经股动脉与经颈动脉入路行导管主动脉瓣置换术：一项更新的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Trans-femoral versus trans-carotid access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
作者信息
Yamani Naser, Ali Syed Hasham, Sadiq Mahnoor, Ahmed Afeera B, Bhojwani Kapil D, Lohana Vivek P, Fatmah Saba, Khalid Shazra, Shamsi Hammad R, Zehra Batool, Fatima Kaneez, Baloch Zulfiqar Q
机构信息
Division of Cardiology, University of Arizona Phoenix Medical Center, AZ 85721, USA.
Faculty of Medicine, Dow Medical College, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, 74200, Pakistan.
出版信息
Future Sci OA. 2024 May 15;10(1):FSO930. doi: 10.2144/fsoa-2023-0101. eCollection 2024.
This meta-analysis aims to shed light on any primacy the -carotid (TC-TAVR) access may have over the -femoral access (TF-TAVR) for those undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane Library were searched, from inception to March 2023 retrieving seven adjusted studies with a total of 6609 patients, of which 5048 underwent TF-TAVR while 1561 underwent TC-TAVR. No divergence in risk of mortality, major bleeding or stroke/transient ischemic attack in TC-TAVR when compared with TF-TAVR was found. In TC-TAVR, the risk of vascular complications was low (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.32-0.83, p = 0.003) as compared with TF-TAVR. As of this analysis, the viability of TC-TAVR as first alternative to TF-TAVR is plausible.
这项荟萃分析旨在阐明经导管主动脉瓣置换术（TAVR）患者中，经颈动脉（TC-TAVR）入路相对于经股动脉入路（TF-TAVR）可能具有的任何优势。检索了PubMed/MEDLINE和Cochrane图书馆，从创建到2023年3月，检索到7项经过调整的研究，共有6609例患者，其中5048例接受了TF-TAVR，1561例接受了TC-TAVR。与TF-TAVR相比，未发现TC-TAVR在死亡率、大出血或中风/短暂性脑缺血发作风险方面存在差异。与TF-TAVR相比，TC-TAVR的血管并发症风险较低（OR：0.51，95%CI：0.32-0.83，p = 0.003）。截至本次分析，TC-TAVR作为TF-TAVR的首选替代方案是合理的。
Zotero 插件