Xu Xiufan, Liu Hong, Gu Jiaxi, Li Minghui, Shao Yongfeng
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Heliyon. 2023 May 13;9(5):e16078. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16078. eCollection 2023 May.
Valve-in-valve (ViV)/valve-in-ring (ViR) transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) is a less invasive alternative to redo surgical mitral valve replacement (SMVR). To further verify its feasibility, we aimed to appraise early clinical outcomes after either ViV/ViR TMVI or redo SMVR for failed bioprosthetic valves or annuloplasty rings, as a comparison of long-term follow-up results are not available for these procedures.
We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, EMBASE, and Web of Science to identify studies that compared ViV/ViR TMVI and redo SMVR. Fixed- and random-effects meta-analyses were used to compare the early clinical results between these two groups.
A total of 3,890 studies published from 2015 to 2022 were searched, and ten articles comprising 7,643 patients (ViV/ViR TMVI, 1,719 patients; redo SMVR, 5,924 patients) were included. In this meta-analysis, ViV/ViR TMVI significantly improved in-hospital mortality (fixed-effects model: odds ratio [OR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.92; P = 0.008) and for the matched populations (fixed-effects model: OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.29-0.61; P < 0.00001). ViV/ViR TMVI also outperformed redo SMVR in 30-day mortality and in rates of early postoperative complications. ViV/ViR TMVI resulted in less time spent in the ICU and hospital, whereas it showed no significant difference in one-year mortality. A lack of comparison of long-term clinical outcomes and postoperative echocardiographic results are important limitations of our results.
ViV/ViR TMVI is a reliable alternative to redo SMVR for failed bioprosthetic valves or annuloplasty rings as a result of lower in-hospital mortality, higher 30-day survival, and lower early postoperative complication rates, although there is no significant difference in 1-year mortality.
瓣中瓣(ViV)/环中瓣(ViR)经导管二尖瓣植入术(TMVI)是再次进行外科二尖瓣置换术(SMVR)的一种侵入性较小的替代方案。为进一步验证其可行性,我们旨在评估ViV/ViR TMVI或再次SMVR治疗生物瓣膜或瓣环成形环功能障碍后的早期临床结局,因为目前尚无这些手术的长期随访结果比较。
我们系统检索了PubMed、Cochrane对照试验注册库、EMBASE和科学网,以确定比较ViV/ViR TMVI和再次SMVR的研究。采用固定效应和随机效应荟萃分析来比较两组的早期临床结果。
共检索到2015年至2022年发表的3890项研究,纳入了10篇文章,共7643例患者(ViV/ViR TMVI组1719例患者;再次SMVR组5924例患者)。在这项荟萃分析中,ViV/ViR TMVI显著降低了住院死亡率(固定效应模型:比值比[OR],0.72;95%置信区间[CI],0.57 - 0.92;P = 0.008),在匹配人群中也是如此(固定效应模型:OR,0.42;95% CI,0.29 - 0.61;P < 0.00001)。ViV/ViR TMVI在30天死亡率和术后早期并发症发生率方面也优于再次SMVR。ViV/ViR TMVI导致在重症监护病房(ICU)和医院的停留时间更短,而在1年死亡率方面无显著差异。缺乏长期临床结局和术后超声心动图结果的比较是我们研究结果的重要局限性。
对于生物瓣膜或瓣环成形环功能障碍,ViV/ViR TMVI是再次SMVR的可靠替代方案,因其住院死亡率较低、30天生存率较高且术后早期并发症发生率较低,尽管1年死亡率无显著差异。