-
European Journal of Cardio-thoracic... Oct 2021Mitral and tricuspid ring annuloplasty dehiscence with consequent recurrent valve regurgitation is a rare but challenging procedural failure. The incidence and...
OBJECTIVES
Mitral and tricuspid ring annuloplasty dehiscence with consequent recurrent valve regurgitation is a rare but challenging procedural failure. The incidence and predisposing risk factors for annuloplasty ring dehiscence include technical and pathological ones.
METHODS
A systematic database search with pooled analysis was conducted of original articles that only included dehiscence rate of mitral and tricuspid ring in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane database and Google Scholar, from inception to November 2020. The outcomes included were dehiscence rate in mitral and tricuspid, type of ring implanted, dehiscence rate by pathology and by ring size and shape.
RESULTS
Our search yielded 821 relevant studies. Thirty-three studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 10 340 patients (6543 mitral, 1414 tricuspid) of which 87 (mitral) and 30 (tricuspid) had dehiscence. Overall, dehiscence rate was 1.43%, diagnosed at a median of 4.5 ± 1.0 months postoperatively. A significant difference in mitral dehiscence rate was found by ring type (semi-rigid 1.86%, rigid 2.32%; flexible 0.43%; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in rate of dehiscence by ring size (P = 0.067) and shape in mitral (P = 0.281) but there was higher dehiscence rate in ischaemic compared to non-ischaemic mitral regurgitation (3.91% vs 1.63%; P = 0.022). Among tricuspid studies, 9 of 10 studies did not report any dehiscence.
CONCLUSIONS
Although rigid, semi-rigid and flexible annuloplasty rings provide acceptable valve repair outcomes, mitral annuloplasty ring dehiscence is clinically more common among rigid rings. Understanding the multifactorial nature of ring dehiscence will help in identifying the patients at high risk and improve their clinical outcomes.
Topics: Heart Valve Prosthesis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Mitral Valve; Mitral Valve Annuloplasty; Mitral Valve Insufficiency; Prosthesis Design; Treatment Outcome; Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency
PubMed: 33880496
DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezab178 -
International Journal of Environmental... Oct 2020Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis represents one of the most frequent surgical procedures on heart valves. These patients often have concomitant mitral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis represents one of the most frequent surgical procedures on heart valves. These patients often have concomitant mitral regurgitation. To reveal whether the moderate mitral regurgitation will improve after aortic valve replacement alone, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We identified 27 studies with 4452 patients that underwent aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis and had co-existent mitral regurgitation. Primary end point was the impact of aortic valve replacement on the concomitant mitral regurgitation. Secondary end points were the analysis of the left ventricle reverse remodeling and long-term survival. Our results showed that there was significant improvement in mitral regurgitation postoperatively (RR, 1.65; 95% CI 1.36-2.00; < 0.00001) with the average decrease of 0.46 (WMD; 95% CI 0.35-0.57; < 0.00001). The effect is more pronounced in the elderly population. Perioperative mortality was higher ( < 0.0001) and long-term survival significantly worse ( < 0.00001) in patients that had moderate/severe mitral regurgitation preoperatively. We conclude that after aortic valve replacement alone there are fair chances but for only slight improvement in concomitant mitral regurgitation. The secondary moderate mitral regurgitation should be addressed at the time of aortic valve replacement. A more conservative approach should be followed for elderly and high-risk patients.
Topics: Aged; Aortic Valve; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Mitral Valve Insufficiency; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33049955
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17197335 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Feb 2022Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is currently a common treatment in high-risk aortic stenosis patients, but the impact of hepatic insufficiency on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is currently a common treatment in high-risk aortic stenosis patients, but the impact of hepatic insufficiency on prognosis after TAVI is debatable and whether TAVI is superior to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with hepatic insufficiency is uncertain.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effect of abnormal liver function on the outcome and safety after TAVI and whether TAVI is superior to SAVR in patients with hepatic insufficiency.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science were systematically searched from inception up to 26 November 2021. Studies were eligible if mortality and complications after TAVI in patients with and without hepatic insufficiency, or mortality and complications for TAVI versus SAVR in patients with hepatic insufficiency were reported. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the quality of each study. This meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021253423) and was carried out by using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 14.0.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis of 21 studies assessed a total of 222,694 patients. Hepatic insufficiency was associated with higher short-term (in-hospital or 30-day) mortality [OR = 1.62, 95% CI (1.18 to 2.21), P = 0.003] and 1-2 years mortality [HR = 1.64, 95% CI (1.42 to 1.89), P < 0.00001] after TAVI. Between TAVI and SAVR in patients with hepatic insufficiency, there was a statistically significant difference in in-hospital mortality [OR = 0.46, 95% CI (0.27 to 0.81), P = 0.007], the occurrence rate of blood transfusions [OR = 0.29, 95% CI (0.22 to 0.38), P < 0.00001] and the occurrence rate of acute kidney injury [OR = 0.55, 95% CI (0.33 to 0.91), P = 0.02].
CONCLUSIONS
TAVI patients with hepatic insufficiency may have negative impact both on short-term (in-hospital or 30-day) and 1-2-years mortality. For patients with hepatic insufficiency, TAVI could be a better option than SAVR.
Topics: Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Hepatic Insufficiency; Humans; Risk Factors; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35196988
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-022-02510-2 -
Europace : European Pacing,... Jul 2022The aims of this study is to assess by an updated meta-analysis the clinical outcomes related to permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
The aims of this study is to assess by an updated meta-analysis the clinical outcomes related to permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) at long-term (≥12 months) follow-up (LTF).
METHODS AND RESULTS
A comprehensive literature research was performed on PubMed and EMBASE. The primary endpoint was all-cause death. Secondary endpoints were rehospitalization for heart failure, stroke, and myocardial infarction. A subgroup analysis was performed according to the Society of Thoracic Surgeon-Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) score. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021243301). A total of 51 069 patients undergoing TAVI from 31 observational studies were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 22 months. At LTF, PPI post-TAVI was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death [risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-1.25; P < 0.001] and rehospitalization for heart failure (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.13-1.52; P < 0.001). In contrast, the risks of stroke and myocardial infarction were not affected. Among the 20 studies that reported procedural risk, the association between PPI and all-cause death risk at LTF was statistically significant only in studies enrolling patients with high STS-PROM score (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.12-1.40), although there was a similar tendency of the results in those at medium and low risk.
CONCLUSION
Patients necessitating PPI after TAVI have a higher long-term risk of all-cause death and rehospitalization for heart failure as compared to those who do not receive PPI.
Topics: Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Heart Failure; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Pacemaker, Artificial; Risk Factors; Stroke; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35138367
DOI: 10.1093/europace/euac008 -
JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions Dec 2020The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility, efficacy, and clinical outcomes of transcatheter repair of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) in a pooled analysis of...
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility, efficacy, and clinical outcomes of transcatheter repair of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) in a pooled analysis of interventional studies.
BACKGROUND
New percutaneous devices are available to treat severe TR, but the evidence is sparse and limited to smaller cohorts.
METHODS
Several electronic databases were searched for interventional studies involving percutaneous repair of TR. Devices used were the Cardioband, FORMA, MitraClip, PASCAL, and Trialign. Outcomes included in the final analysis were successful implantation, residual severe TR, post-procedural New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III or IV, 6-min walk distance, and echocardiographic parameters. Subgroup and meta-regression analysis were performed to further explore residual heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Seven studies and 454 patients undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve repair were included in the pooled analysis; 95% of patients had at least severe TR, and 91% were in NYHA functional class III or IV. Successful implantation was achieved in 86% of patients. At the longest follow-up available (weighted mean 265 days), 9% had died. Compared with baseline, a significantly lower proportion of patients had at least severe TR (relative risk: 0.38; 95% confidence interval: 0.20 to 0.70; p = 0.004) and were in NYHA functional class III or IV (relative risk: 0.23; 95% confidence interval: 0.20 to 0.30; p < 0.001). Patients also experienced increases in 6-min walk distance (mean difference +64.6 m; p < 0.001) and significant reductions in tricuspid valve annular diameter (mean difference -3 mm; p < 0.001), while left and right ventricular function did not change significantly.
CONCLUSIONS
A strategy of transcatheter repair for severe TR appears to be feasible, effective, and associated with improved clinical outcomes at mid-term follow-up.
Topics: Cardiac Catheterization; Echocardiography; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Severity of Illness Index; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency
PubMed: 33189640
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.08.020 -
ESC Heart Failure Oct 2022Randomized controlled trials comparing the use of the MitraClip device in addition to guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT) to GDMT alone in patients with secondary... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
Randomized controlled trials comparing the use of the MitraClip device in addition to guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT) to GDMT alone in patients with secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) have shown conflicting results. However, if these differences could be due to the underlying MR aetiology is still unknown. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate if the effects of percutaneous edge-to-edge repair with MitraClip implantation could differ in patients with ischaemic (I-MR) and non-ischaemic mitral regurgitation (NI-MR).
METHODS AND RESULTS
PubMed, Embase, BioMed Central, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for all studies including patients with secondary MR treated with the MitraClip device. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death and heart failure-related hospitalization. Secondary endpoints were the single components of the primary endpoint, New York Heart Association functional Classes III and IV, and mitral valve re-intervention. Seven studies enrolling 2501 patients were included. Patients with I-MR compared with patients with NI-MR had a similar risk of the primary endpoint (odds ratio: 1.17; 95% confidence interval: 0.93 to 1.46; I : 0%). The risk of all-cause death was increased in patients with I-MR (odds ratio: 1.31; 95% confidence interval: 1.07 to 1.62; I : 0%), while no differences were observed between the two groups in terms of the other secondary endpoints.
CONCLUSIONS
The risk of mortality after MitraClip implantation is lower in patients with NI-MR than in those with I-MR. No absolute differences in the risk of heart failure related hospitalization were observed between groups.
Topics: Humans; Mitral Valve Insufficiency; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Treatment Outcome; Mitral Valve; Heart Failure
PubMed: 35770326
DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.13772 -
European Heart Journal. Quality of Care... Jul 2021Multiple guidelines exist for the management of aortic stenosis (AS). We systematically reviewed current guidelines and recommendations, developed by national or...
Multiple guidelines exist for the management of aortic stenosis (AS). We systematically reviewed current guidelines and recommendations, developed by national or international medical organizations, on management of AS to aid clinical decision-making. Publications in MEDLINE and EMBASE between 1 June 2010 and 15 January 2021 were identified. Additionally, the International Guideline Library, National Guideline Clearinghouse, National Library for Health Guidelines Finder, Canadian Medical Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Infobase, and websites of relevant organizations were searched. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts. Two reviewers assessed rigour of guideline development and extracted the recommendations. Of the seven guidelines and recommendations retrieved, five showed considerable rigour of development. Those rigourously developed, agreed on the definition of severe AS and diverse haemodynamic phenotypes, indications and contraindications for intervention in symptomatic severe AS, surveillance intervals in asymptomatic severe AS, and the importance of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) and shared decision-making. Discrepancies exist in age and surgical risk cut-offs for recommending surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) vs. transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), the use of biomarkers and complementary multimodality imaging for decision-making in asymptomatic patients and surveillance intervals for non-severe AS. Contemporary guidelines for AS management agree on the importance of MDT involvement and shared decision-making for individualized treatment and unanimously indicate valve replacement in severe, symptomatic AS. Discrepancies exist in thresholds for age and procedural risk used in choosing between SAVR and TAVI, role of biomarkers and complementary imaging modalities to define AS severity and risk of progression in asymptomatic patients.
Topics: Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Canada; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
PubMed: 33751049
DOI: 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcab016 -
Medicine Jul 2021Presently, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) as an effective and convenient intervention has been adopted extensively for patients with severe aortic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparison of postprocedural new-onset atrial fibrillation between transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on 16 randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Presently, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) as an effective and convenient intervention has been adopted extensively for patients with severe aortic disease. However, after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and TAVR, the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is prevalently found. This meta-analysis was designed to comprehensively compare the incidence of NOAF at different times after TAVR and SAVR for patients with severe aortic disease.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to October 1, 2020 was conducted for relevant studies that comparing TAVR and SAVR in the treatment of severe aortic disease. The primary outcomes were the incidence of NOAF with early, midterm and long term follow-up. The secondary outcomes included permanent pacemaker (PM) implantation, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiogenic shock, as well as mortality and other complications. Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted the data independently. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures provided in Review Manager 5.2.
RESULTS
A total of 16 studies including 13,310 patients were identified. The pooled results indicated that, compared with SAVR, TAVR experienced a significantly lower incidence of 30-day/in-hospital, 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year NOAF, with pooled risk ratios (RRs) of 0.31 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.41; 5725 pts), 0.30 (95% CI 0.24-0.39; 6321 pts), 0.48 (95% CI 0.38-0.61; 3441 pts), and 0.45 (95% CI 0.37-0.55; 2268 pts) respectively. In addition, TAVR showed lower incidence of MI (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.40-0.97) and cardiogenic shock (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.19-0.59), but higher incidence of permanent PM (RR 3.16; 95% CI 1.61-6.21) and major vascular complications (RR 2.22; 95% CI 1.14-4.32) at 30-day/in-hospital. At 1- and 2-year after procedure, compared with SAVR, TAVR experienced a significantly higher incidence of neurological events, transient ischemic attacks (TIA), permanent PM, and major vascular complications, respectively. At 5-year after procedure, compared with SAVR, TAVR experienced a significantly higher incidence of TIA and re-intervention respectively. There was no difference in 30-day, 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year all-cause or cardiovascular mortality as well as stroke between TAVR and SAVR.
CONCLUSIONS
Our analysis showed that TAVR was superior to SAVR in decreasing the both short and long term postprocedural NOAF. TAVR was equal to SAVR in early, midterm and long term mortality. In addition, TAVR showed lower incidence of 30-day/in-hospital MI and cardiogenic shock after procedure. However, pooled results showed that TAVR was inferior to SAVR in reducing permanent pacemaker implantation, neurological events, TIA, major vascular complications, and re-intervention.
Topics: Atrial Fibrillation; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Severity of Illness Index; Time Factors; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
PubMed: 34260547
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000026613 -
Journal of the American Heart... Sep 2019Background Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) has emerged as an alternative therapeutic option for the treatment of severe mitral regurgitation in patients...
Background Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) has emerged as an alternative therapeutic option for the treatment of severe mitral regurgitation in patients with prohibitive or high surgical risk. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the clinical procedural characteristics and outcomes associated with the early TMVR experience. Methods and Results Published studies and international conference presentations reporting data on TMVR systems were identified. Only records including clinical characteristics, procedural results, and 30-day and midterm outcomes were analyzed. A total of 16 publications describing 308 patients were analyzed. Most patients (65.9%) were men, with a mean age of 75 years (range: 69-81 years) and Society for Thoracic Surgery Predicted Risk of Mortality score of 7.7% (range: 6.1-8.6%). The etiology of mitral regurgitation was predominantly secondary or mixed (87.1%), and 81.5% of the patients were in New York Heart Association class III or IV. A transapical approach was used in 81.5% of patients, and overall technical success was high (91.7%). Postprocedural mean transmitral gradient was 3.5 mm Hg (range: 3-5.5 mm Hg), and only 4 cases (1.5%) presented residual moderate to severe mitral regurgitation. Procedural and all-cause 30-day mortality were 4.6% and 13.6%, respectively. Left ventricular outflow obstruction and conversion to open heart surgery were reported in 0.3% and 4% of patients, respectively. All-cause and cardiovascular-related mortality rates were 27.6% and 23.3%, respectively, after a mean follow-up of 10 (range: 3 to 24) months. Conclusions TMVR was a feasible, less invasive alternative for treating severe mitral regurgitation in patients with high or prohibitive surgical risk. TMVR was associated with a high rate of successful valve implantation and excellent hemodynamic results. However, periprocedural complications and all-cause mortality were relatively high.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cardiac Catheterization; Female; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Hemodynamics; Humans; Male; Mitral Valve; Mitral Valve Insufficiency; Postoperative Complications; Recovery of Function; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Severity of Illness Index; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31441371
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.119.013332 -
JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions Jan 2020Aortic stenosis (AS) is among the most common valvular heart diseases encountered in the United States. In this review the authors examine differences between racial and...
Aortic stenosis (AS) is among the most common valvular heart diseases encountered in the United States. In this review the authors examine differences between racial and ethnic groups in the epidemiology and management of severe AS, explore potential explanations for these findings, and discuss the implications for improving the delivery of care to racially and ethnically diverse populations. Underrepresented racial and ethnic groups experience a paradoxically lower prevalence or incidence of AS relative to white subjects, despite having a higher prevalence of traditional risk factors. Historically, UREGs with severe AS have had lower rates of both surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement and experienced more post-surgical complications, including, bleeding, worsening heart failure, and rehospitalization. Last, UREGs with severe AS have an increased risk for morbidity and mortality relative to white patients. To date much of the research on AS has examined black-white differences, so there is a need to understand how other racial and ethnic groups with severe AS are diagnosed and treated, with examination of their resulting outcomes. Overall, racial and ethnic disparities in health care access and care delivery are a public health concern given the changing demographics of the U.S. population. These differences in AS management and outcomes highlight the need for additional research into contributing factors and appropriate interventions to address the lower rates of aortic valve replacement and higher morbidity and mortality among UREGs.
Topics: Aortic Valve Stenosis; Health Status Disparities; Healthcare Disparities; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Prevalence; Race Factors; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Severity of Illness Index; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31973792
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.08.056