Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With or Without Preimplantation Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease

Sandro Sponga¹  Bob Kiaii²  Michael W. A. Chu²  Pantelis Diamantouros³  Patrick J. Teefy³  Rodrigo Bagur³  Luis Nombela‐Franco⁴  Mark A. de Belder⁵  Peter F. Ludman⁶  James Nolan⁷  Mark Gunning⁷  Mamas A. Mamas⁷  Chun Shing Kwok⁷ 

[1] Cardiothoracic Department, University Hospital of Udine, Italy;Department of Surgery, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada;Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada;Division of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain;James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, North Yorkshire, United Kingdom;Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, United Kingdom;Royal Stoke University Hospital, Stoke‐on‐Trent, Staffordshire, United Kingdom;

关键词: aortic stenosis;    aortic valve replacement;    balloon aortic valvuloplasty;    transcutaneous aortic valve implantation;    transfemoral aortic valve implantation;   

DOI  :  10.1161/JAHA.115.003191

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundPreimplantation balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) is considered a routine procedure during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) to facilitate prosthesis implantation and expansion; however, it has been speculated that fewer embolic events and/or less hemodynamic instability may occur if TAVI is performed without preimplantation BAV. The aim of this study was to systematically review the clinical outcomes associated with TAVI undertaken without preimplantation BAV. Methods and ResultsWe conducted a search of Medline and Embase to identify studies that evaluated patients who underwent TAVI with or without preimplantation BAV for predilation. Pooled analysis and random‐effects meta‐analyses were used to estimate the rate and risk of adverse outcomes. Sixteen studies involving 1395 patients (674 with and 721 without preimplantation BAV) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Crude device success was achieved in 94% (1311 of 1395), and 30‐day all‐cause mortality occurred in 6% (72 of 1282) of patients. Meta‐analyses evaluating outcomes of strategies with and without preimplantation BAV showed no statistically significant differences in terms of mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.61, 95% CI 0.32–1.14, P=0.12), safety composite end point (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.62–1.18, P=0.34), moderate to severe paravalvular leaks (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.23–1.99, P=0.48), need for postdilation (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66–1.13, P=0.58), stroke and/or transient ischemic attack (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.30–1.71, P=0.45), and permanent pacemaker implantation (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.49–1.30, P=0.37). ConclusionsOur analysis suggests that TAVI procedures with or without preimplantation BAV were associated with similar outcomes for a number of clinically relevant end points. Further studies including a large number of patients are needed to ascertain the impact of TAVI without preimplantation BAV as a standard practice.

【 授权许可】

Unknown