Suppr超能文献

经腔静脉与经主动脉上血管通路用于经导管主动脉瓣置换术:一项系统评价与荟萃分析

Transcaval versus Supra-Aortic Vascular Accesses for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Antiochos Panagiotis, Kirsch Matthias, Monney Pierre, Tzimas Georgios, Meier David, Fournier Stephane, Ferlay Clémence, Nowacka Anna, Rancati Valentina, Abellan Christophe, Skalidis Ioannis, Muller Olivier, Lu Henri

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Lausanne University Hospital, University of Lausanne, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.

Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital, University of Lausanne, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.

出版信息

J Clin Med. 2024 Jan 14;13(2):455. doi: 10.3390/jcm13020455.

Abstract

A growing body of evidence suggests that extrathoracic vascular accesses for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) yield favorable outcomes and can be considered as primary alternatives when the gold-standard transfemoral access is contraindicated. Data comparing the transcaval (TCv) to supra-aortic (SAo) approaches (transcarotid, transsubclavian, and transaxillary) for TAVR are lacking. We aimed to compare the outcomes and safety of TCv and SAo accesses for TAVR as alternatives to transfemoral TAVR. A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed by searching PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for all articles comparing TCv-TAVR against SAo-TAVR published until September 2023. Outcomes included in-hospital or 30-day all-cause mortality (ACM) and postoperative complications. A total of three studies with 318 TCv-TAVR and 179 SAo-TAVR patients were included. No statistically significant difference was found regarding in-hospital or 30-day ACM (relative risk [RR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-2.34, = 0.91), major bleeding, the need for blood transfusions, major vascular complications, and acute kidney injury. TCv-TAVR was associated with a non-statistically significant lower rate of neurovascular complications (RR 0.39, 95%CI 0.14-1.09, = 0.07). These results suggest that both approaches may be considered as first-line alternatives to transfemoral TAVR, depending on local expertise and patients' anatomy. Additional data from long-term cohort studies are needed.

摘要

越来越多的证据表明,经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)的胸外血管通路可产生良好的结果,并且在金标准的经股动脉通路禁忌时可被视为主要替代方案。目前缺乏比较经腔静脉(TCv)与经主动脉弓(SAo)入路(经颈动脉、经锁骨下动脉和经腋动脉)用于TAVR的数据。我们旨在比较TCv和SAo入路用于TAVR作为经股动脉TAVR替代方案的疗效和安全性。通过检索PubMed/MEDLINE和EMBASE数据库,对截至2023年9月发表的所有比较TCv-TAVR与SAo-TAVR的文章进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。纳入的结果包括住院期间或30天全因死亡率(ACM)和术后并发症。总共纳入了三项研究,其中318例患者接受TCv-TAVR,179例患者接受SAo-TAVR。在住院期间或30天ACM(相对风险[RR]1.04,95%置信区间[CI]0.47-2.34,P=0.91)、大出血、输血需求、主要血管并发症和急性肾损伤方面未发现统计学显著差异。TCv-TAVR与神经血管并发症发生率较低但无统计学意义相关(RR 0.39,95%CI 0.14-1.09,P=0.07)。这些结果表明,根据当地专业知识和患者解剖结构,两种入路均可被视为经股动脉TAVR的一线替代方案。需要来自长期队列研究的更多数据。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5b8a/10816274/656b16de3d26/jcm-13-00455-g001.jpg

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