Aortic valve stenosis: what do people know? A heart valve disease awareness survey of over 8,800 people aged 60 or over
| Autor: | Maria Corina Serban, Dimitri P. Mikhailidis, Michael J. Pencina, Amirhossein Sahebkar, Rani K. Hasan, Steven R. Jones, Daniel Brie, Maciej Banach, Peter P. Toth, Mahmoud Al Rifai, Svetlana Mosteoru, Seth S. Martin, Hector M. Garcia-Garcia, Jacek Rysz, Patrick W. Serruys |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Gaede, Luise, Di Bartolomeo, Roberto, Van Der Kley, Frank, Elsässer, Albrecht, Iung, Bernard, Möllmann, Helge |
| Rok vydání: | 2016 |
| Předmět: |
Drug
Target lesion Male medicine.medical_specialty Health Knowledge Attitudes Practice media_common.quotation_subject Aortic valve stenosi 030204 cardiovascular system & hematology 03 medical and health sciences Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) 0302 clinical medicine Internal medicine Statistical significance Surveys and Questionnaires Medicine Humans 030212 general & internal medicine Myocardial infarction Survey media_common Aged Aged 80 and over business.industry Awarene Heart valve disease Odds ratio Aortic Valve Stenosis Middle Aged medicine.disease Confidence interval Surgery Europe Aortic valve stenosis Meta-analysis Cardiology Female business Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine |
| Zdroj: | EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology. 12(7) |
| ISSN: | 1969-6213 |
| Popis: | Aims Several studies have suggested good procedural and similar clinical outcomes between everolimus-eluting Absorb bioresorbable stents (BRS) versus conventional drug-eluting stents (DES), but the evidence is not definitive. Our aim was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effects of BRS versus conventional drug-eluting and bare metallic stents on the cardiovascular endpoints and all-cause mortality. Methods and results The follow-up in the included studies was up to 13 months. The following endpoints were evaluated: all-cause mortality, cardiac death, patient-oriented major adverse cardiac events (POCE), device-oriented major adverse cardiac events (DOCE), any-cause myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel MI (TVMI), target vessel revascularisation (TVR) and target lesion revascularisation (TLR). The results of 10 studies with 5,773 subjects showed a statistically significant increase in the risk of TVMI between BRS and conventional stents (odds ratio [OR]: 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-2.05, p=0.032). None of the other differences reached statistical significance: all-cause mortality (OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.30-1.49, p=0.333), cardiac death (OR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.47-2.12, p=0.996), POCE (OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.68-1.22, p=0.546), DOCE (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.86-1.46, p=0.387), any-cause MI (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 0.98-1.82, p=0.064), TVR (OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.73-1.33, p=0.934) and TLR (OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.66-1.29, p=0.641). Similar results were observed after restricting the meta-analysis to the comparison of BRS vs. EES. Conclusions Our meta-analysis suggests a significantly higher risk of TVMI with BRS compared with conventional stents and no significant differences in the rates of occurrence of the other outcomes during one-year follow-up. Further studies with larger samples sizes, longer follow-up, different clinical scenarios and more complex lesions are required to confirm or refute our findings. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|