支架生物假体与同种异体二尖瓣移植在三尖瓣感染性心内膜炎手术治疗中的比较。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Reviews in cardiovascular medicine Pub Date : 2025-07-08 eCollection Date: 2025-07-01 DOI:10.31083/RCM37204
Mikhail Nuzhdin, Yury Malinovsky, Maksim Galchenko, Roman Komarov, Aleksey Fokin, Nikita Nadtochiy
{"title":"支架生物假体与同种异体二尖瓣移植在三尖瓣感染性心内膜炎手术治疗中的比较。","authors":"Mikhail Nuzhdin, Yury Malinovsky, Maksim Galchenko, Roman Komarov, Aleksey Fokin, Nikita Nadtochiy","doi":"10.31083/RCM37204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prevalence of tricuspid valve (TV) infective endocarditis (IE) continues to increase among patients with drug addictions and chronic vascular access or cardiac electronic devices. Moreover, long-term mortality and morbidity following surgery with conventional prostheses remain high. Allografts may represent a suitable alternative in tricuspid surgery. This study aimed to compare outcomes between stented biological valves and mitral allografts (MAs) for tricuspid valve replacement (TVR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 54 patients with IE underwent TVR using either a stented bioprosthesis (B) or MA between January 2016 and July 2024. Clinical and echocardiographic data were analyzed in accordance with the Tricuspid-Valve Academic Research Consortium (T-VARC) criteria. Early safety, clinical efficacy, and time-to-event survival were compared between the two equal B and MA groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no in-hospital or 30-day mortality, nor cardiac, cerebral, and wound complications in either group. The peak and mean pressure gradient (PG) on TV after surgery were 9.2 (6.5-12.0) and 4.0 (3.2-6.0) mmHg in the B group versus 6.0 (4.5-7.5) and 3.0 (2.0-4.0) mmHg in the MA group (<i>p</i> < 0.001). A T-VARC-adjusted analysis demonstrated superior freedom from cardiovascular mortality, recurrent IE, reoperation, and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) in the MA group 2 years after operation. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed significantly higher freedom from cardiovascular mortality in the MA group (100% vs. 81.5%, 77.8%, 77.8%, 69.6% respectively (log-rank test, <i>p</i> = 0.011) at 12-, 18-, 24-, 36-months, and freedom from PPI (100% vs. 81% at all time intervals) (log-rank test, <i>p</i> = 0.021).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Application of contemporary endpoint criteria demonstrated superior outcomes with MA, including lower cardiovascular mortality, reduced PPI, fewer recurrent endocarditis, decreased reoperations, cardiac hospitalizations, alongside improved patient-reported outcomes. Time-to-event analysis demonstrated benefits in cardiovascular survival and PPI avoidance with allografts. Mitral allograft may be a preferable alternative valve substitute for TVR in patients with IE.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT06591000, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06591000?term=NCT06591000&rank=1, registration date: September 19, 2024.</p>","PeriodicalId":20989,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in cardiovascular medicine","volume":"26 7","pages":"37204"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12326450/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stented Biological Prosthesis Versus Mitral Allograft in Surgical Treatment of Tricuspid Valve Infective Endocarditis.\",\"authors\":\"Mikhail Nuzhdin, Yury Malinovsky, Maksim Galchenko, Roman Komarov, Aleksey Fokin, Nikita Nadtochiy\",\"doi\":\"10.31083/RCM37204\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prevalence of tricuspid valve (TV) infective endocarditis (IE) continues to increase among patients with drug addictions and chronic vascular access or cardiac electronic devices. Moreover, long-term mortality and morbidity following surgery with conventional prostheses remain high. Allografts may represent a suitable alternative in tricuspid surgery. This study aimed to compare outcomes between stented biological valves and mitral allografts (MAs) for tricuspid valve replacement (TVR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 54 patients with IE underwent TVR using either a stented bioprosthesis (B) or MA between January 2016 and July 2024. Clinical and echocardiographic data were analyzed in accordance with the Tricuspid-Valve Academic Research Consortium (T-VARC) criteria. Early safety, clinical efficacy, and time-to-event survival were compared between the two equal B and MA groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no in-hospital or 30-day mortality, nor cardiac, cerebral, and wound complications in either group. The peak and mean pressure gradient (PG) on TV after surgery were 9.2 (6.5-12.0) and 4.0 (3.2-6.0) mmHg in the B group versus 6.0 (4.5-7.5) and 3.0 (2.0-4.0) mmHg in the MA group (<i>p</i> < 0.001). A T-VARC-adjusted analysis demonstrated superior freedom from cardiovascular mortality, recurrent IE, reoperation, and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) in the MA group 2 years after operation. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed significantly higher freedom from cardiovascular mortality in the MA group (100% vs. 81.5%, 77.8%, 77.8%, 69.6% respectively (log-rank test, <i>p</i> = 0.011) at 12-, 18-, 24-, 36-months, and freedom from PPI (100% vs. 81% at all time intervals) (log-rank test, <i>p</i> = 0.021).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Application of contemporary endpoint criteria demonstrated superior outcomes with MA, including lower cardiovascular mortality, reduced PPI, fewer recurrent endocarditis, decreased reoperations, cardiac hospitalizations, alongside improved patient-reported outcomes. Time-to-event analysis demonstrated benefits in cardiovascular survival and PPI avoidance with allografts. Mitral allograft may be a preferable alternative valve substitute for TVR in patients with IE.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT06591000, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06591000?term=NCT06591000&rank=1, registration date: September 19, 2024.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reviews in cardiovascular medicine\",\"volume\":\"26 7\",\"pages\":\"37204\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12326450/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reviews in cardiovascular medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31083/RCM37204\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reviews in cardiovascular medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31083/RCM37204","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:三尖瓣(TV)感染性心内膜炎(IE)的患病率在药物成瘾和慢性血管通路或心脏电子设备患者中持续增加。此外,传统假体手术后的长期死亡率和发病率仍然很高。同种异体移植物可能是三尖瓣手术中一个合适的选择。本研究旨在比较支架生物瓣膜和同种异体二尖瓣移植(MAs)在三尖瓣置换术(TVR)中的效果。方法:2016年1月至2024年7月期间,共有54例IE患者使用支架生物假体(B)或MA进行TVR。根据三尖瓣学术研究联盟(T-VARC)标准分析临床和超声心动图数据。比较B组和MA组的早期安全性、临床疗效和事件发生时间。结果:两组患者均无住院死亡率和30天死亡率,无心脏、脑和伤口并发症。B组术后TV测压峰值和平均PG分别为9.2(6.5-12.0)和4.0 (3.2-6.0)mmHg, MA组为6.0(4.5-7.5)和3.0 (2.0-4.0)mmHg (p < 0.001)。一项经t - varc校正的分析显示,MA组在术后2年心血管死亡率、复发性IE、再手术和永久性起搏器植入(PPI)方面均无显著差异。Kaplan-Meier分析显示,在12个月、18个月、24个月和36个月时,MA组心血管死亡率的自由度(100%比81.5%、77.8%、77.8%、69.6%,log-rank检验,p = 0.011)和PPI的自由度(100%比81%,所有时间间隔,p = 0.021)显著更高。结论:应用当代终点标准显示了MA的优越结果,包括心血管死亡率降低,PPI降低,心内膜炎复发减少,再手术减少,心脏住院治疗减少,以及患者报告的结果改善。时间-事件分析显示同种异体移植在心血管生存和避免PPI方面的益处。同种异体二尖瓣移植可能是IE患者较好的TVR替代方法。临床试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT06591000, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06591000?term=NCT06591000&rank=1,注册日期:2024年9月19日。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Stented Biological Prosthesis Versus Mitral Allograft in Surgical Treatment of Tricuspid Valve Infective Endocarditis.

Stented Biological Prosthesis Versus Mitral Allograft in Surgical Treatment of Tricuspid Valve Infective Endocarditis.

Stented Biological Prosthesis Versus Mitral Allograft in Surgical Treatment of Tricuspid Valve Infective Endocarditis.

Stented Biological Prosthesis Versus Mitral Allograft in Surgical Treatment of Tricuspid Valve Infective Endocarditis.

Stented Biological Prosthesis Versus Mitral Allograft in Surgical Treatment of Tricuspid Valve Infective Endocarditis.

Stented Biological Prosthesis Versus Mitral Allograft in Surgical Treatment of Tricuspid Valve Infective Endocarditis.

Stented Biological Prosthesis Versus Mitral Allograft in Surgical Treatment of Tricuspid Valve Infective Endocarditis.

Background: The prevalence of tricuspid valve (TV) infective endocarditis (IE) continues to increase among patients with drug addictions and chronic vascular access or cardiac electronic devices. Moreover, long-term mortality and morbidity following surgery with conventional prostheses remain high. Allografts may represent a suitable alternative in tricuspid surgery. This study aimed to compare outcomes between stented biological valves and mitral allografts (MAs) for tricuspid valve replacement (TVR).

Methods: A total of 54 patients with IE underwent TVR using either a stented bioprosthesis (B) or MA between January 2016 and July 2024. Clinical and echocardiographic data were analyzed in accordance with the Tricuspid-Valve Academic Research Consortium (T-VARC) criteria. Early safety, clinical efficacy, and time-to-event survival were compared between the two equal B and MA groups.

Results: There were no in-hospital or 30-day mortality, nor cardiac, cerebral, and wound complications in either group. The peak and mean pressure gradient (PG) on TV after surgery were 9.2 (6.5-12.0) and 4.0 (3.2-6.0) mmHg in the B group versus 6.0 (4.5-7.5) and 3.0 (2.0-4.0) mmHg in the MA group (p < 0.001). A T-VARC-adjusted analysis demonstrated superior freedom from cardiovascular mortality, recurrent IE, reoperation, and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) in the MA group 2 years after operation. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed significantly higher freedom from cardiovascular mortality in the MA group (100% vs. 81.5%, 77.8%, 77.8%, 69.6% respectively (log-rank test, p = 0.011) at 12-, 18-, 24-, 36-months, and freedom from PPI (100% vs. 81% at all time intervals) (log-rank test, p = 0.021).

Conclusion: Application of contemporary endpoint criteria demonstrated superior outcomes with MA, including lower cardiovascular mortality, reduced PPI, fewer recurrent endocarditis, decreased reoperations, cardiac hospitalizations, alongside improved patient-reported outcomes. Time-to-event analysis demonstrated benefits in cardiovascular survival and PPI avoidance with allografts. Mitral allograft may be a preferable alternative valve substitute for TVR in patients with IE.

Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT06591000, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06591000?term=NCT06591000&rank=1, registration date: September 19, 2024.

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
Reviews in cardiovascular medicine
Reviews in cardiovascular medicine 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
377
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: RCM is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal. RCM publishes research articles, review papers and short communications on cardiovascular medicine as well as research on cardiovascular disease. We aim to provide a forum for publishing papers which explore the pathogenesis and promote the progression of cardiac and vascular diseases. We also seek to establish an interdisciplinary platform, focusing on translational issues, to facilitate the advancement of research, clinical treatment and diagnostic procedures. Heart surgery, cardiovascular imaging, risk factors and various clinical cardiac & vascular research will be considered.
×
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