Incidence of aortic valve reintervention in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis of randomized studies.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Julia Goese Groberio, Pedro Henrique Reginato, Rafael Eduardo Streit, Alice Volpato Rocha, Ofonime Chantal Udoma-Udofa, Cynthia Florêncio de Mesquita, André Rivera, Anderson Zampier Ulbrich, Fábio Rocha Farias, Wilton Francisco Gomes
{"title":"Incidence of aortic valve reintervention in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis of randomized studies.","authors":"Julia Goese Groberio, Pedro Henrique Reginato, Rafael Eduardo Streit, Alice Volpato Rocha, Ofonime Chantal Udoma-Udofa, Cynthia Florêncio de Mesquita, André Rivera, Anderson Zampier Ulbrich, Fábio Rocha Farias, Wilton Francisco Gomes","doi":"10.1007/s11748-024-02090-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) are established interventions for alleviating symptoms and enhancing survival in individuals with severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, the long-term outcomes and incidence of reintervention associated with TAVI and SAVR remain uncertain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the incidence of reintervention in TAVI versus SAVR. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled with a random-effects model. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine RCTs were included, with 5144 (50.9%) patients randomized to TAVI. Compared with SAVR, TAVI increased reinterventions (RR 1.89; 95% CI 1.29-2.76; p < 0.01) and the need for pacemakers (RR 1.91; 95% CI 1.49-2.45; p < 0.01). In addition, TAVI significantly reduced the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.32- 0.59; p < 0.01). There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.92-1.16; p = 0.55), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.94-1.17; p = 0.44), stroke (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.80-1.17; p = 0.76), endocarditis (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.70-1.33; p = 0.82), and myocardial infarction (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.79-1.41; p = 0.72) between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with severe AS, TAVI significantly increased the incidence of reinterventions and the need for pacemakers as compared with SAVR.</p>","PeriodicalId":12585,"journal":{"name":"General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11748-024-02090-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) are established interventions for alleviating symptoms and enhancing survival in individuals with severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, the long-term outcomes and incidence of reintervention associated with TAVI and SAVR remain uncertain.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the incidence of reintervention in TAVI versus SAVR. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled with a random-effects model. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: Nine RCTs were included, with 5144 (50.9%) patients randomized to TAVI. Compared with SAVR, TAVI increased reinterventions (RR 1.89; 95% CI 1.29-2.76; p < 0.01) and the need for pacemakers (RR 1.91; 95% CI 1.49-2.45; p < 0.01). In addition, TAVI significantly reduced the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.32- 0.59; p < 0.01). There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.92-1.16; p = 0.55), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.94-1.17; p = 0.44), stroke (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.80-1.17; p = 0.76), endocarditis (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.70-1.33; p = 0.82), and myocardial infarction (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.79-1.41; p = 0.72) between groups.

Conclusions: In patients with severe AS, TAVI significantly increased the incidence of reinterventions and the need for pacemakers as compared with SAVR.

接受经导管主动脉瓣植入术与手术主动脉瓣置换术的主动脉瓣狭窄患者主动脉瓣再介入的发生率:随机研究的系统回顾和最新荟萃分析。
导言:经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)和外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)是缓解严重主动脉瓣狭窄(AS)患者症状和提高存活率的成熟干预措施。然而,与 TAVI 和 SAVR 相关的长期疗效和再介入发生率仍不确定:我们对 TAVI 和 SAVR 的再介入发生率进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。我们在 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane 数据库中检索了随机对照试验 (RCT)。采用随机效应模型对风险比 (RR) 和 95% 置信区间 (CI) 进行了汇总。P 值 结果:共纳入 9 项 RCT,5144 名(50.9%)患者随机接受了 TAVI。与 SAVR 相比,TAVI 增加了再干预率(RR 1.89;95% CI 1.29-2.76;P 结论:TAVI 增加了再干预率:在重度强直性脊柱炎患者中,与 SAVR 相比,TAVI 大大增加了再介入的发生率和对起搏器的需求。
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
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
142
期刊介绍: The General Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery is the official publication of The Japanese Association for Thoracic Surgery and The Japanese Association for Chest Surgery, the affiliated journal of The Japanese Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, that publishes clinical and experimental studies in fields related to thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.
×
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