Chrome Extension
WeChat Mini Program
Use on ChatGLM

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

Nagendra Boopathy Senguttuvan, Nishok Victory Srinivasan, Manokar Panchanatham, Rizwan Suliankatchi Abdulkader, Asuwin Anandaram, Dinesh Reddy Polareddy,Sankaran Ramesh,Harsimran Singh, Hanumath Yallanki, Dhamodaran Kaliyamoorthi, Sundar Chidambaram,Vadivelu Ramalingam,Ravindran Rajendran, Thoddi Ramamurthy Muralidharan, Ravindar Rao,Ashok Seth,Bimmer Claessen,Parasuram Krishnamoorthy

OPEN HEART(2024)

Cited 0|Views12
No score
Abstract
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-2=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-2=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.
More
Translated text
Key words
Aortic Valve Stenosis,Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation,Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement,Outcome Assessment, Health Care
AI Read Science
Must-Reading Tree
Example
Generate MRT to find the research sequence of this paper
Chat Paper
Summary is being generated by the instructions you defined