CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

经导管主动脉瓣置换

科研文章

荐读文献

Randomized Evaluation of TriGuard 3 Cerebral Embolic Protection After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: REFLECT II 2020 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on Management of Conduction Disturbances in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement A Report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients With Symptomatic Severe Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis 5-Year Outcomes Comparing Surgical Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Ambulatory Electrocardiogram Monitoring in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Evolving concepts in the management of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation Extracellular Myocardial Volume in Patients With Aortic Stenosis Short Length of Stay After Elective Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Is Not Associated With Increased Early or Late Readmission Risk Change in Kidney Function and 2-Year Mortality After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Temporal Trends, Characteristics, and Outcomes of Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Review Article2019 May 25. pii: S0002-9149(19)30584-3.

JOURNAL:Am J Cardiol. Article Link

Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness and Safety of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-to-Intermediate Surgical Risk Cohort

Ando T, Ashraf S, Villablanca P et al. Keywords: transcatheter aortic valve implantation; surgical aortic valve replacement; low-to-intermediate surgical risk cohort

ABSTRACT

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been used to treat high surgical risk cohorts but has been expanded to treat low-to-intermediate risk cohort as well. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the outcomes between TAVI and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-to-intermediate risk cohort. We queried PUBMED, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrial.gov for relevant articles. Randomized controlled trials that compared at least one of the outcomes of interest between TAVI and SAVR were included. Risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled with a random-effects model to compare the risk of the primary outcome between the 2 procedures. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality or disabling/major stroke at 1 year. Seven studies with a total of 7,143 patients (3,665 TAVI) were included. All-cause mortality or disabling/major stroke at 30 days (6 studies, RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.03) was similar between TAVI and SAVR but was significantly lower in TAVI at 1 year (5 studies, RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98). All-cause mortality was similar at both 30 days (7 studies, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.21) and 1 year (6 studies, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.04). Disabling/major stroke was similar between the 2 procedures (6 studies, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.12) at 30 days but was significantly lower in TAVI at 1 year (5 studies RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.98). Age, gender, diabetes, and surgical risk score did not modulate the primary outcome. TAVI had a significantly lower composite of all-cause mortality or disabling/major stroke at 1 year compared with SAVR in low-to-intermediate surgical risk cohort.