Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024
Trends in Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes in Patients With Low-Surgical Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализПоддержка 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.
Kazemian Sina, Fallahtafti Parisa, Sharifi Mohammad, Mohammadi Negin Sadat Hosseini, Soleimani Hamidreza, Moghadam Arman Soltani, Karimi Elaheh, Sattar Yaser, Jenab Yaser, Mehrani Mehdi, Hajizeinali Alimohammad, Iskander Mina, Sabet Mehrshad Fathian, Salehi Negar, Al-Azizi Karim, Hakim Diaa, Alam Mahboob, Hosseini Kaveh
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). This meta-analysis aims to elucidate outcome trends following TAVR versus SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis and low-surgical risk.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases from inception until May 2024, to identify studies comparing TAVR versus SAVR in patients with low-surgical risk (Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality score <4%). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular mortality, stroke, disabling stroke, rehospitalization, myocardial infarction, aortic valve reintervention, permanent pacemaker implantation, and new-onset atrial fibrillation. Binary random-effects models were used to compare the risk of each outcome across various follow-up intervals and the risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias-2 tool. The meta-analysis included 6 randomized trials including 4682 patients. TAVR was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality than SAVR in the 30-day (hazard ratio [HR: 0.45] [95% CI: 0.26-0.77], I2: 0%) and 30-day to 1-year (HR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.37-0.81], I2: 16%) follow-ups. However, the risk of all-cause mortality was similar during >1-year follow-ups. TAVR was associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular mortality, disabling stroke, rehospitalization, new-onset atrial fibrillation, and a higher risk of permanent pacemaker implantation compared with SAVR during the 30-day follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: TAVR was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality within the first year of post-procedural follow-up compared with SAVR. However, the risk of all-cause mortality was similar in >1-year follow-ups.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases from inception until May 2024, to identify studies comparing TAVR versus SAVR in patients with low-surgical risk (Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality score <4%). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular mortality, stroke, disabling stroke, rehospitalization, myocardial infarction, aortic valve reintervention, permanent pacemaker implantation, and new-onset atrial fibrillation. Binary random-effects models were used to compare the risk of each outcome across various follow-up intervals and the risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias-2 tool. The meta-analysis included 6 randomized trials including 4682 patients. TAVR was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality than SAVR in the 30-day (hazard ratio [HR: 0.45] [95% CI: 0.26-0.77], I2: 0%) and 30-day to 1-year (HR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.37-0.81], I2: 16%) follow-ups. However, the risk of all-cause mortality was similar during >1-year follow-ups. TAVR was associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular mortality, disabling stroke, rehospitalization, new-onset atrial fibrillation, and a higher risk of permanent pacemaker implantation compared with SAVR during the 30-day follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: TAVR was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality within the first year of post-procedural follow-up compared with SAVR. However, the risk of all-cause mortality was similar in >1-year follow-ups.