Trends in cardiovascular medicine · 2022
Respect versus resect approaches for mitral valve repair: A study-level meta-analysis.
МетаанализСтатьяОбзорПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sá Michel Pompeu, Cavalcanti Luiz Rafael P, Van den Eynde Jef, Amabile Andrea, Escorel Neto Antonio C, Perazzo Alvaro M, Weymann Alexander, Ruhparwar Arjang, Sicouri Serge, Bisleri Gianluigi, Torregrossa Gianluca, Geirsson Arnar, Ramlawi Basel
Аннотация
Mitral valve repair (MVr) restores leaflets coaptation while preserving the patient's own valve. The two main techniques are: (a) chordal replacement ("respect approach"), whereby artificial neochordae are used to resuspend prolapsed segments of the affected leaflet - and (b) leaflet resection ("resect approach"), whereby diseased leaflet segment is resected, and the remaining segments are sutured together. Both techniques of MVr are associated with better long-term results, fewer valve-related complications and lower mortality when compared with mitral valve replacement (MVR). They also restore quality of life and improve survival to rates equivalent to those of the general population. We performed a meta-analysis to pool data of clinical studies that compared outcomes of MVr stratified by the surgical technique. Seventeen studies accounting for 6,046 patients fulfilled our eligibility criteria. The "respect approach" outperformed the "resect approach" with lower permanent pacemaker implantation rates and lower mean gradients. Despite any possible advantages of one technique over the other, which approach is best for each patient must be decided on a case-by-case basis and more long-term follow-up data are warranted.