Mohammed Al-Tawil, Jesvin T Sunny, Christopher J Goulden, Tahiyyah Akhteruzzaman, Basel F Alqeeq, Amer Harky
{"title":"紧急和急诊经导管二尖瓣修复术(MitraClip®)的结果:与标准择期修复术的比较。","authors":"Mohammed Al-Tawil, Jesvin T Sunny, Christopher J Goulden, Tahiyyah Akhteruzzaman, Basel F Alqeeq, Amer Harky","doi":"10.4103/heartviews.heartviews_88_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mitral regurgitation (MR) is the most common valvular disease worldwide. MR has been managed surgically, with either a mitral valve replacement or repair. Percutaneous transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) with MitraClip<sup>®</sup> insertion has gained wide popularity and success over medical and surgical therapy for MR. Some patients with acute MR or decompensated heart failure could benefit from urgent TMVr. This meta-analysis aims to compare clinical outcomes of urgent versus elective TMVr.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a study-level meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of urgent versus elective TMVr using the MitraClip system. The primary endpoint outcome was all-cause mortality. Additional outcomes included procedural success, postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI), stroke, and length of in-hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 30-day mortality was significantly higher in the urgent group (odds ratio [OR]: 2.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] [2.17, 3.48]; <i>P</i> < 0.00001; <i>I</i>² =0%). However, subgroup analysis of matched cohorts showed no significant difference between both groups (OR: 1.80; 95% CI [0.94, 3.46]; <i>P</i> = 0.08; <i>I</i>² =0%). One-year mortality was similar between both groups (and: 1.67; 95% CI [0.96, 2.90]; <i>P</i> = 0.07; <i>I</i>² =0%). Procedural success was similar between both groups (89.4% vs. 89.8%; <i>P</i> = 0.43). Postoperative AKI was significantly higher in the urgent group (OR: 4.12; 95% CI [2.87, 5.91]; <i>P</i> < 0.00001; <i>I</i>² =0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Urgent TMVr should be indicated in select populations as it is considered therapeutic with acceptable outcomes therein.</p>","PeriodicalId":32654,"journal":{"name":"Heart Views","volume":"25 1","pages":"13-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11104547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Results of Urgent and Emergent Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair (MitraClip<sup>®</sup>): A Comparison with Standard Elective Repair.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammed Al-Tawil, Jesvin T Sunny, Christopher J Goulden, Tahiyyah Akhteruzzaman, Basel F Alqeeq, Amer Harky\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/heartviews.heartviews_88_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mitral regurgitation (MR) is the most common valvular disease worldwide. MR has been managed surgically, with either a mitral valve replacement or repair. Percutaneous transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) with MitraClip<sup>®</sup> insertion has gained wide popularity and success over medical and surgical therapy for MR. Some patients with acute MR or decompensated heart failure could benefit from urgent TMVr. This meta-analysis aims to compare clinical outcomes of urgent versus elective TMVr.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a study-level meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of urgent versus elective TMVr using the MitraClip system. The primary endpoint outcome was all-cause mortality. Additional outcomes included procedural success, postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI), stroke, and length of in-hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 30-day mortality was significantly higher in the urgent group (odds ratio [OR]: 2.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] [2.17, 3.48]; <i>P</i> < 0.00001; <i>I</i>² =0%). However, subgroup analysis of matched cohorts showed no significant difference between both groups (OR: 1.80; 95% CI [0.94, 3.46]; <i>P</i> = 0.08; <i>I</i>² =0%). One-year mortality was similar between both groups (and: 1.67; 95% CI [0.96, 2.90]; <i>P</i> = 0.07; <i>I</i>² =0%). Procedural success was similar between both groups (89.4% vs. 89.8%; <i>P</i> = 0.43). Postoperative AKI was significantly higher in the urgent group (OR: 4.12; 95% CI [2.87, 5.91]; <i>P</i> < 0.00001; <i>I</i>² =0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Urgent TMVr should be indicated in select populations as it is considered therapeutic with acceptable outcomes therein.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":32654,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heart Views\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"13-20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11104547/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heart Views\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/heartviews.heartviews_88_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart Views","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/heartviews.heartviews_88_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Results of Urgent and Emergent Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair (MitraClip®): A Comparison with Standard Elective Repair.
Background: Mitral regurgitation (MR) is the most common valvular disease worldwide. MR has been managed surgically, with either a mitral valve replacement or repair. Percutaneous transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) with MitraClip® insertion has gained wide popularity and success over medical and surgical therapy for MR. Some patients with acute MR or decompensated heart failure could benefit from urgent TMVr. This meta-analysis aims to compare clinical outcomes of urgent versus elective TMVr.
Methods: We performed a study-level meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of urgent versus elective TMVr using the MitraClip system. The primary endpoint outcome was all-cause mortality. Additional outcomes included procedural success, postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI), stroke, and length of in-hospital stay.
Results: Overall, 30-day mortality was significantly higher in the urgent group (odds ratio [OR]: 2.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] [2.17, 3.48]; P < 0.00001; I² =0%). However, subgroup analysis of matched cohorts showed no significant difference between both groups (OR: 1.80; 95% CI [0.94, 3.46]; P = 0.08; I² =0%). One-year mortality was similar between both groups (and: 1.67; 95% CI [0.96, 2.90]; P = 0.07; I² =0%). Procedural success was similar between both groups (89.4% vs. 89.8%; P = 0.43). Postoperative AKI was significantly higher in the urgent group (OR: 4.12; 95% CI [2.87, 5.91]; P < 0.00001; I² =0%).
Conclusion: Urgent TMVr should be indicated in select populations as it is considered therapeutic with acceptable outcomes therein.