An Updated Meta-Analysis on Cerebral Embolic Protection in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Intervention Stratified by Baseline Surgical Risk and Device Type

IF 1.4 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Safi U. Khan MD, MS , Salman Zahid MD , Mohamad A. Alkhouli MD , Usman Ali Akbar MD , Syed Zaid MD , Hassaan B. Arshad MD , Stephen H. Little MD , Michael J. Reardon MD , Neal S. Kleiman MD , Sachin S. Goel MD
{"title":"An Updated Meta-Analysis on Cerebral Embolic Protection in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Intervention Stratified by Baseline Surgical Risk and Device Type","authors":"Safi U. Khan MD, MS ,&nbsp;Salman Zahid MD ,&nbsp;Mohamad A. Alkhouli MD ,&nbsp;Usman Ali Akbar MD ,&nbsp;Syed Zaid MD ,&nbsp;Hassaan B. Arshad MD ,&nbsp;Stephen H. Little MD ,&nbsp;Michael J. Reardon MD ,&nbsp;Neal S. Kleiman MD ,&nbsp;Sachin S. Goel MD","doi":"10.1016/j.shj.2023.100178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) can lead to the embolization of debris. Capturing the debris by cerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices may reduce the risk of stroke. New evidence has allowed us to examine the effects of CEP in patients undergoing TAVI. We aimed to assess the effects of CEP overall and stratified by the device used (SENTINEL or TriGuard) and the surgical risk of the patients.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We selected randomized controlled trials using electronic databases through September 17, 2022. We estimated random-effects risk ratios (RR) with (95% confidence interval) and calculated absolute risk differences at 30 days across baseline surgical risks derived from the TAVI trials for any stroke (disabling and nondisabling) and all-cause mortality.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Among 6 trials (n = 3921), CEP vs. control did not reduce any stroke [RR: 0.95 (0.50-1.81)], disabling [RR: 0.75 (0.18-3.16)] or nondisabling [RR: 0.99 (0.65-1.49)] strokes, or all-cause mortality [RR: 1.23 (0.55-2.77)]. However, when analyzed by device, SENTINEL reduced disabling stroke [RR: 0.46 (0.22-0.95)], translating into 6 fewer per 1000 in high-risk, 3 fewer per 1000 in intermediate-risk, and 1 fewer per 1000 in low surgical-risk patients. CEP vs. control did not reduce the risk of any bleeding [RR: 1.03 (0.44-2.40)], major vascular complications [RR: 1.41 (0.57-3.48)], or acute kidney injury [RR: 1.36 (0.57-3.28)].</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This updated meta-analysis showed that SENTINEL CEP might reduce disabling stroke in patients undergoing TAVI. Patients with high and intermediate surgical risks were most likely to derive benefits.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36053,"journal":{"name":"Structural Heart","volume":"7 4","pages":"Article 100178"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10382981/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Structural Heart","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2474870623000404","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) can lead to the embolization of debris. Capturing the debris by cerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices may reduce the risk of stroke. New evidence has allowed us to examine the effects of CEP in patients undergoing TAVI. We aimed to assess the effects of CEP overall and stratified by the device used (SENTINEL or TriGuard) and the surgical risk of the patients.

Methods

We selected randomized controlled trials using electronic databases through September 17, 2022. We estimated random-effects risk ratios (RR) with (95% confidence interval) and calculated absolute risk differences at 30 days across baseline surgical risks derived from the TAVI trials for any stroke (disabling and nondisabling) and all-cause mortality.

Results

Among 6 trials (n = 3921), CEP vs. control did not reduce any stroke [RR: 0.95 (0.50-1.81)], disabling [RR: 0.75 (0.18-3.16)] or nondisabling [RR: 0.99 (0.65-1.49)] strokes, or all-cause mortality [RR: 1.23 (0.55-2.77)]. However, when analyzed by device, SENTINEL reduced disabling stroke [RR: 0.46 (0.22-0.95)], translating into 6 fewer per 1000 in high-risk, 3 fewer per 1000 in intermediate-risk, and 1 fewer per 1000 in low surgical-risk patients. CEP vs. control did not reduce the risk of any bleeding [RR: 1.03 (0.44-2.40)], major vascular complications [RR: 1.41 (0.57-3.48)], or acute kidney injury [RR: 1.36 (0.57-3.28)].

Conclusions

This updated meta-analysis showed that SENTINEL CEP might reduce disabling stroke in patients undergoing TAVI. Patients with high and intermediate surgical risks were most likely to derive benefits.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

经导管主动脉瓣介入治疗患者脑栓塞保护的最新meta分析,按基线手术风险和装置类型分层
背景:经导管主动脉瓣介入治疗(TAVI)可导致碎片栓塞。通过脑栓塞保护(CEP)装置捕获碎片可以降低中风的风险。新的证据使我们能够检查CEP对TAVI患者的影响。我们的目的是评估CEP的整体效果,并根据所使用的装置(SENTINEL或trigguard)和患者的手术风险进行分层。方法选取截至2022年9月17日的电子数据库随机对照试验。我们用(95%置信区间)估计随机效应风险比(RR),并计算从TAVI试验得出的任何中风(致残和非致残)和全因死亡率的基线手术风险在30天内的绝对风险差异。结果在6项试验中(n = 3921), CEP与对照组相比没有减少卒中[RR: 0.95(0.50-1.81)]、致残卒中[RR: 0.75(0.18-3.16)]或非致残卒中[RR: 0.99(0.65-1.49)]或全因死亡率[RR: 1.23(0.55-2.77)]。然而,当通过设备进行分析时,SENTINEL减少了致残性卒中[RR: 0.46(0.22-0.95)],意味着每1000例高危患者减少6例,每1000例中危患者减少3例,每1000例低手术风险患者减少1例。与对照组相比,CEP并没有降低出血的风险[RR: 1.03(0.44-2.40)],主要血管并发症[RR: 1.41(0.57-3.48)],或急性肾损伤[RR: 1.36(0.57-3.28)]。这项最新的荟萃分析显示,SENTINEL CEP可能会减少TAVI患者的致残性卒中。手术高风险和中度风险的患者最有可能从中获益。
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
Structural Heart
Structural Heart Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
81
×
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