020 Oct 7;15(1):304. doi: 10.1186/s13019-020-01344-3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment strategy following a failed mitral valve repair remains unclear. This study aims to compare and analyse available studies which report the clinical outcomes post mitral valve re-repair (MVr) or replacement (MVR) after a prior mitral valve repair.

METHODS

Based on PRISMA guidelines, a literature search was performed utilising PubMed, Cochrane and Scopus databases to identify retrospective cohort studies that reported outcomes of MVr and MVR after a prior mitral valve repair. Data regarding operative mortality, clinical outcomes and complications were extracted, synthesized and meta-analysed where appropriate.

RESULTS

Eight studies with a total cohort of 1632 patients were used. After analysis, no significant differences in the short term and long-term operative mortality, incidence of stroke, congestive heart failure, Grade 1 and Grade 2 mitral regurgitation, requirement of 3rd mitral valve operation and reoperation due bleeding were found between the two groups. However, a slightly higher incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation (OR: 0.11, CI: 0.02 to 0.17, I = 0%, p = 0.02) was observed in the MVR group, as compared to the MVr group.

CONCLUSION

MVr appears to be a viable alternative to MVR for mitral valve reoperation, given that they are associated with similar post-operative outcomes.

摘要

背景

二尖瓣修复失败后的最佳治疗策略仍不明确。本研究旨在比较和分析现有的研究,这些研究报告了在先前的二尖瓣修复后行二尖瓣再次修复(MVr)或置换(MVR)的临床结果。

方法

根据 PRISMA 指南,利用 PubMed、Cochrane 和 Scopus 数据库进行文献检索,以确定报告先前二尖瓣修复后行 Mvr 和 MVR 的结果的回顾性队列研究。提取并综合了有关手术死亡率、临床结果和并发症的数据,并在适当的情况下进行了荟萃分析。

结果

使用了 8 项共纳入 1632 例患者的研究。分析后,两组在短期和长期手术死亡率、卒中发生率、充血性心力衰竭、1 级和 2 级二尖瓣反流、需要进行第 3 次二尖瓣手术和因出血而再次手术方面无显著差异。然而,与 Mvr 组相比,MVR 组术后心房颤动的发生率略高(OR:0.11,CI:0.02 至 0.17,I=0%,p=0.02)。

结论

鉴于 MVR 与 MVr 的术后结果相似,MVr 似乎是二尖瓣再次手术的可行替代方案。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d354/7542900/e1024dddcba3/13019_2020_1344_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验