合并主动脉瓣置换术患者的二尖瓣修复与置换术。

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Heart, Lung and Circulation Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-29 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":"合并主动脉瓣置换术患者的二尖瓣修复与置换术。","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":"3-15"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":\"3-15\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"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\":\"2024/11/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","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":"2024/11/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在适合修复的孤立二尖瓣疾病病例中,二尖瓣修复(MVr)比二尖瓣置换术(MVr)具有更有利的长期预后。然而,关于MVr的优势是否延伸到合并主动脉瓣和二尖瓣疾病的患者,存在争议。因此,本荟萃分析旨在比较主动脉瓣置换术(AVR) + MVr与双瓣置换术(DVR)的生存获益。方法:到2022年10月20日,在PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane上进行全面的文献检索。比较合并AVR患者的MVr和MVr的研究被纳入。主要终点是长期生存。次要结局是早期死亡率、二尖瓣再手术和瓣膜相关不良事件。结果:16项研究共纳入140,638例患者。接受AVR + MVr的患者在长期生存中表现出有利的趋势(HR 0.85;95% ci 0.71-1.03;p = 0.10;I2 = 58%)。重建Kaplan-Meier曲线显示,AVR + MVr组5、10和15年的长期生存率(分别为80.95%、67.63%和51.18%)高于DVR组(分别为76.62%、61.36%和43.21%)。主动脉瓣置换术加MVr的早期死亡风险较低(RR 0.67;95% ci 0.58-0.79;p2=77%),血栓栓塞事件(RR 0.81;95% ci 0.67-0.98;p = 0.03;I2=5%)和出血事件(RR 0.87;95% ci 0.78-0.98;p = 0.01;I2 = 59%)。此外,两组二尖瓣再手术率相当(HR 1.73;95% ci 0.86-3.48;p = 0.13;I2=60%)和感染性心内膜炎(RR 1.60;95% ci 0.65-3.93;p = 0.31;I2 = 0%)。然而,风湿性心脏病患者AVR + MVr的再手术率显著增加(HR 3.30, 95% CI 1.66-6.59;结论:与DVR相比,AVR + MVr具有较好的长期生存率、较低的早期死亡风险、较低的血栓栓塞和出血事件发生率,且未增加二尖瓣再手术或感染性心内膜炎的风险。然而,风湿性心脏病患者在AVR + MVr中观察到更高的再手术率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Mitral Valve Repair Versus Replacement in Patients Undergoing Concomitant Aortic Valve Replacement.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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
Isochronal Apparent Dispersion at Early Activation Sites Accurately Identifies Outflow Tract Ventricular Ectopy Sites. Elucidating the Causal Link Between Treg-Related Immune Traits and Atherosclerosis-Related Cardiovascular Diseases: A Bidirectional Mendelian Randomisation Analysis. Effectiveness of Various Sternal Closure Devices Post Adult Cardiac Surgery. The Clinical Significance of PCI-Related Myocardial Infarction in Stable Ischaemic Heart Disease Patients in the Era of hs-Troponin. Identifying Gaps in Detection of Heart Valve Disease in Australia: A Population Survey.
×
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