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

Author:

Sá Michel Pompeu12ORCID,Jacquemyn Xander3ORCID,Van den Eynde Jef3ORCID,Chu Danny12ORCID,Serna‐Gallegos Derek12ORCID,Ebels Tjark4ORCID,Clavel Marie‐Annick56ORCID,Pibarot Philippe56ORCID,Sultan Ibrahim12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery University of Pittsburgh PA USA

2. University of Pittsburgh Medical Center UPMC Heart and Vascular Institute Pittsburgh PA USA

3. Department of Cardiovascular Sciences KU Leuven Leuven Belgium

4. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen University of Groningen The Netherlands

5. Centre de Recherche de l’Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec Québec City Québec Canada

6. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Université Laval Québec City Québec Canada

Abstract

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], P <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], P <0.001; severe versus no PPM: HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.24–1.35], P <0.001). PPM was associated with higher risk of cardiac death, heart failure–related hospitalizations, and aortic valve reinterventions over time ( P <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.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3