Systematic Review Certainty of Evidence and Procedural Durability of Septal Reduction Therapies in Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Cardiology Pub Date : 2026-06-13 DOI:10.1159/000552974
Arthur Cordeiro Simão, Marcos Benito Gonçalves de Oliveira, Antônio da Silva Menezes Junior
{"title":"Systematic Review Certainty of Evidence and Procedural Durability of Septal Reduction Therapies in Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses.","authors":"Arthur Cordeiro Simão, Marcos Benito Gonçalves de Oliveira, Antônio da Silva Menezes Junior","doi":"10.1159/000552974","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This umbrella review aimed to evaluate the certainty and consistency of the available evidence rather than to provide a new procedural comparison. We synthesized systematic reviews comparing surgical septal myectomy (SM) versus alcohol septal ablation (ASA) for symptomatic obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) to critically assess the certainty of findings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An umbrella review of meta-analyses was conducted following Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of four databases was performed. Methodological quality, risk of bias, and study overlap were assessed. Quantitative synthesis was performed using a random-effects model, and the certainty of evidence was classified using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six meta-analyses comprising 31 unique primary studies and 12,860 patients were included, demonstrating very high study overlap. ASA was associated with a significantly higher risk of reoperation compared to SM, supported by high-certainty evidence. Conversely, for all other outcomes, including mortality and permanent pacemaker implantation, the certainty of evidence was consistently classified as very low due to inconsistency and imprecision.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>High-certainty evidence supports SM as the more durable intervention for oHCM, demonstrated by a reduced need for reoperations. Notably, the evidence for mortality outcomes is of very low certainty, precluding definitive conclusions regarding clinical equivalence or technique superiority. This review identifies current knowledge gaps regarding survival benefits to inform clinical practice and future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":9391,"journal":{"name":"Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000552974","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This umbrella review aimed to evaluate the certainty and consistency of the available evidence rather than to provide a new procedural comparison. We synthesized systematic reviews comparing surgical septal myectomy (SM) versus alcohol septal ablation (ASA) for symptomatic obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) to critically assess the certainty of findings.

Methods: An umbrella review of meta-analyses was conducted following Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of four databases was performed. Methodological quality, risk of bias, and study overlap were assessed. Quantitative synthesis was performed using a random-effects model, and the certainty of evidence was classified using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Results: Six meta-analyses comprising 31 unique primary studies and 12,860 patients were included, demonstrating very high study overlap. ASA was associated with a significantly higher risk of reoperation compared to SM, supported by high-certainty evidence. Conversely, for all other outcomes, including mortality and permanent pacemaker implantation, the certainty of evidence was consistently classified as very low due to inconsistency and imprecision.

Conclusion: High-certainty evidence supports SM as the more durable intervention for oHCM, demonstrated by a reduced need for reoperations. Notably, the evidence for mortality outcomes is of very low certainty, precluding definitive conclusions regarding clinical equivalence or technique superiority. This review identifies current knowledge gaps regarding survival benefits to inform clinical practice and future research.

阻塞性肥厚性心肌病鼻中隔缩小治疗的证据确定性和程序持久性:荟萃分析综述。
本综述旨在评估现有证据的确定性和一致性,而不是提供一种新的程序比较。我们结合了系统综述,研究了手术性室间隔肌切除术(SM)和酒精性室间隔消融(ASA)治疗阻塞性肥厚性心肌病(oHCM)的症状。方法:遵循Cochrane和PRISMA指南对meta分析进行了综合综述。系统地检索了四个数据库。评估方法学质量、偏倚风险和研究重叠。使用随机效应模型进行定量综合,并使用建议评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)方法对证据的确定性进行分类。结果:纳入了6项荟萃分析,包括33项不同的初级研究和12,860例患者,表明有大量的研究重叠。与SM相比,ASA与更高的再干预风险相关,这一点得到了高确定性证据的支持。另一方面,对于所有其他结果,如死亡率和永久起搏器的需求,证据往往被认为是非常薄弱的,因为它不一致和不明确。结论:强有力的证据表明,SM是一种更持久的治疗oHCM,因为它可以减少再干预。死亡率结果的证据非常不确定,因此不可能得出关于哪种技术更好的确切结论。本综述确定了目前关于生存益处的知识差距,以告知临床实践和未来的研究。
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
Cardiology
Cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
56
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: ''Cardiology'' features first reports on original clinical, preclinical and fundamental research as well as ''Novel Insights from Clinical Experience'' and topical comprehensive reviews in selected areas of cardiovascular disease. ''Editorial Comments'' provide a critical but positive evaluation of a recent article. Papers not only describe but offer critical appraisals of new developments in non-invasive and invasive diagnostic methods and in pharmacologic, nutritional and mechanical/surgical therapies. Readers are thus kept informed of current strategies in the prevention, recognition and treatment of heart disease. Special sections in a variety of subspecialty areas reinforce the journal''s value as a complete record of recent progress for all cardiologists, internists, cardiac surgeons, clinical physiologists, pharmacologists and professionals in other areas of medicine interested in current activity in cardiovascular diseases.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书