IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Hristo Kirov, Tulio Caldonazo, Murat Mukharyamov, Sultonbek Toshmatov, Philine Fleckenstein, Timur Kyashif, Thierry Siemeni, Torsten Doenst
{"title":"Cardiac Surgery 2024 Reviewed.","authors":"Hristo Kirov, Tulio Caldonazo, Murat Mukharyamov, Sultonbek Toshmatov, Philine Fleckenstein, Timur Kyashif, Thierry Siemeni, Torsten Doenst","doi":"10.1055/a-2548-4098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For the 11th consecutive time, we systematically reviewed the cardio-surgical literature for the past year (2024), using the PRISMA approach for a results-oriented summary. In 2024, the discussion on the value of randomized and registry evidence increased, triggered by consistent findings in the field of coronary artery disease (CAD) and discrepant results in structural heart disease. The literature in 2024 again confirmed the excellent long-term outcomes of CABG compared with PCI in different scenarios, generating further validation for the CABG advantage reported in randomized studies. This has been reflected in the new guidelines for chronic CAD in 2024. Two studies indicate novel perspectives for CABG, showing that cardiac shockwave therapy in CABG improves myocardial function in ischemic hearts and that CABG guided by computed tomography is safe and feasible. For aortic stenosis, an early advantage for transcatheter (TAVI) compared with surgical (SAVR) treatment has found more support; however, long-term TAVI results keep being challenged, this year by new FDA and registry data in favor of SAVR. For failed aortic valves, redo-SAVR showed superior results compared with valve-in-valve TAVI. In the mitral field, studies showed short-term noninferiority for transcatheter treatment compared with surgery for secondary mitral regurgitation (MR), and significant long-term survival benefit in registries with surgery for primary MR. Finally, surgery was associated with better survival compared with medical therapy for acute type A aortic intramural hematoma. This article summarizes publications perceived as important by us. It cannot be complete nor free of individual interpretation but provides up-to-date information for patient-specific decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":23057,"journal":{"name":"Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2548-4098","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

摘要

我们连续第 11 次系统回顾了过去一年(2024 年)的心脏外科文献,并采用 PRISMA 方法进行了以结果为导向的总结。2024 年,由于冠状动脉疾病(CAD)领域的研究结果一致,而结构性心脏病的研究结果不一,因此关于随机和登记证据价值的讨论有所增加。2024 年的文献再次证实,在不同情况下,与 PCI 相比,CABG 的长期疗效非常好,这进一步验证了随机研究中报告的 CABG 优势。这一点已反映在 2024 年新的慢性 CAD 指南中。两项研究显示了 CABG 的新前景,其中一项研究表明,CABG 中的心脏冲击波疗法可改善缺血心脏的心肌功能,另一项研究表明,在计算机断层扫描引导下进行 CABG 是安全可行的。对于主动脉瓣狭窄,经导管(TAVI)治疗与手术(SAVR)治疗相比具有早期优势,这一点得到了更多支持;然而,TAVI 的长期治疗结果不断受到质疑,今年美国食品药物管理局(FDA)和登记处的新数据支持 SAVR。对于失败的主动脉瓣,重做主动脉瓣置换术(redo-SAVR)的结果优于瓣膜置入术(valve-in-valve TAVI)。在二尖瓣领域,研究显示,经导管治疗与手术治疗继发性二尖瓣反流(MR)相比,短期疗效并无劣势,而在对原发性二尖瓣反流进行手术治疗的登记中,长期生存率也显著提高。最后,与药物治疗相比,手术治疗急性A型主动脉壁内血肿的生存率更高。本文总结了我们认为重要的出版物。它不可能是完整的,也不可能没有个人的解释,但它为特定患者的决策提供了最新信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cardiac Surgery 2024 Reviewed.

For the 11th consecutive time, we systematically reviewed the cardio-surgical literature for the past year (2024), using the PRISMA approach for a results-oriented summary. In 2024, the discussion on the value of randomized and registry evidence increased, triggered by consistent findings in the field of coronary artery disease (CAD) and discrepant results in structural heart disease. The literature in 2024 again confirmed the excellent long-term outcomes of CABG compared with PCI in different scenarios, generating further validation for the CABG advantage reported in randomized studies. This has been reflected in the new guidelines for chronic CAD in 2024. Two studies indicate novel perspectives for CABG, showing that cardiac shockwave therapy in CABG improves myocardial function in ischemic hearts and that CABG guided by computed tomography is safe and feasible. For aortic stenosis, an early advantage for transcatheter (TAVI) compared with surgical (SAVR) treatment has found more support; however, long-term TAVI results keep being challenged, this year by new FDA and registry data in favor of SAVR. For failed aortic valves, redo-SAVR showed superior results compared with valve-in-valve TAVI. In the mitral field, studies showed short-term noninferiority for transcatheter treatment compared with surgery for secondary mitral regurgitation (MR), and significant long-term survival benefit in registries with surgery for primary MR. Finally, surgery was associated with better survival compared with medical therapy for acute type A aortic intramural hematoma. This article summarizes publications perceived as important by us. It cannot be complete nor free of individual interpretation but provides up-to-date information for patient-specific decision-making.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
365
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon publishes articles of the highest standard from internationally recognized thoracic and cardiovascular surgeons, cardiologists, anesthesiologists, physiologists, and pathologists. This journal is an essential resource for anyone working in this field. Original articles, short communications, reviews and important meeting announcements keep you abreast of key clinical advances, as well as providing the theoretical background of cardiovascular and thoracic surgery. Case reports are published in our Open Access companion journal The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon Reports.
×
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