Cargando…

Comparison of Biological and Mechanical Prostheses for Heart Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND: The choice of a mechanical (MP) or biological prosthesis (BP) for patients with valvular heart disease undergoing replacement is still not a consensus. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the clinical outcomes of MP or BP placement in those patients. METHODS: We conducted a systematic revie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kiyose, Alberto Takeshi, Suzumura, Erica Aranha, Laranjeira, Lígia, Buehler, Anna Maria, Santo, José Amalth Espírito, Berwanger, Otavio, Carvalho, Antonio Carlos de Camargo, de Paola, Angelo Amato, Moises, Valdir Ambrósio, Cavalcanti, Alexandre Biasi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia - SBC 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6424027/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30916201
http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/abc.20180272
_version_ 1783404634783612928
author Kiyose, Alberto Takeshi
Suzumura, Erica Aranha
Laranjeira, Lígia
Buehler, Anna Maria
Santo, José Amalth Espírito
Berwanger, Otavio
Carvalho, Antonio Carlos de Camargo
de Paola, Angelo Amato
Moises, Valdir Ambrósio
Cavalcanti, Alexandre Biasi
author_facet Kiyose, Alberto Takeshi
Suzumura, Erica Aranha
Laranjeira, Lígia
Buehler, Anna Maria
Santo, José Amalth Espírito
Berwanger, Otavio
Carvalho, Antonio Carlos de Camargo
de Paola, Angelo Amato
Moises, Valdir Ambrósio
Cavalcanti, Alexandre Biasi
author_sort Kiyose, Alberto Takeshi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The choice of a mechanical (MP) or biological prosthesis (BP) for patients with valvular heart disease undergoing replacement is still not a consensus. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the clinical outcomes of MP or BP placement in those patients. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared biological prostheses and mechanical prostheses in patients with valvular heart diseases and assessed the outcomes. RCTs were searched in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, SCOPUS and Web of Science (from inception to November 2014) databases. Meta-analyses were performed using inverse variance with random effects models. The GRADE system was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A P-value lower than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of four RCTs were included in the meta-analyses (1,528 patients) with follow up ranging from 2 to 20 years. Three used old generation mechanical and biological prostheses, and one used contemporary prostheses. No significant difference in mortality was found between BP and MP patients (risk ratio (RR = 1.07; 95% CI 0.99-1.15). The risk of bleeding was significantly lower in BP patients than MP patients (RR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.78); however, reoperations were significantly more frequent in BP patients (RR = 3.60; 95% CI 2.44-5.32). There were no statistically significant differences between BP and MP patients with respect to systemic arterial embolisms and infective endocarditis (RR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.66-1.31, RR = 1.21; CI95% 0.78-1.88, respectively). Results in the trials with modern and old prostheses were similar. CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate and the risk of thromboembolic events and endocarditis were similar between BP and MP patients. The risk of bleeding was approximately one third lower for BP patients than for MP patients, while the risk of reoperations was more than three times higher for BP patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6424027
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia - SBC
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64240272019-03-21 Comparison of Biological and Mechanical Prostheses for Heart Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials Kiyose, Alberto Takeshi Suzumura, Erica Aranha Laranjeira, Lígia Buehler, Anna Maria Santo, José Amalth Espírito Berwanger, Otavio Carvalho, Antonio Carlos de Camargo de Paola, Angelo Amato Moises, Valdir Ambrósio Cavalcanti, Alexandre Biasi Arq Bras Cardiol Original Article BACKGROUND: The choice of a mechanical (MP) or biological prosthesis (BP) for patients with valvular heart disease undergoing replacement is still not a consensus. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the clinical outcomes of MP or BP placement in those patients. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared biological prostheses and mechanical prostheses in patients with valvular heart diseases and assessed the outcomes. RCTs were searched in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, SCOPUS and Web of Science (from inception to November 2014) databases. Meta-analyses were performed using inverse variance with random effects models. The GRADE system was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A P-value lower than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of four RCTs were included in the meta-analyses (1,528 patients) with follow up ranging from 2 to 20 years. Three used old generation mechanical and biological prostheses, and one used contemporary prostheses. No significant difference in mortality was found between BP and MP patients (risk ratio (RR = 1.07; 95% CI 0.99-1.15). The risk of bleeding was significantly lower in BP patients than MP patients (RR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.78); however, reoperations were significantly more frequent in BP patients (RR = 3.60; 95% CI 2.44-5.32). There were no statistically significant differences between BP and MP patients with respect to systemic arterial embolisms and infective endocarditis (RR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.66-1.31, RR = 1.21; CI95% 0.78-1.88, respectively). Results in the trials with modern and old prostheses were similar. CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate and the risk of thromboembolic events and endocarditis were similar between BP and MP patients. The risk of bleeding was approximately one third lower for BP patients than for MP patients, while the risk of reoperations was more than three times higher for BP patients. Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia - SBC 2019-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6424027/ /pubmed/30916201 http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/abc.20180272 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Kiyose, Alberto Takeshi
Suzumura, Erica Aranha
Laranjeira, Lígia
Buehler, Anna Maria
Santo, José Amalth Espírito
Berwanger, Otavio
Carvalho, Antonio Carlos de Camargo
de Paola, Angelo Amato
Moises, Valdir Ambrósio
Cavalcanti, Alexandre Biasi
Comparison of Biological and Mechanical Prostheses for Heart Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title Comparison of Biological and Mechanical Prostheses for Heart Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full Comparison of Biological and Mechanical Prostheses for Heart Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Comparison of Biological and Mechanical Prostheses for Heart Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Biological and Mechanical Prostheses for Heart Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_short Comparison of Biological and Mechanical Prostheses for Heart Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_sort comparison of biological and mechanical prostheses for heart valve surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6424027/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30916201
http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/abc.20180272
work_keys_str_mv AT kiyosealbertotakeshi comparisonofbiologicalandmechanicalprosthesesforheartvalvesurgeryasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT suzumuraericaaranha comparisonofbiologicalandmechanicalprosthesesforheartvalvesurgeryasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT laranjeiraligia comparisonofbiologicalandmechanicalprosthesesforheartvalvesurgeryasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT buehlerannamaria comparisonofbiologicalandmechanicalprosthesesforheartvalvesurgeryasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT santojoseamalthespirito comparisonofbiologicalandmechanicalprosthesesforheartvalvesurgeryasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT berwangerotavio comparisonofbiologicalandmechanicalprosthesesforheartvalvesurgeryasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT carvalhoantoniocarlosdecamargo comparisonofbiologicalandmechanicalprosthesesforheartvalvesurgeryasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT depaolaangeloamato comparisonofbiologicalandmechanicalprosthesesforheartvalvesurgeryasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT moisesvaldirambrosio comparisonofbiologicalandmechanicalprosthesesforheartvalvesurgeryasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT cavalcantialexandrebiasi comparisonofbiologicalandmechanicalprosthesesforheartvalvesurgeryasystematicreviewofrandomizedcontrolledtrials