Suppr超能文献

经导管主动脉瓣置换术治疗退行性生物瓣主动脉瓣与再次开胸换瓣术治疗退行性生物瓣主动脉瓣的对比:一项比较中期结果的更新荟萃分析。

Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus redo surgical valve replacement for degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valve: An updated meta-analysis comparing midterm outcomes.

机构信息

Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, Nebraska, USA.

Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA.

出版信息

Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Jun 1;97(7):1481-1488. doi: 10.1002/ccd.29541. Epub 2021 Feb 13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Redo surgical aortic valve replacement (redo SAVR) and valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV TAVR) are the two treatment strategies available for patients with severe symptomatic bioprosthetic aortic valve dysfunction. Herein, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing both early and mid-term outcomes of ViV TAVR versus redo SAVR in patients with bioprosthetic aortic valve disease.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane reviews, and Google scholar electronic databases were searched and studies comparing ViV TAVR versus redo SAVR were included. The primary outcome of interest was mid-term (1-5 years) and 1-year all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included were 30-day all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, pacemaker implantation, stroke, acute kidney injury, major or life-threatening bleeding, and postprocedural aortic valve gradients. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for all outcomes using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model.

RESULTS

Nine observational studies with a total of 2,891 individuals and mean follow-up of 26 months met the inclusion criteria. There is no significant difference in mid-term and 1-year mortality between ViV-TAVR and redo SAVR groups with RR of 1.15 (95% CI 0.99-1.32; p = .06) and 1.06 (95% CI 0.69-1.61; p = .8). 30-day mortality rate was significantly lower in ViV-TAVR group with RR of 0.65 (95% CI 0.45-0.93; p = .02). ViV-TAVR group had lower 30-day bleeding, length of stay, and higher postoperative gradients.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates a lower 30-day mortality and similar 1-year and mid-term mortality for ViV TAVR compared to redo SAVR despite a higher baseline risk. Given these findings and the ongoing advances in the transcatheter therapeutics, VIV TAVR should be preferred over redo SAVR particularly in those at intermediate-high surgical risk.

摘要

背景

对于患有严重症状性生物瓣主动脉瓣功能障碍的患者,可选择再次行主动脉瓣置换术(redo SAVR)或经导管主动脉瓣置换术(ViV TAVR)进行治疗。在此,我们进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,比较了 ViV TAVR 与 redo SAVR 治疗生物瓣主动脉瓣疾病患者的近期和中期结果。

方法

检索了 PubMed、Cochrane 评价和 Google Scholar 电子数据库,并纳入了比较 ViV TAVR 与 redo SAVR 的研究。主要研究终点为中期(1-5 年)和 1 年全因死亡率。次要结局包括 30 天全因死亡率、心肌梗死、起搏器植入、卒中和急性肾损伤、大出血和危及生命的出血以及术后主动脉瓣跨瓣压差。使用 DerSimonian-Laird 随机效应模型计算所有结局的汇总风险比(RR)及其相应的 95%置信区间(CI)。

结果

纳入了 9 项观察性研究,共 2891 例患者,平均随访 26 个月。ViV-TAVR 与 redo SAVR 组在中期和 1 年死亡率方面无显著差异,RR 分别为 1.15(95%CI 0.99-1.32;p=0.06)和 1.06(95%CI 0.69-1.61;p=0.8)。ViV-TAVR 组 30 天死亡率显著降低,RR 为 0.65(95%CI 0.45-0.93;p=0.02)。ViV-TAVR 组 30 天出血、住院时间较少,术后跨瓣压差较高。

结论

尽管基线风险较高,但与 redo SAVR 相比,ViV TAVR 可降低 30 天死亡率,并具有相似的 1 年和中期死亡率。鉴于这些发现以及经导管治疗的不断进展,ViV TAVR 应优先于 redo SAVR,特别是对于中高危手术风险的患者。

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