Fan P, Ye Y Z, Ma X
Department of Heart Function, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University,State Key Laboratory of Pathogenesis, Prevention and Treatment of High Incidence Diseases in Central Asia, Urumqi 830000, China.
Center of Heart, First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830000, China.
Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi. 2022 Sep 24;50(9):913-919. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112148-20220211-00100.
To systematically review the prognosis of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis. A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, China biomedical literature database, China journal full text database (CNKI), Wanfang database and VIP database from January 2012 to February 2022 was conducted for randomized controlled trial (RCT) that comparing TAVR and SAVR in the treatment of severe aortic stenosis. The primary outcomes were the incidence of all-cause mortality, stroke incidence, reoperation rate and complications (pacemaker implantation, atrial fibrillation) at 1 month and 1, 2, 5 years after operation. Jadad scale was used to evaluate the literature quality of RCTs. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures provided in RevMan 5.4.1. A total of 17 studies including 11 712 patients were identified, including 6 007 patients treated with TAVR and 5 705 patients treated with SAVR. There were 4 high-quality studies and 13 medium-quality studies. The results of meta-analysis showed that the rate of new onset atrial fibrillation was lower in TAVR group than that in SAVR group (=0.28, 95% 0.21-0.38, <0.001), and there was no significant difference in all-cause death, stroke, pacemaker implantation and reoperation rate (all >0.05) at 30 days follow-up. At one year after TAVR and SAVR treatment, all-cause mortality (=0.85, 95% 0.74-0.97, =0.01) and new onset atrial fibrillation (=0.28, 95% 0.20-0.39, <0.001) were lower in TAVR group than SAVR group. However, the pacemaker implantation rate was higher in TAVR group than that of SAVR group (=1.79, 95% 1.11-2.89, =0.02), while there was no significant difference in the incidence of stroke and reoperation between the two groups (>0.05). At two years after TAVR and SAVR treatment, the pacemaker implantation rate was higher in TAVR group than that in SAVR group (=2.23, 95% 1.28-3.86, =0.004), and the rate of new atrial fibrillation was lower in TAVR group than that in SAVR group (=0.46, 95% 0.38-0.56, <0.001). There was no significant difference in all-cause death, stroke and reoperation rates between the two groups (>0.05). At five years after TAVR and SAVR treatment, the pacemaker implantation rate (=1.89, 95% 1.13-3.17, =0.02) and reoperation rate (=3.64, 95% 1.75-7.58, =0.000 5) were higher in TAVR group than those in SAVR group, while the rate of new onset atrial fibrillation was lower in TAVR group than that in SAVR group (=0.45, 95% 0.37-0.55, <0.001). There was no significant difference in all-cause death and stroke incidence between the two groups (all >0.05). The all-cause mortality and the incidence of new onset atrial fibrillation after TAVR are lower than SAVR, and TAVR is a preferred therapy for patients with aortic stenosis.
系统评价经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)与外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)治疗严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者的预后。对2012年1月至2022年2月期间的PubMed、EMBASE、Scopus、Cochrane图书馆、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、万方数据库和维普数据库进行系统检索,以查找比较TAVR和SAVR治疗严重主动脉瓣狭窄的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结局指标为术后1个月及1、2、5年时的全因死亡率、卒中发生率、再次手术率及并发症(起搏器植入、心房颤动)发生率。采用Jadad量表评估RCT的文献质量。所有统计分析均使用RevMan 5.4.1提供的标准统计程序进行。共纳入17项研究,包括11712例患者,其中TAVR治疗6007例,SAVR治疗5705例。有4项高质量研究和13项中等质量研究。Meta分析结果显示,TAVR组新发心房颤动发生率低于SAVR组(比值比=0.28,95%置信区间0.21-0.38,P<0.001),随访30天时全因死亡、卒中、起搏器植入及再次手术率差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。TAVR和SAVR治疗1年后,TAVR组全因死亡率(比值比=0.85,95%置信区间0.74-0.97,P=0.01)和新发心房颤动发生率(比值比=0.28,95%置信区间0.20-0.39,P<0.001)低于SAVR组。然而,TAVR组起搏器植入率高于SAVR组(比值比=1.79,95%置信区间1.11-2.89,P=0.02),两组卒中发生率和再次手术率差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。TAVR和SAVR治疗2年后,TAVR组起搏器植入率高于SAVR组(比值比=2.23,95%置信区间1.28-3.86,P=0.004),TAVR组新发心房颤动发生率低于SAVR组(比值比=0.46,95%置信区间0.38-0.56,P<0.001)。两组全因死亡、卒中和再次手术率差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。TAVR和SAVR治疗5年后,TAVR组起搏器植入率(比值比=1.89,95%置信区间1.13-3.17,P=0.02)和再次手术率(比值比=3.64,95%置信区间1.75-7.58,P=0.0005)高于SAVR组,TAVR组新发心房颤动发生率低于SAVR组(比值比=0.45,95%置信区间0.37-0.55,P<0.001)。两组全因死亡和卒中发生率差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。TAVR术后全因死亡率和新发心房颤动发生率低于SAVR,TAVR是主动脉瓣狭窄患者的首选治疗方法。