Khader Ashiq A, Allaf Mohammed, Lu Oscar W, Lazopoulos George, Moscarelli Marco, Kendall Simon, Salmasi Mohammad Y, Athanasiou Thanos
Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Division of Biosciences, University College London, London, UK.
J Card Surg. 2021 Mar;36(3):1103-1119. doi: 10.1111/jocs.15298. Epub 2021 Jan 11.
Surgical repair of the mitral valve has long been the established therapy for degenerative mitral regurgitation (MR). Newer transcatheter methods over the last decade, such as the MitraClip, serve to restore mitral function with reduced procedural burden and enhanced recovery. This study aims to compare the shortterm and midterm outcomes of MitraClip insertion with surgical repair for MR.
A systematic review of the literature was conducted for studies comparing outcomes between surgical repair and MitraClip. The initial search returned 1850 titles, from which 12 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria (one randomized controlled trial and 11 retrospective studies).
The final analysis comprised 4219 patients (MitraClip 1210; surgery 3009). Operative mortality was not different between the groups (odds ratio [OR] = 1.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.63-4.23]; p = .317). Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the MitraClip group (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.882, 95% CI: [0.77-0.99]; p < .001) with considerable heterogeneity (I > 90%; p < .001). The rate of reoperation on the mitral valve was lower in the surgical group (OR = 0.392; 95% CI: [0.188-0.817]; p = .012) as was the rate of MR recurrence grade moderate or above (OR = 0.29; 95% CI: [0.19-0.46]; p < .001) during midterm follow up. Long term survival (4-5 years) was also similar between both groups (hazard ratio = 0.70; 95% CI: [0.35-1.41]; p = .323).
This study highlights the superior midterm durability of surgical valve repair for MR compared with the MitraClip.
二尖瓣手术修复长期以来一直是退行性二尖瓣反流(MR)的既定治疗方法。在过去十年中,诸如MitraClip等更新的经导管方法有助于恢复二尖瓣功能,同时减轻手术负担并促进恢复。本研究旨在比较MitraClip植入术与MR手术修复的短期和中期结果。
对比较手术修复和MitraClip结果的研究进行了系统的文献综述。初步检索返回1850个标题,其中12项研究符合纳入标准(1项随机对照试验和11项回顾性研究)。
最终分析纳入4219例患者(MitraClip组1210例;手术组3009例)。两组的手术死亡率无差异(优势比[OR]=1.63,95%置信区间[CI]:[0.63-4.23];p=0.317)。MitraClip组的住院时间显著更短(标准化均值差[SMD]=0.882,95%CI:[0.77-0.99];p<0.001),且存在相当大的异质性(I>90%;p<0.001)。手术组二尖瓣再次手术率较低(OR=0.392;95%CI:[0.188-0.817];p=0.012),中期随访期间中度或以上MR复发率也较低(OR=0.29;95%CI:[0.19-0.46];p<0.001)。两组的长期生存率(4-5年)也相似(风险比=0.70;95%CI:[0.35-1.41];p=0.323)。
本研究强调了与MitraClip相比,手术瓣膜修复治疗MR具有更好的中期耐久性。