Mitral Valve Repair Versus Replacement in Patients Undergoing Concomitant Aortic Valve Replacement.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Heart, Lung and Circulation Pub Date : 2024-11-28 DOI:10.1016/j.hlc.2024.07.015
Yi Zhang, Guangguo Fu, Gang Li, Bohao Jian, Rui Wang, Yang Huang, Tongxin Chu, Zhongkai Wu, Zhuoming Zhou, Mengya Liang
{"title":"Mitral Valve Repair Versus Replacement in Patients Undergoing Concomitant Aortic Valve Replacement.","authors":"Yi Zhang, Guangguo Fu, Gang Li, Bohao Jian, Rui Wang, Yang Huang, Tongxin Chu, Zhongkai Wu, Zhuoming Zhou, Mengya Liang","doi":"10.1016/j.hlc.2024.07.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Mitral valve repair (MVr) is associated with more favourable long-term outcomes than mitral valve replacement (MVR) in cases of isolated mitral valve disease suitable for repair. However, there is debate regarding whether the superiority of MVr extends to patients with concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease. Therefore, this meta-analysis was conducted to compare the survival benefits between aortic valve replacement (AVR) plus MVr with a double valve replacement (DVR).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane until 20 October 2022. Studies comparing MVr and MVR in patients undergoing concomitant AVR were included. The primary outcome was long-term survival. The secondary outcomes were early mortality, mitral valve reoperation, and valve-related adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen studies with a total of 140,638 patients were included in this analysis. Patients undergoing AVR plus MVr exhibited a favourable trend in long-term survival (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.71-1.03; p=0.10; I<sup>2</sup>=58%). The reconstructed Kaplan-Meier curve revealed that the long-term survival at 5, 10, and 15 years was higher in the AVR plus MVr (80.95%, 67.63%, and 51.18%, respectively) than in the DVR group (76.62%, 61.36%, 43.21%, respectively). Aortic valve replacement plus MVr had a lower risk of early mortality (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.58-0.79; p<0.001; I<sup>2</sup>=77%), thromboembolic events (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.67-0.98; p=0.03; I<sup>2</sup>=5%), and haemorrhagic events (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.78-0.98; p=0.01; I<sup>2</sup>=59%). Moreover, both groups displayed comparable rates of mitral valve reoperation (HR 1.73; 95% CI 0.86-3.48; p=0.13; I<sup>2</sup>=60%) and infective endocarditis (RR 1.60; 95% CI 0.65-3.93; p=0.31; I<sup>2</sup>=0%). However, the rate of reoperation for AVR plus MVr significantly increased in rheumatic heart disease patients (HR 3.30, 95% CI 1.66-6.59; p<0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with DVR, AVR plus MVr was associated with favourable long-term survival, reduced early mortality risk, and a lower incidence of thromboembolic and haemorrhagic events without increasing the risk of mitral valve reoperation or infective endocarditis in unselected patients. However, higher reoperation rates were observed in rheumatic heart disease patients undergoing AVR plus MVr.</p>","PeriodicalId":13000,"journal":{"name":"Heart, Lung and Circulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart, Lung and Circulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlc.2024.07.015","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Mitral valve repair (MVr) is associated with more favourable long-term outcomes than mitral valve replacement (MVR) in cases of isolated mitral valve disease suitable for repair. However, there is debate regarding whether the superiority of MVr extends to patients with concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease. Therefore, this meta-analysis was conducted to compare the survival benefits between aortic valve replacement (AVR) plus MVr with a double valve replacement (DVR).

Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane until 20 October 2022. Studies comparing MVr and MVR in patients undergoing concomitant AVR were included. The primary outcome was long-term survival. The secondary outcomes were early mortality, mitral valve reoperation, and valve-related adverse events.

Results: Sixteen studies with a total of 140,638 patients were included in this analysis. Patients undergoing AVR plus MVr exhibited a favourable trend in long-term survival (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.71-1.03; p=0.10; I2=58%). The reconstructed Kaplan-Meier curve revealed that the long-term survival at 5, 10, and 15 years was higher in the AVR plus MVr (80.95%, 67.63%, and 51.18%, respectively) than in the DVR group (76.62%, 61.36%, 43.21%, respectively). Aortic valve replacement plus MVr had a lower risk of early mortality (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.58-0.79; p<0.001; I2=77%), thromboembolic events (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.67-0.98; p=0.03; I2=5%), and haemorrhagic events (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.78-0.98; p=0.01; I2=59%). Moreover, both groups displayed comparable rates of mitral valve reoperation (HR 1.73; 95% CI 0.86-3.48; p=0.13; I2=60%) and infective endocarditis (RR 1.60; 95% CI 0.65-3.93; p=0.31; I2=0%). However, the rate of reoperation for AVR plus MVr significantly increased in rheumatic heart disease patients (HR 3.30, 95% CI 1.66-6.59; p<0.0001).

Conclusions: Compared with DVR, AVR plus MVr was associated with favourable long-term survival, reduced early mortality risk, and a lower incidence of thromboembolic and haemorrhagic events without increasing the risk of mitral valve reoperation or infective endocarditis in unselected patients. However, higher reoperation rates were observed in rheumatic heart disease patients undergoing AVR plus MVr.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Heart, Lung and Circulation
Heart, Lung and Circulation CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.80%
发文量
912
审稿时长
11.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Heart, Lung and Circulation publishes articles integrating clinical and research activities in the fields of basic cardiovascular science, clinical cardiology and cardiac surgery, with a focus on emerging issues in cardiovascular disease. The journal promotes multidisciplinary dialogue between cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, cardio-pulmonary physicians and cardiovascular scientists.
期刊最新文献
Qualitative Content Analysis of Unplanned Readmissions in Patients With Acute Heart Failure. Radiofrequency and Cryoablation as Energy Sources in the Cox-Maze Procedure: A Meta-Analysis of Rhythm Outcomes. High-Intensity Interval Training in Adults With Congenital Heart Disease: A Systematic Review. Validation of a Prediction Model From Quantitative Coronary Angiography to Detect Ischaemic Lesions as Evaluated by Invasive Fractional Flow Reserve. The State of STEMI Care Across NSW: A Comparison of Rural, Regional, and Metropolitan Centres.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1