Mao Yong, Wang Cingting, Li Yongnan, Guan Xinqiang, Zhang Xiaopeng, Wu Xiangyang
Department of Cardiac Surgery, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Health Science Center of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Apr 17;10:1158906. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1158906. eCollection 2023.
Ruptured sinus of Valsalva aneurysm (RSVA) often has an abrupt onset, and can chest pain, acute heart failure, and even sudden death. The effectiveness of different treatment modalities remains controversial. Thus, we completed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficiency and safety of traditional surgery vs. percutaneous closure (PC) for RSVA.
We carried out a meta-analysis using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Data, and the China Science and Technology Journal Database. The primary outcome was comparing in-hospital mortality between the two procedures, and the secondary outcome was documenting postoperative residual shunts, postoperative aortic regurgitation, and length of hospital stay in the two groups. Differences were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the relationships between predefined surgical variables and clinical outcomes. This meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software (version 5.3).
The final qualifying studies included 330 patients from 10 trials (123 in the percutaneous closure group, and 207 in the surgical repair group). When PC was compared to surgical repair, there were no statistically significant differences in in-hospital mortality (overall OR: 0.47, 95%CI 0.05-4.31, = 0.50). However, percutaneous closure did significantly decrease the average length of hospital stay (OR: -2.13, 95% CI -3.05 to -1.20, < 0.00001) when compared to surgical repair, but there were no significant between-group differences in the rates of postoperative residual shunts (overall OR: 1.54, 95%CI 0.55-4.34, = 0.41) or postoperative aortic regurgitation (overall OR: 1.54, 95%CI 0.51-4.68, = 0.45).
PC may become a valuable alternative to surgical repair for RSVA.
瓦氏窦瘤破裂(RSVA)通常起病急骤,可导致胸痛、急性心力衰竭甚至猝死。不同治疗方式的疗效仍存在争议。因此,我们完成了一项荟萃分析,以评估传统手术与经皮封堵术(PC)治疗RSVA的有效性和安全性。
我们使用PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane图书馆、中国知网(CNKI)、万方数据和中国科技期刊数据库进行荟萃分析。主要结局是比较两种手术方式的院内死亡率,次要结局是记录两组术后残余分流、术后主动脉瓣反流和住院时间。差异以比值比(OR)和95%置信区间(CI)表示,以评估预定义手术变量与临床结局之间的关系。本荟萃分析使用Review Manager软件(5.3版)进行。
最终纳入的合格研究包括来自10项试验的330例患者(经皮封堵组123例,手术修复组207例)。将PC与手术修复进行比较时,院内死亡率无统计学显著差异(总体OR:0.47,95%CI 0.05 - 4.31,P = 0.50)。然而,与手术修复相比,经皮封堵术确实显著缩短了平均住院时间(OR:-2.13,95%CI -3.05至-1.20,P < 0.00001),但两组术后残余分流率(总体OR:1.54,95%CI 0.55 - 4.34,P = 0.41)或术后主动脉瓣反流率(总体OR:1.54,95%CI 0.51 - 4.68,P = 0.45)无显著组间差异。
对于RSVA,PC可能成为手术修复的一种有价值的替代方法。