-
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 2024In recent years, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) models to generate individualised risk assessments and predict patient outcomes post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve...
OBJECTIVES
In recent years, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) models to generate individualised risk assessments and predict patient outcomes post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) has been a topic of increasing relevance in literature. This study aims to evaluate the predictive accuracy of AI algorithms in forecasting post-TAVI mortality as compared to traditional risk scores.
METHODS
Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) standard, a systematic review was carried out. We searched four databases in total-PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane-from 19 June 2023-24 June, 2023.
RESULTS
From 2,239 identified records, 1,504 duplicates were removed, 735 manuscripts were screened, and 10 studies were included in our review. Our pooled analysis of 5 studies and 9,398 patients revealed a significantly higher mean area under curve (AUC) associated with AI mortality predictions than traditional score predictions (MD: -0.16, CI: -0.22 to -0.10, < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses of 30-day mortality (MD: -0.08, CI: -0.13 to -0.03, = 0.001) and 1-year mortality (MD: -0.18, CI: -0.27 to -0.10, < 0.0001) also showed significantly higher mean AUC with AI predictions than traditional score predictions. Pooled mean AUC of all 10 studies and 22,933 patients was 0.79 [0.73, 0.85].
CONCLUSION
AI models have a higher predictive accuracy as compared to traditional risk scores in predicting post-TAVI mortality. Overall, this review demonstrates the potential of AI in achieving personalised risk assessment in TAVI patients.
REGISTRATION AND PROTOCOL
This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered under the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), under the registration name "All-Cause Mortality in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Assessed by Artificial Intelligence" and registration number CRD42023437705. A review protocol was not prepared. There were no amendments to the information provided at registration.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO (CRD42023437705).
PubMed: 38883982
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1343210 -
Current Problems in Cardiology Jul 2024The ideal surgical intervention for secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR), a disease of the left ventricle not the mitral valve itself, is still debated. We performed an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
Long-term outcomes comparison of mitral valve repair or replacement for secondary mitral valve regurgitation. An updated systematic review and reconstructed time-to-event study-level meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND AND AIM
The ideal surgical intervention for secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR), a disease of the left ventricle not the mitral valve itself, is still debated. We performed an updated systematic review and study-level meta-analysis investigating mitral valve repair (MVr) versus mitral valve replacement (MVR) for adult patients with SMR, with or without coronary artery disease (CAD).
METHODS
PubMed, CENTRAL and EMBASE were searched for studies comparing MVr versus MVR. Randomized trial or observational studies were considered eligible. Primary endpoint was long-term mortality for any cause. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were reconstructed and compared with Cox linear regression. Landmark analysis and time-varying hazard ratio (HR) were analyzed. Sensitivity analyses included meta-regression and separate sub-analysis. A random effects model was used.
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies (MVr=3,727 and MVR=2,839) were included. One study was a randomized trial, and 19 studies were adjusted. The mean weighted follow-up was 3.7±2.8 years. MVR was associated with significative greater late mortality (HR=1.26; 95 % CI, 1.14-1.39; P<0.0001) at 10-year follow-up. There was a time-varying trend showing an increased risk of mortality in the first 2 years after MVR (HR=1.38; 95 % CI, 1.21-1.56; P<0.0001), after which this difference dissipated (HR=0.94; 95 % CI, 0.81-1.09; P=0.41). Separate sub-analyses showed comparable long-term mortality in patients with concomitant coronary surgery ≥90 %, left ventricle ejection fraction ≤40 %, and sub-valvular apparatus preservation rate of 100 %.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to repair, MVR is associated with higher probability of mortality in the first 2 years following surgery, after which the two procedures showed comparable late mortality rate.
Topics: Humans; Mitral Valve Insufficiency; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Mitral Valve; Treatment Outcome; Mitral Valve Annuloplasty; Time Factors
PubMed: 38735348
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102636 -
Journal of the American Heart... Apr 2024It remains controversial whether prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) impacts long-term outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement. We aimed to evaluate the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch After Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data of 122 989 Patients With 592 952 Patient-Years.
BACKGROUND
It remains controversial whether prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) impacts long-term outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement. We aimed to evaluate the association of PPM with mortality, rehospitalizations, and aortic valve reinterventions.
METHODS AND RESULTS
We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data of studies published by March 2023 (according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). Sixty-five studies met our eligibility criteria and included 122 989 patients (any PPM: 68 332 patients, 55.6%). At 25 years of follow-up, the survival rates were 11.8% and 20.6% in patients with and without any PPM, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.16 [95% CI, 1.13-1.18], <0.001). At 20 years of follow-up, the survival rates were 19.5%, 12.1%, and 8.8% in patients with no, moderate, and severe PPM, respectively (moderate versus no PPM: HR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.06-1.11], <0.001; severe versus no PPM: HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.24-1.35], <0.001). PPM was associated with higher risk of cardiac death, heart failure-related hospitalizations, and aortic valve reinterventions over time (<0.001). Statistically significant associations between PPM and worse survival were observed regardless of valve type (bioprosthetic versus mechanical valves), contemporary PPM definitions unadjusted and adjusted for body mass index, and PPM quantification method (in vitro, in vivo, Doppler echocardiography). Our meta-regression analysis revealed that populations with more women tend to have higher HRs for all-cause death associated with PPM.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the present study suggest that any degree of PPM is associated with poorer long-term outcomes following surgical aortic valve replacement and provide support for implementation of preventive strategies to avoid PPM after surgical aortic valve replacement.
Topics: Humans; Female; Aortic Valve; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Prosthesis Failure; Treatment Outcome; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Risk Factors; Prosthesis Design
PubMed: 38533939
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.123.033176 -
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery Mar 2024The Cabrol procedure has undergone various modifications and developments since its invention. However, there is a notable gap in the literature regarding meta-analyses... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The Cabrol procedure has undergone various modifications and developments since its invention. However, there is a notable gap in the literature regarding meta-analyses assessing it.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and long-term outcomes of the Cabrol procedure and its modifications. Pooling was conducted using random effects model. Outcome events were reported as linearized occurrence rates (percentage per patient-year) with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
A total of 14 studies involving 833 patients (mean age: 50.8 years; 68.0% male) were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled all-cause early mortality was 9.0% (66 patients), and the combined rate of reoperation due to bleeding was 4.9% (17 patients). During the average 4.4-year follow-up (3,727.3 patient-years), the annual occurrence rates (linearized) for complications were as follows: 3.63% (2.79-4.73) for late mortality, 0.64% (0.35-1.16) for aortic root reoperation, 0.57% (0.25-1.31) for hemorrhage events, 0.66% (0.16-2.74) for thromboembolism, 0.60% (0.29-1.26) for endocarditis, 2.32% (1.04-5.16) for major valve-related adverse events, and 0.58% (0.34-1.00) for Cabrol-related coronary graft complications.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review provides evidence that the outcomes of the Cabrol procedure and its modifications are acceptable in terms of mortality, reoperation, anticoagulation, and valve-related complications, especially in Cabrol-related coronary graft complications. Notably, the majority of Cabrol procedures were performed in reoperations and complex cases. Furthermore, the design and anastomosis of the Dacron interposition graft for coronary reimplantation, considering natural anatomy and physiological hemodynamics, may promise future advancements in this field.
Topics: Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Female; Blood Vessel Prosthesis; Aortic Valve; Aorta; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Reoperation; Heart Diseases
PubMed: 38532449
DOI: 10.1186/s13019-024-02642-w -
International Journal of Surgery... Jun 2024The efficacy of mitral valve repair (MVR) in combination with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for moderate ischaemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) remains unclear.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy of mitral valve repair in combination with coronary revascularization for moderate ischaemic mitral regurgitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
The efficacy of mitral valve repair (MVR) in combination with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for moderate ischaemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) remains unclear. To evaluate whether MVR + CABG is superior to CABG alone, the authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
The authors searched PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for eligible RCTs from the date of their inception to October 2023. The primary outcomes were operative (in-hospital or within 30 days) and long-term (≥ 1 year) mortality. The secondary outcomes were postoperative stroke, worsening renal function (WRF), and reoperation for bleeding or tamponade. The authors performed random-effects meta-analyses and reported the results as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs.
RESULTS
Six RCTs were eligible for inclusion. Compared with CABG alone, MVR + CABG did not increase the risk of operative mortality (RR, 1.244; 95% CI, 0.514-3.014); however, it was also not associated with a lower risk of long-term mortality (RR, 0.676; 95% CI, 0.417-1.097). Meanwhile, there was no difference between the two groups in terms of postoperative stroke (RR, 2.425; 95% CI, 0.743-7.915), WRF (RR, 1.257; 95% CI, 0.533-2.964), and reoperation for bleeding or tamponade (RR, 1.667; 95% CI, 0.527-5.270).
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that MVR + CABG fails to improve the clinical outcomes of patients with moderate IMR compared to CABG alone.
Topics: Humans; Mitral Valve Insufficiency; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Coronary Artery Bypass; Mitral Valve; Treatment Outcome; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Myocardial Ischemia
PubMed: 38502857
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001277 -
International Journal of Surgery... May 2024This study aims to investigate the effect of concomitant tricuspid valve surgery (TVS) during left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation due to the controversy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
This study aims to investigate the effect of concomitant tricuspid valve surgery (TVS) during left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation due to the controversy over the clinical outcomes of concomitant TVS in patients undergoing LVAD.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and EMbase from the inception to 1 August 2023. Studies comparing outcomes in adult patients undergoing concomitant TVS during LVAD implantation (TVS group) and those who did not (no-TVS group) were included. The primary outcomes were right heart failure (RHF), right ventricular assist device (RVAD) implantation, and early mortality. All meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models, and a two-tailed P <0.05 was considered significant.
RESULTS
Twenty-one studies were included, and 16 of them were involved in the meta-analysis, with 660 patients in the TVS group and 1291 in the no-TVS group. Patients in the TVS group suffered from increased risks of RHF [risk ratios (RR)=1.31, 95% CI: 1.01-1.70, P =0.04; I2 =38%, pH =0.13), RVAD implantation (RR=1.56, 95% CI: 1.16-2.11, P =0.003; I2 =0%, pH =0.74), and early mortality (RR=1.61, 95% CI: 1.07-2.42, P =0.02; I2 =0%, pH =0.75). Besides, the increased risk of RHF holds true in patients with moderate to severe tricuspid regurgitation (RR=1.36, 95% CI: 1.04-1.78, P =0.02). TVS was associated with a prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass time. No significant differences in acute kidney injury, reoperation requirement, hospital length of stay, or ICU stay were observed.
CONCLUSIONS
Concomitant TVS failed to show benefits in patients undergoing LVAD, and it was associated with increased risks of RHF, RVAD implantation, and early mortality.
Topics: Humans; Heart-Assist Devices; Tricuspid Valve; Heart Failure; Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation
PubMed: 38348836
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001189 -
Open Heart Jan 2024A quarter of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) were asymptomatic, and only a third of them survived at the end of 4 years. Only a select subset of these patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Systematic review and meta-analysis of early aortic valve replacement versus conservative therapy in patients with asymptomatic aortic valve stenosis with preserved left ventricle systolic function.
BACKGROUND
A quarter of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) were asymptomatic, and only a third of them survived at the end of 4 years. Only a select subset of these patients was recommended for aortic valve replacement (AVR) by the current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines. We intended to study the effect of early AVR (eAVR) in this subset of asymptomatic patients with preserved left ventricle function.
METHODS AND RESULTS
We searched PubMed and Embase for randomised and observational studies comparing the effect of eAVR versus conservative therapy in patients with severe, asymptomatic AS and normal left ventricular function. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were composite major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (study defined), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, cardiac death, sudden death, the development of symptoms, heart failure hospitalisations and major bleeding. We used GRADEPro to assess the certainty of the evidence. In the randomised controlled trial (RCT) only analysis, we found no significant difference in all-cause mortality between the early aortic intervention group versus the conservative arm (CA) (incidence rate ratio, IRR (CI): 0.5 (0.2 to 1.1), I=31%, p=0.09). However, in the overall cohort, we found mortality benefit for eAVR over CA (IRR (CI): 0.4 (0.3 to 0.7), I=84%, p<0.01). There were significantly lower MACE, cardiac death, sudden death, development of symptoms and heart failure hospitalisations in the eAVR group. We noticed no difference in MI, stroke and major bleeding.
CONCLUSION
We conclude that there is no reduction in all-cause mortality in the eAVR arm in patients with asymptomatic AS with preserved ejection fraction. However, eAVR reduces heart failure related hospitalisations and death or heart failure hospitalisations.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022306132.
Topics: Humans; Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Conservative Treatment; Death, Sudden, Cardiac; Heart Failure; Hemorrhage; Myocardial Infarction; Stroke; United States; Ventricular Function, Left; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
PubMed: 38191233
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2023-002511 -
The American Journal of Cardiology Feb 2024Mitral valve repair (MVr) has been associated with superior long-term survival and freedom from valve-related complications compared with mitral valve replacement for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Mitral valve repair (MVr) has been associated with superior long-term survival and freedom from valve-related complications compared with mitral valve replacement for primary mitral regurgitation (MR). The 2 main approaches for MVr are chordal replacement ("respect approach") and leaflet resection ("resect approach"). We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis using 3 search databases to compare the long-term end points between both approaches. The primary end point was long-term survival. The secondary end points were long-term MR recurrence and reoperation. After reconstruction of time-to-event data for the individual survival analysis, pooled Kaplan-Meier curves for the end points were generated. A total of 14 studies (5,565 patients) were included in the analysis. The respect approach was associated with superior survival compared with the resect approach in the overall sample (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 0.96, p = 0.024, n = 3,901 patients) but not in the risk-adjusted sample (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.82, p = 0.991, n = 620 patients). There was no difference between the approaches in the rate of MR recurrence in the overall sample (HR 1.39, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.08, p = 0.116, n = 1,882 patients) or in the risk-adjusted sample (HR 1.62, 95% CI 0.76 to 3.47, p = 0.211, n = 288 patients). The data for reoperation were only available in the overall sample and did not reveal a difference (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.35, p = 0.663, n = 3,505 patients). In conclusion, the current evidence suggests no difference in long-term mortality, MR recurrence, or reoperation between the resect and respect approaches for MVr after adjusting for patient risk factors. More long-term follow-up data are warranted.
Topics: Humans; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Mitral Valve; Mitral Valve Annuloplasty; Mitral Valve Insufficiency; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Reoperation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38104750
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2023.12.010 -
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery Nov 2023The aim of this review was the creation of uniform protocols to carry out and disclose First-In-Human and preliminary clinical trials of biological mitral valve... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The aim of this review was the creation of uniform protocols to carry out and disclose First-In-Human and preliminary clinical trials of biological mitral valve replacement. The need for consistent methodology in these early trials was highlighted by the observation of significant variability in the methods and protocols used across different research.
METHODS
An extensive search through six major databases was carried out to retrieve First-In-Human (FIH) clinical studies evaluating surgically implanted bio-prostheses in the mitral position.
RESULTS
Following the PRISMA guideline, a systematic search identified 2082 published articles until March 2023. After removing duplicates (189), 1862 citations were screened, resulting in 22 eligible studies with 3332 patients for analysis. The mitral valve prostheses in these studies ranged from 21 to 37 mm, with the 29 mm size being most prevalent. Patient numbers varied, with the FIH subgroup including 31 patients and the older subgroup including 163 patients. Average study durations differed: the older subgroup lasted 4.57 years, the FIH subgroup 2.85 years, and the early phase studies spanned 8.05 years on average.
CONCLUSION
FIH clinical report is essential to assess the significance of clinical data required for a "de novo" surgical implant. In addition, understanding the performance of the device, and recognizing the difficulties associated with the innovation constitute important lessons. These insights could be beneficial for the development of bioprosthetic heart valves and formulating a protocol for an FIH clinical trial.
Topics: Humans; Mitral Valve; Prosthesis Design; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Bioprosthesis; Prosthesis Failure
PubMed: 38037117
DOI: 10.1186/s13019-023-02464-2 -
The Journal of Invasive Cardiology Nov 2023Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) using the MitraClip (Abbott Vascular) system has emerged as a standard treatment for patients with symptomatic severe secondary... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) using the MitraClip (Abbott Vascular) system has emerged as a standard treatment for patients with symptomatic severe secondary or inoperable primary mitral regurgitation (MR). The relatively recent approval of the PASCAL Transcatheter Valve Repair System (Edwards Lifesciences) has expanded the options of TEER devices. However, evidence comparing PASCAL with MitraClip systems is still limited.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature research and meta-analysis in PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE databases for studies comparing PASCAL and MitraClip systems.
RESULTS
Four observational studies and 1 randomized controlled trial, involving 1315 patients total, were eligible for inclusion. All patients exhibited symptomatic (NYHA II-IV) MR grades 3+ or 4+. Baseline characteristics were comparable across all included studies. The clinical outcomes were assessed according to the Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium consensus. The procedural success rates for the 2 devices were comparable in terms of achieving post-procedural MR grades of less than or equal to 2+ and less than or equal to 1+. Furthermore, most patients improved their clinical status, with no significant differences between patients treated with PASCAL and those treated with MitraClip. In terms of safety, both procedures exhibited low overall mortality rates and occurrence of major adverse events (MAE), without significant difference between the 2 devices. These findings remained consistent in both short- and long-term follow-up assessments.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study revealed similar effectiveness and safety profiles between the PASCAL and MitraClip devices in patients experiencing significant symptomatic MR.
Topics: Humans; Cardiac Catheterization; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Catheters; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Mitral Valve; Mitral Valve Insufficiency; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37992330
DOI: 10.25270/jic/23.00218