Cargando…

Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND: Stroke is a feared complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), which embolic protection devices (EPDs) may mitigate. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of EPDs in TAVR. METHODS: All RCTs compa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Reddy, Rohin K., Ahmad, Yousif, Arnold, Ahran D., Howard, James P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Inc 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10533415/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37780935
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jscai.2023.101031
_version_ 1785112187355791360
author Reddy, Rohin K.
Ahmad, Yousif
Arnold, Ahran D.
Howard, James P.
author_facet Reddy, Rohin K.
Ahmad, Yousif
Arnold, Ahran D.
Howard, James P.
author_sort Reddy, Rohin K.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Stroke is a feared complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), which embolic protection devices (EPDs) may mitigate. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of EPDs in TAVR. METHODS: All RCTs comparing EPDs with control during TAVR were systematically identified. Prespecified primary end points were all stroke, disabling stroke, nondisabling stroke, and all-cause mortality. Safety and neuroimaging parameters were assessed. Sensitivity analyses were stratified by EPD type. Study registration was a priori (CRD42022377939). RESULTS: Eight trials randomizing 4043 patients were included. There was no significant difference between EPDs and control for all stroke (relative risk [RR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.65-1.18; P = .39; I(2) = 0%), disabling stroke (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.31-1.46; P = .32; I(2) = 8.6%), nondisabling stroke (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.71-1.40; P = .97; I(2) = 0%), or all-cause mortality (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.43-1.78; P = .71; I(2) = 2.3%). There were no differences in safety end points of bleeding, vascular complications, or acute kidney injury. EPDs did not result in differences in total lesion volume or the number of new lesions. The Sentinel EPD significantly reduced the risk of disabling stroke (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.20-0.88; P = .022; I(2) = 0%) but did not affect all stroke, nondisabling stroke, or all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The totality of randomized data for EPDs during TAVR demonstrated no safety concerns or significant differences in clinical or neuroimaging end points. Analyses restricted to the Sentinel EPD demonstrated large, clinically meaningful reductions in disabling stroke. Ongoing RCTs may help validate these results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10533415
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier Inc
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105334152023-09-29 Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Reddy, Rohin K. Ahmad, Yousif Arnold, Ahran D. Howard, James P. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv Meta-Analysis BACKGROUND: Stroke is a feared complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), which embolic protection devices (EPDs) may mitigate. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of EPDs in TAVR. METHODS: All RCTs comparing EPDs with control during TAVR were systematically identified. Prespecified primary end points were all stroke, disabling stroke, nondisabling stroke, and all-cause mortality. Safety and neuroimaging parameters were assessed. Sensitivity analyses were stratified by EPD type. Study registration was a priori (CRD42022377939). RESULTS: Eight trials randomizing 4043 patients were included. There was no significant difference between EPDs and control for all stroke (relative risk [RR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.65-1.18; P = .39; I(2) = 0%), disabling stroke (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.31-1.46; P = .32; I(2) = 8.6%), nondisabling stroke (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.71-1.40; P = .97; I(2) = 0%), or all-cause mortality (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.43-1.78; P = .71; I(2) = 2.3%). There were no differences in safety end points of bleeding, vascular complications, or acute kidney injury. EPDs did not result in differences in total lesion volume or the number of new lesions. The Sentinel EPD significantly reduced the risk of disabling stroke (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.20-0.88; P = .022; I(2) = 0%) but did not affect all stroke, nondisabling stroke, or all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The totality of randomized data for EPDs during TAVR demonstrated no safety concerns or significant differences in clinical or neuroimaging end points. Analyses restricted to the Sentinel EPD demonstrated large, clinically meaningful reductions in disabling stroke. Ongoing RCTs may help validate these results. Elsevier Inc 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10533415/ /pubmed/37780935 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jscai.2023.101031 Text en © 2023 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Meta-Analysis
Reddy, Rohin K.
Ahmad, Yousif
Arnold, Ahran D.
Howard, James P.
Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_short Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_sort cerebral embolic protection devices during transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic Meta-Analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10533415/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37780935
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jscai.2023.101031
work_keys_str_mv AT reddyrohink cerebralembolicprotectiondevicesduringtranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT ahmadyousif cerebralembolicprotectiondevicesduringtranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT arnoldahrand cerebralembolicprotectiondevicesduringtranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT howardjamesp cerebralembolicprotectiondevicesduringtranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials