主动脉狭窄经导管与手术主动脉瓣置换术后急性肾损伤发生率的综合分析:13777例患者的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 3.1 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Ahmad Alazzam, Yacoub Aldroubi, Tariq Alhusban, Mosab Said
{"title":"主动脉狭窄经导管与手术主动脉瓣置换术后急性肾损伤发生率的综合分析:13777例患者的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Ahmad Alazzam, Yacoub Aldroubi, Tariq Alhusban, Mosab Said","doi":"10.1007/s12928-025-01144-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) differences between surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and how surgical risk stratification and diagnostic criteria influence outcomes. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we included both non-randomized studies and randomized clinical trials that reported AKI criteria and patients' surgical risk in patients with aortic stenosis by searching PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science until late September. We executed a random-effects model in Review Manager to pool effect estimates of AKI incidence or the need for dialysis as an odds ratio (OR) and I<sup>2</sup> heterogeneity, and we utilized R for meta-regression to address any heterogeneity with subgroup analysis for surgical risk, AKI criteria, and study design. We used the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB-1) for risk of bias assessment and GRADE for certainty assessment. Involving 17 studies and a total of 13,777 patients, we found that the AKI incidence was significantly lower in TAVR compared to SAVR (OR = 0.36; 95% CI: [0.30, 0.44], I<sup>2</sup> = 55%, P = 0.003), along with the need for dialysis (OR = 0.35; 95% CI: [0.19, 0.63], I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, P = 0.92). The study also found that intermediate and low-risk patients had more favorable outcomes. However, the retrospective study design and VARC-2 criteria were associated with unfavorable outcomes. TAVR effectively reduced the risk of AKI in all surgical risk categories and the need for dialysis compared to SAVR in patients with AS.</p>","PeriodicalId":9439,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comprehensive analysis of acute kidney injury incidence following transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in aortic stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13,777 patients.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmad Alazzam, Yacoub Aldroubi, Tariq Alhusban, Mosab Said\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12928-025-01144-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) differences between surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and how surgical risk stratification and diagnostic criteria influence outcomes. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we included both non-randomized studies and randomized clinical trials that reported AKI criteria and patients' surgical risk in patients with aortic stenosis by searching PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science until late September. We executed a random-effects model in Review Manager to pool effect estimates of AKI incidence or the need for dialysis as an odds ratio (OR) and I<sup>2</sup> heterogeneity, and we utilized R for meta-regression to address any heterogeneity with subgroup analysis for surgical risk, AKI criteria, and study design. We used the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB-1) for risk of bias assessment and GRADE for certainty assessment. Involving 17 studies and a total of 13,777 patients, we found that the AKI incidence was significantly lower in TAVR compared to SAVR (OR = 0.36; 95% CI: [0.30, 0.44], I<sup>2</sup> = 55%, P = 0.003), along with the need for dialysis (OR = 0.35; 95% CI: [0.19, 0.63], I<sup>2</sup> = 0%, P = 0.92). The study also found that intermediate and low-risk patients had more favorable outcomes. However, the retrospective study design and VARC-2 criteria were associated with unfavorable outcomes. TAVR effectively reduced the risk of AKI in all surgical risk categories and the need for dialysis compared to SAVR in patients with AS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9439,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-025-01144-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-025-01144-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本系统综述和荟萃分析评估了手术主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)和经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)在急性肾损伤(AKI)方面的差异,以及手术风险分层和诊断标准如何影响预后。根据PRISMA指南,我们通过检索PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science纳入了非随机研究和随机临床试验,这些研究报告了主动脉瓣狭窄患者的AKI标准和手术风险。我们在Review Manager中执行了一个随机效应模型,将AKI发生率或透析需求的效应估计汇总为优势比(or)和I2异质性,我们使用R进行meta回归,通过亚组分析处理手术风险、AKI标准和研究设计的任何异质性。我们使用纽卡斯尔渥太华量表(NOS)和Cochrane偏倚风险工具(rob1)进行偏倚风险评估,GRADE进行确定性评估。纳入17项研究,共13777例患者,我们发现TAVR的AKI发生率明显低于SAVR (OR = 0.36;95% CI: [0.30, 0.44], I2 = 55%, P = 0.003),以及透析需求(OR = 0.35;95% ci: [0.19, 0.63], i2 = 0%, p = 0.92)。研究还发现,中危和低危患者的预后更好。然而,回顾性研究设计和VARC-2标准与不良结果相关。与SAVR相比,TAVR有效降低了所有手术风险类别的AKI风险和AS患者的透析需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comprehensive analysis of acute kidney injury incidence following transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in aortic stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13,777 patients.

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) differences between surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and how surgical risk stratification and diagnostic criteria influence outcomes. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we included both non-randomized studies and randomized clinical trials that reported AKI criteria and patients' surgical risk in patients with aortic stenosis by searching PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science until late September. We executed a random-effects model in Review Manager to pool effect estimates of AKI incidence or the need for dialysis as an odds ratio (OR) and I2 heterogeneity, and we utilized R for meta-regression to address any heterogeneity with subgroup analysis for surgical risk, AKI criteria, and study design. We used the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB-1) for risk of bias assessment and GRADE for certainty assessment. Involving 17 studies and a total of 13,777 patients, we found that the AKI incidence was significantly lower in TAVR compared to SAVR (OR = 0.36; 95% CI: [0.30, 0.44], I2 = 55%, P = 0.003), along with the need for dialysis (OR = 0.35; 95% CI: [0.19, 0.63], I2 = 0%, P = 0.92). The study also found that intermediate and low-risk patients had more favorable outcomes. However, the retrospective study design and VARC-2 criteria were associated with unfavorable outcomes. TAVR effectively reduced the risk of AKI in all surgical risk categories and the need for dialysis compared to SAVR in patients with AS.

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
Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics
Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics (CVIT) is an international journal covering the field of cardiovascular disease and includes cardiac (coronary and noncoronary) and peripheral interventions and therapeutics. Articles are subject to peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability. CVIT is an official journal of The Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics.
×
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