Network meta-analysis of new-generation valves for transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
Aged, 80 and over
Aortic Valve
/ surgery
Aortic Valve Stenosis
/ mortality
Cause of Death
/ trends
Female
Heart Valve Prosthesis
Humans
Incidence
Japan
/ epidemiology
Male
Network Meta-Analysis
Postoperative Complications
/ epidemiology
Prosthesis Design
Survival Rate
/ trends
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
/ methods
Network meta-analysis
New-generation transcatheter heart valve
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation
Journal
Heart and vessels
ISSN: 1615-2573
Titre abrégé: Heart Vessels
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 8511258
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2019
Dec 2019
Historique:
received:
08
03
2019
accepted:
24
05
2019
pubmed:
31
5
2019
medline:
25
2
2020
entrez:
31
5
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To comprehensively compare and rank new-generation valves (NGVs) for transcatheter aortic valve implantation, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) of all eligible comparative studies. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through September 2018. We included all studies comparing 4 NGVs (ACURATE, Evolut R, Lotus, and SAPIEN 3) and an early generation valve (CoreValve) as the reference transcatheter heart valve (THV) each other and reporting at least one of postprocedural incidence of all-cause death, ≥ moderate aortic regurgitation (AR), and new permanent pacemaker implantation (PMI). To compare different THVs, a random-effects restricted-maximum-likelihood NMA based on a frequentist framework for indirect and mixed comparisons was used. Using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), the relative ranking probability of each THV was estimated and the hierarchy of competing THVs was obtained. We identified 29 eligible studies enrolling a total of 17,817 patients. In accordance with the estimated SUCRA probability, SAPIEN 3 was the best effective for a reduction in death (80.6%) and the second best for decreased ≥ moderate AR (74.4%) and PMI (74.1%) compared with the other THVs. Lotus was ranked the best for a reduction in ≥ moderate AR (94.5%;), whereas the worst for decreased PMI (1.2%) and the second worst for a reduction in mortality (38.6%). ACURATE was the best for decreased PMI (99.2%) and the second best for a reduction in mortality (77.9%). As a whole, SAPIEN 3 may be the best effective NGV among the 4 examined NGVs (ACURATE, Evolut R, Lotus, and SAPIEN 3).
Identifiants
pubmed: 31144096
doi: 10.1007/s00380-019-01442-w
pii: 10.1007/s00380-019-01442-w
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1984-1992Références
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Dec 1;92(7):1374-1379
pubmed: 29521464
J Invasive Cardiol. 2017 Feb;29(2):69-74
pubmed: 28145874
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2016 Jul 05;12:52-56
pubmed: 28616543
EuroIntervention. 2017 Apr 7;12(18):e2170-e2176
pubmed: 28067197
J Invasive Cardiol. 2017 Jan;29(1):30-35
pubmed: 27845874
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Jul;90(1):139-146
pubmed: 28029207
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Oct 23;10(20):2078-2087
pubmed: 29050625
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Jun;10(6):null
pubmed: 28566290
J Heart Valve Dis. 2017 Jul;26(4):405-412
pubmed: 29302939
Int J Cardiol. 2017 Oct 15;245:83-89
pubmed: 28760396
Am J Cardiol. 2018 May 15;121(10):1225-1230
pubmed: 29706182
Intern Med J. 2016 Jan;46(1):42-51
pubmed: 26482426
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Oct;10(10):null
pubmed: 28951395
J Interv Cardiol. 2018 Jun;31(3):391-399
pubmed: 29696693
J Interv Cardiol. 2017 Aug;30(4):356-361
pubmed: 28493389
J Cardiol. 2018 Jun;71(6):540-546
pubmed: 29548665
J Cardiol. 2017 Jun;69(6):877-882
pubmed: 27614379
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2018 Sep;71(9):735-742
pubmed: 29191782
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2018 Mar;19(2):186-191
pubmed: 28830749
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Aug 13;11(15):1495-1505
pubmed: 30031719
Eur Heart J. 2018 Jun 1;39(21):2003-2013
pubmed: 29420704
Circulation. 2018 Jun 12;137(24):2557-2567
pubmed: 29530883
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Jun;8(7):962-71
pubmed: 26088514
Open Heart. 2018 Mar 25;5(1):e000770
pubmed: 29632681
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Mar 1;93(4):685-691
pubmed: 30280466
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2018 Nov;19(11):655-663
pubmed: 30299408
J Interv Cardiol. 2017 Feb;30(1):72-78
pubmed: 27882613
Int J Cardiol. 2016 Aug 1;216:9-15
pubmed: 27135150
EuroIntervention. 2012 Sep;8 Suppl Q:Q70-4
pubmed: 22995115
Int J Cardiol. 2017 Sep 15;243:126-131
pubmed: 28595747
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Oct 23;10(20):2090-2098
pubmed: 29050627
J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Nov 17;5(11):
pubmed: 27856487
J Am Heart Assoc. 2017 Mar 3;6(3):null
pubmed: 28258051
EuroIntervention. 2016 Jan 22;11(9):1034-43
pubmed: 26788706
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 03;8(10):e76654
pubmed: 24098547