Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low and intermediate risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score matching observational studies
机构:[1]Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China首都医科大学附属安贞医院[2]Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
Background: To compare the outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low and intermediate risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and propensity score matching (PSM) studies compare TAVR with SAVR in patients at low and intermediate surgical risk. Methods: Two authors searched relevant literature independently, then extracted data from the included studies, and assessed risk of bias and quality of study separately according to different study designs, besides that, the extracted data was analyzed via utilization of GRADE system to evaluate the quality of evidence separately. Results: Overall 15 studies (5 RCTs, 10 PSM studies) with total 12,057 patients were selected. Mortality and disabling stroke during follow-up period were comparable between TAVR and SAVR (RR 1.09, 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.46; RR 0.7, 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.07, respectively), TAVR revealed to be superior to SAVR regarding acute kidney injury (AKI), and onset of new atrial fibrillation (AF) (RCT: high certainty; AKI in PSM: moderate certainty, AF in PSM: low certainty). These results of RCT and PSM studies are consistent. In RCT review, SAVR was better in the following aspects: aortic valve (AV) re-intervention (high certainty), vascular complications, pacemaker implantation (moderate certainty), but comparable in the following aspects: myocardial infarction (MI), aortic insufficient (AI) (moderate certainty), major bleeding (low certainty). In PSM review, SAVR revealed a better result in AI and vascular complications (high certainty), but in the aspects of AV re-intervention, pacemaker implantation, major bleeding and MI (low certainty), it was comparable. Conclusions: TAVR is comparable to SAVR in terms of mortality and disabling stroke in severe AS patients at low and intermediate risk, but higher proportion of AV re-intervention observed in TAVR. Those results should encourage caution when extending the indications of TAVR into low risk patients, especially for young low risk patients.
基金:
International Cooperation and Exchange Project [81861128025]
第一作者机构:[1]Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
通讯作者:
通讯机构:[1]Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China[*1]Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 2 Anzhen Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100029, China.
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
Jintao Fu,Mohammad Sharif Popal,Yulin Li,et al.Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low and intermediate risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score matching observational studies[J].JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE.2019,11(5):1945-+.doi:10.21037/jtd.2019.04.97.
APA:
Jintao Fu,Mohammad Sharif Popal,Yulin Li,Guoqi Li,Yue Qi...&Jie Du.(2019).Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low and intermediate risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score matching observational studies.JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE,11,(5)
MLA:
Jintao Fu,et al."Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low and intermediate risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score matching observational studies".JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE 11..5(2019):1945-+