We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
Transcatheter versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement after Previous Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Aim: Aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with prior cardiac surgery might be challenging. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) offers a promising alternative in such patients. We therefore aimed at comparing the outcomes of patients with aortic valve diseases undergoing TAVR versus those undergoing surgical AVR (SAVR) after previous cardiac surgery.
Methods and Results: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register were searched. Seven relevant studies were identified, published between 01/2011 and 12/2015, enrolling a total of 1148 patients with prior cardiac surgery (97.6% prior CABG): 49.2% underwent TAVR, whereas 50.8% underwent SAVR. Incidence of stroke (3.8 versus 7.9%, p =0.04) and major bleeding (8.3 versus 15.3%, p =0.04) was significantly lower in the TAVR group. Incidence of mild/severe paravalvular leakage (14.4/10.9 versus 0%, p < 0.0001) and pacemaker implantation (11.3 versus 3.9%, p =0.01) was significantly higher in the TAVR group. There were no significant differences in the incidence of acute kidney injury (9.7 versus 8.7%, p =0.99), major adverse cardiovascular events (8.7 versus 12.3%, p =0.21), 30-day mortality (5.1 versus 5.5%, p =0.7), or 1-year mortality (11.6 versus 11.8%, p =0.97) between the TAVR and SAVR group.
Conclusions: TAVR as a redo procedure offers a safe alternative for patients presenting with aortic valve diseases after previous cardiac surgery especially those with prior CABG.
Methods and Results: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register were searched. Seven relevant studies were identified, published between 01/2011 and 12/2015, enrolling a total of 1148 patients with prior cardiac surgery (97.6% prior CABG): 49.2% underwent TAVR, whereas 50.8% underwent SAVR. Incidence of stroke (3.8 versus 7.9%, p =0.04) and major bleeding (8.3 versus 15.3%, p =0.04) was significantly lower in the TAVR group. Incidence of mild/severe paravalvular leakage (14.4/10.9 versus 0%, p < 0.0001) and pacemaker implantation (11.3 versus 3.9%, p =0.01) was significantly higher in the TAVR group. There were no significant differences in the incidence of acute kidney injury (9.7 versus 8.7%, p =0.99), major adverse cardiovascular events (8.7 versus 12.3%, p =0.21), 30-day mortality (5.1 versus 5.5%, p =0.7), or 1-year mortality (11.6 versus 11.8%, p =0.97) between the TAVR and SAVR group.
Conclusions: TAVR as a redo procedure offers a safe alternative for patients presenting with aortic valve diseases after previous cardiac surgery especially those with prior CABG.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app