Safety and efficacy of cerebral embolic protection devices for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: An updated meta-analysis

被引:4
|
作者
Shrestha, Dhan Bahadur [1 ]
Shtembari, Jurgen [1 ]
Lamichhane, Sandesh [2 ]
Baniya, Abinash [2 ]
Shahi, Manoj [2 ]
Dhungel, Swati [3 ]
Pant, Kailash [4 ]
Sutton, Nadia R. [5 ,6 ]
Villablanca, Pedro [7 ]
Mungee, Sudhir [4 ]
机构
[1] Mt Sinai Hosp, Dept Internal Med, Chicago, IL USA
[2] Chitwan Med Coll Teaching Hosp, Dept Internal Med, Bharatpur, Nepal
[3] John H Stroger Jr Hosp Cook Cty, Dept Internal Med, Div Cardiovasc Med, Chicago, IL USA
[4] Univ Illinois, Dept Internal Med, Div Cardiovasc Med, Coll Med,OSF Healthcare, Peoria, IL USA
[5] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Internal Med, Div Cardiovasc Med, Nashville, TN USA
[6] Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Biomed Engn, Nashville, TN USA
[7] Henry Ford Hosp, Ctr Struct Heart Dis, Dept Internal Med, Div Intervent Cardiol & Struct Heart Dis, Detroit, MI USA
关键词
cerebral embolic protection devices; stroke; transcatheter aortic valve replacement; RANDOMIZED EVALUATION; RISK-FACTORS; CEREBROVASCULAR EVENTS; DEFLECTION DEVICE; IMPLANTATION; STENOSIS; STROKE; IMPROVEMENT; OUTCOMES; LESIONS;
D O I
10.1002/hsr2.1391
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background and AimsCerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices are employed to capture embolic debris and reduce the risk of stroke during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Evidence is mixed regarding the safety and efficacy of CEP. We aimed to summarize the safety and effectiveness of CEP use during TAVR. MethodsElectronic databases, including PubMed, PubMed Central, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Embase, were searched using relevant search terms for articles relating to CEP. All relevant data from 20 studies were extracted into a standardized form. Statistical analyses were performed using Revman 5.4. Odds ratio (OR) or mean differences (MDs) were used to estimate the desired outcome with a 95% confidence interval (CI). ResultsTwenty studies (eight randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) involving 210,871 patients (19,261 in the CEP group and 191,610 in TAVR without the CEP group) were included. The use of CEP was associated with a lower odds of 30-day mortality by 39% (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.53-0.70) and stroke by 31% (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52-0.92). Comparing devices, benefit in terms of mortality and stroke was observed with the use of the Sentinel device (Boston Scientific), but not among other devices. No differences were observed in the outcomes of acute kidney injury, major or life-threatening bleeding events, or major vascular complications between groups. When only RCTs were included, there were no observed differences in the primary or secondary outcomes for CEP versus no CEP use during TAVR. ConclusionsThe totality of evidence suggests a net benefit for the use of CEP, weighted by studies in which the Sentinal device was used. However, given the RCT subanalysis, additional evidence is needed to identify patients at the highest risk of stroke for optimal decision-making.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Outcomes of Cerebral Embolic Protection for Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
    Zhang, Jiajun
    Li, Xiaoxing
    Tian, Rui
    Zong, Mengzhi
    Gu, Xinghua
    Xu, Feng
    Chen, Yuguo
    Li, Chuanbao
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION, 2023, 12 (12):
  • [32] Clinical Outcomes of the Sentinel Cerebral Protection System in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis
    Ndunda, Paul
    Vindhyal, Mohinder
    Srinivasan, Sachin
    Muutu, Tabitha
    Hammami, Sumaya
    Fanari, Zaher
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2018, 72 (13) : B236 - B236
  • [33] CEREBRAL EMBOLIC PROTECTION FOR TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS
    Ali, Rimsha
    Amirian, Aslan
    Mirza, Taaha
    Soni, Bosky
    Rajak, Kripa
    Aljassani, Khaldoon
    Halder, Anupam
    Cunningham, Jessica
    Ramesh, Navitha
    CHEST, 2023, 164 (04) : 145A - 146A
  • [34] Meta-Analysis of Usefulness of Cerebral Embolic Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation
    Ahmad, Yousif
    Howard, James P.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2021, 146 : 69 - 73
  • [35] Cerebral embolic protection devices during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    Reddy, R. K.
    Ahmad, Y.
    Arnold, A. D.
    Howard, J. P.
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2023, 44
  • [36] ROUTINE USE OF CEREBRAL EMBOLIC PROTECTION DEVICE DURING TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT: WHAT DOES THE DATA SUPPORT? AN UPDATED META-ANALYSIS
    Atallah, Issam
    Das, Debapria
    Nafee, Tarek
    Lin, Chien-Jung
    Harjai, Kishore J.
    Nasir, Ammar
    Forsberg, Michael
    Mikhalkova, Deana
    Mar, Philip L.
    Mani, Kartik
    Sampath-Kumar, Sridhar
    Prasad, Sunil
    Cahill, Anne
    Verma, Divya Ratan
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2023, 81 (08) : 819 - 819
  • [37] Cerebral Embolic Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
    Yashima, Fumiaki
    Briasoulis, Alexandros
    Kuno, Toshiki
    Noguchi, Masahiko
    Ahmad, Hasan
    Zaid, Syed
    Goldberg, Joshua B.
    Malik, Aaqib H.
    Tang, Gilbert H. L.
    CARDIOVASCULAR REVASCULARIZATION MEDICINE, 2022, 36 : 9 - 13
  • [38] Cerebral embolic protection systems for transcatheter aortic valve replacement
    Gasior, Tomasz
    Mangner, Norman
    Bijoch, Julia
    Wojakowski, Wojciech
    JOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGY, 2018, 31 (06) : 891 - 898
  • [39] Transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement with cerebral embolic protection
    McGrath, Daniel
    Salehi, Payam
    Weintraub, Andrew
    Zhan, Yong
    JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2022, 37 (06) : 1779 - 1782
  • [40] Safety and efficacy of cerebral protection devices during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Testa, Luca
    Bedogni, Francesco
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2017, 70 (18) : B268 - B269