生物人工主动脉瓣置换术抗血栓策略的比较疗效:一项网络荟萃分析。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Angiology Pub Date : 2025-01-22 DOI:10.1177/00033197241313254
Noritsugu Naito, Hisato Takagi
{"title":"生物人工主动脉瓣置换术抗血栓策略的比较疗效:一项网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Noritsugu Naito, Hisato Takagi","doi":"10.1177/00033197241313254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This meta-analysis evaluates outcomes in patients undergoing bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (bAVR), comparing different antithrombotic strategies. We conducted a systematic search through May 2024. A standard meta-analysis compared outcomes between patients who received anticoagulation therapy (AC) and those who did not. Therapeutic categories were subdivided into four groups: AC alone, AC with antiplatelet therapy (AP), AP alone, and no antithrombotic therapy. A network meta-analysis was performed for these categories. The review included 16 studies, comprising a total of 59,054 patients. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality rates (HR: hazard ratio [95% CI: confidence interval] = 0.98 [0.77-1.25], <i>P</i> = .88) or thromboembolic events (HR [95% CI] = 0.91 [0.65-1.28], <i>P</i> = .60) between patients with and without AC. However, bleeding events were significantly higher in patients receiving AC (HR [95% CI] = 1.55 [1.20-2.00], <i>P</i> < .01). Network meta-analysis showed that AP alone was associated with lower mortality rates compared with other therapeutic categories. Additionally, AP alone was associated with fewer bleeding events compared with AC alone and AC with AP. This meta-analysis suggests that AP alone in patients undergoing bAVR is associated with superior outcomes compared with other antithrombotic strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":8264,"journal":{"name":"Angiology","volume":" ","pages":"33197241313254"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Efficacy of Antithrombotic Strategies in Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement: A Network Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Noritsugu Naito, Hisato Takagi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00033197241313254\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This meta-analysis evaluates outcomes in patients undergoing bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (bAVR), comparing different antithrombotic strategies. We conducted a systematic search through May 2024. A standard meta-analysis compared outcomes between patients who received anticoagulation therapy (AC) and those who did not. Therapeutic categories were subdivided into four groups: AC alone, AC with antiplatelet therapy (AP), AP alone, and no antithrombotic therapy. A network meta-analysis was performed for these categories. The review included 16 studies, comprising a total of 59,054 patients. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality rates (HR: hazard ratio [95% CI: confidence interval] = 0.98 [0.77-1.25], <i>P</i> = .88) or thromboembolic events (HR [95% CI] = 0.91 [0.65-1.28], <i>P</i> = .60) between patients with and without AC. However, bleeding events were significantly higher in patients receiving AC (HR [95% CI] = 1.55 [1.20-2.00], <i>P</i> < .01). Network meta-analysis showed that AP alone was associated with lower mortality rates compared with other therapeutic categories. Additionally, AP alone was associated with fewer bleeding events compared with AC alone and AC with AP. This meta-analysis suggests that AP alone in patients undergoing bAVR is associated with superior outcomes compared with other antithrombotic strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8264,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Angiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"33197241313254\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Angiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00033197241313254\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Angiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00033197241313254","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本荟萃分析评估了生物人工主动脉瓣置换术(bAVR)患者的预后,比较了不同的抗血栓策略。我们在2024年5月进行了系统搜索。一项标准的荟萃分析比较了接受抗凝治疗(AC)和未接受抗凝治疗的患者之间的结果。治疗类别细分为4组:单独AC、AC联合抗血小板治疗(AP)、单独AP和不进行抗血栓治疗。对这些类别进行网络荟萃分析。该综述包括16项研究,共59054例患者。两组患者的全因死亡率(HR:危险比[95% CI:可信区间]= 0.98 [0.77-1.25],P = 0.88)或血栓栓塞事件(HR [95% CI] = 0.91 [0.65-1.28], P = 0.60)均无显著差异。然而,接受AC治疗的患者出血事件显著高于接受AC治疗的患者(HR [95% CI] = 1.55 [1.20-2.00], P
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
Comparative Efficacy of Antithrombotic Strategies in Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement: A Network Meta-Analysis.

This meta-analysis evaluates outcomes in patients undergoing bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (bAVR), comparing different antithrombotic strategies. We conducted a systematic search through May 2024. A standard meta-analysis compared outcomes between patients who received anticoagulation therapy (AC) and those who did not. Therapeutic categories were subdivided into four groups: AC alone, AC with antiplatelet therapy (AP), AP alone, and no antithrombotic therapy. A network meta-analysis was performed for these categories. The review included 16 studies, comprising a total of 59,054 patients. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality rates (HR: hazard ratio [95% CI: confidence interval] = 0.98 [0.77-1.25], P = .88) or thromboembolic events (HR [95% CI] = 0.91 [0.65-1.28], P = .60) between patients with and without AC. However, bleeding events were significantly higher in patients receiving AC (HR [95% CI] = 1.55 [1.20-2.00], P < .01). Network meta-analysis showed that AP alone was associated with lower mortality rates compared with other therapeutic categories. Additionally, AP alone was associated with fewer bleeding events compared with AC alone and AC with AP. This meta-analysis suggests that AP alone in patients undergoing bAVR is associated with superior outcomes compared with other antithrombotic strategies.

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
Angiology
Angiology 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
180
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: A presentation of original, peer-reviewed original articles, review and case reports relative to all phases of all vascular diseases, Angiology (ANG) offers more than a typical cardiology journal. With approximately 1000 pages per year covering diagnostic methods, therapeutic approaches, and clinical and laboratory research, ANG is among the most informative publications in the field of peripheral vascular and cardiovascular diseases. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 13 days
期刊最新文献
Differential Impact of Chronic Kidney Disease Stages on the Survival Benefit of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Large Real-world Cohort Study. Letter: C-reactive protein: An Important Inflammatory Marker of Coronary Atherosclerotic Disease or an Innocent Bystander? Letter: Relationship Between Magnesium Levels and Contrast Nephropathy in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction. Hs-CRP/ALB Levels Are Associated With Poor Long-term Prognosis in Patients With STEMI Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Impact of Chronic Inflammatory Diseases on Clinical Outcomes in Patients undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
×
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