Surgical closure versus transcatheter closure for ventricular septal defect post infarction, a meta-analysis

Mohamed A. S. Aramin, Shadi Abuhashem, Khalid Jamal Faris, Belal M. M. Omar, Mohd Burhanuddin, Puli Sai Teja, Mark Ibraheim
{"title":"Surgical closure versus transcatheter closure for ventricular septal defect post infarction, a meta-analysis","authors":"Mohamed A. S. Aramin, Shadi Abuhashem, Khalid Jamal Faris, Belal M. M. Omar, Mohd Burhanuddin, Puli Sai Teja, Mark Ibraheim","doi":"10.1097/ms9.0000000000002294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Surgical correction of post-infarct ventricular septal defect (PIVSD) is associated with a significant incidence of morbidity and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgical versus transcatheter approaches in the management of PIVSD.\n \n \n \n A systematic review and meta-analysis of retrospective from five databases including the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid, and Scopus) until 9 March 2024 was conducted. Risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes was used and data with a 95% confidence interval (CI) are presented.\n \n \n \n A total of 7 retrospective observational studies with 603 patients were included in the analysis. surgical closure was associated with a significantly lower short-term mortality and lower number of residual shunt or reintervention rate compared to percutaneous closure, with a relative risk (RR) of 1.21 (95% confidence interval (CI):1:00 to 1.46, P = 0.05) and 2.68 (95% confidence interval: 1.46 to 4.91, P = 0.001) respectively. surgical closure was associated with a non-significantly lower long-term mortality rate compared to percutaneous closure, with a relative risk (RR) of 1.10 (95% confidence interval: 0.82 to1.48, P = 0.52). No difference is reported when time from AMI or PIVSD to intervention is compared groups, with a relative risk (RR) of -0.24 (95% confidence interval: -4.49 to 4.2, P = 0.91).\n \n \n \n Our meta-analysis shied the light on the significance of surgical closure in terms of short-term mortality and need for re-intervention. However, no significant difference was observed in term of long-term mortality and time to intervention.\n","PeriodicalId":503882,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Medicine & Surgery","volume":"139 14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Medicine & Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ms9.0000000000002294","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Surgical correction of post-infarct ventricular septal defect (PIVSD) is associated with a significant incidence of morbidity and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of surgical versus transcatheter approaches in the management of PIVSD. A systematic review and meta-analysis of retrospective from five databases including the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid, and Scopus) until 9 March 2024 was conducted. Risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes was used and data with a 95% confidence interval (CI) are presented. A total of 7 retrospective observational studies with 603 patients were included in the analysis. surgical closure was associated with a significantly lower short-term mortality and lower number of residual shunt or reintervention rate compared to percutaneous closure, with a relative risk (RR) of 1.21 (95% confidence interval (CI):1:00 to 1.46, P = 0.05) and 2.68 (95% confidence interval: 1.46 to 4.91, P = 0.001) respectively. surgical closure was associated with a non-significantly lower long-term mortality rate compared to percutaneous closure, with a relative risk (RR) of 1.10 (95% confidence interval: 0.82 to1.48, P = 0.52). No difference is reported when time from AMI or PIVSD to intervention is compared groups, with a relative risk (RR) of -0.24 (95% confidence interval: -4.49 to 4.2, P = 0.91). Our meta-analysis shied the light on the significance of surgical closure in terms of short-term mortality and need for re-intervention. However, no significant difference was observed in term of long-term mortality and time to intervention.
脑梗塞后室间隔缺损的手术闭合与经导管闭合的荟萃分析
心肌梗塞后室间隔缺损(PIVSD)的手术矫治与高发病率和高死亡率有关。我们旨在评估手术与经导管方法在治疗 PIVSD 方面的有效性和安全性。 我们对截至 2024 年 3 月 9 日的五个数据库(包括 Cochrane Library、PubMed、Web of Science、Ovid 和 Scopus)进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。采用二分法结果的风险比(RR),并给出了带有 95% 置信区间(CI)的数据。 与经皮闭合术相比,手术闭合术与较低的短期死亡率和较低的残留分流次数或再介入率相关,相对风险 (RR) 为 1.与经皮闭合术相比,手术闭合术与非显著性较低的长期死亡率相关,相对风险 (RR) 为 1.10(95% 置信区间:0.82 至 1.48,P = 0.52)。如果比较从急性心肌梗死或 PIVSD 到干预的时间,各组之间没有差异,相对风险 (RR) 为-0.24(95% 置信区间:-4.49 到 4.2,P = 0.91)。 我们的荟萃分析揭示了手术闭合在短期死亡率和再次干预需求方面的重要性。但是,在长期死亡率和干预时间方面没有观察到明显差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信