Cargando…

Comparing mid‐term outcomes of Cox‐Maze procedure and pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation after concomitant mitral valve surgery: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: Although concomitant pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is used more frequently than the Cox‐Maze procedure, which is currently the gold standard treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF), data on the comparative effectiveness of the two procedures after concomitant mitral valve (MV) surgery ar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sef, Davorin, Trkulja, Vladimir, Raja, Shahzad G., Hooper, Joanne, Turina, Marko I.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9804989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36040710
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jocs.16888
_version_ 1784862240131776512
author Sef, Davorin
Trkulja, Vladimir
Raja, Shahzad G.
Hooper, Joanne
Turina, Marko I.
author_facet Sef, Davorin
Trkulja, Vladimir
Raja, Shahzad G.
Hooper, Joanne
Turina, Marko I.
author_sort Sef, Davorin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although concomitant pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is used more frequently than the Cox‐Maze procedure, which is currently the gold standard treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF), data on the comparative effectiveness of the two procedures after concomitant mitral valve (MV) surgery are still limited. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the mid‐term mortality and recurrence of AF after concomitant Cox‐Maze and PVI in patients with AF undergoing MV surgery based on 12‐month follow‐up. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE databases, and the Cochrane Library were searched from 1987 up to March 2022 for studies comparing concomitant Cox‐Maze and PVI. Additionally, a meta‐analysis of RCTs was performed to compare the mid‐term clinical outcomes between these two surgical ablation techniques. RESULTS: Three RCTs and three observational studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this systematic review with 790 patients in total (532 concomitant Cox‐Maze and 258 PVI during MV surgery). Most studies reported that the concomitant Cox‐Maze procedure was associated with higher freedom from AF at 12‐month follow‐up than PVI. Regarding AF recurrence, estimates pooled across the three RCTs indicated large heterogeneity and high uncertainty. In the largest and highest quality RCT, 12‐month AF recurrence was higher in the PVI arm (risk ratio = 1.58, 95% CI: 0.91–2.73). In two out of three higher‐quality observational studies, 12‐month AF recurrence was higher in PVI than in the Cox‐Maze arm (estimated adjusted probabilities 11% vs. 8% and 35% vs. 17%, respectively). RCTs demonstrated comparable 12‐month mortality between concomitant Cox‐Maze and PVI, while observational studies demonstrated the survival benefit of Cox‐Maze. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant Cox‐Maze in AF patients undergoing MV surgery is associated with better mid‐term freedom from AF when compared to PVI with comparable mid‐term survival. Large observational studies suggest that there might be a mid‐term survival benefit among patients after concomitant Cox‐Maze. Further large RCTs with longer standardized follow‐up are required to clarify the benefits of concomitant Cox‐Maze in AF patients during MV surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9804989
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98049892023-01-06 Comparing mid‐term outcomes of Cox‐Maze procedure and pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation after concomitant mitral valve surgery: A systematic review Sef, Davorin Trkulja, Vladimir Raja, Shahzad G. Hooper, Joanne Turina, Marko I. J Card Surg Review BACKGROUND: Although concomitant pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is used more frequently than the Cox‐Maze procedure, which is currently the gold standard treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF), data on the comparative effectiveness of the two procedures after concomitant mitral valve (MV) surgery are still limited. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the mid‐term mortality and recurrence of AF after concomitant Cox‐Maze and PVI in patients with AF undergoing MV surgery based on 12‐month follow‐up. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE databases, and the Cochrane Library were searched from 1987 up to March 2022 for studies comparing concomitant Cox‐Maze and PVI. Additionally, a meta‐analysis of RCTs was performed to compare the mid‐term clinical outcomes between these two surgical ablation techniques. RESULTS: Three RCTs and three observational studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this systematic review with 790 patients in total (532 concomitant Cox‐Maze and 258 PVI during MV surgery). Most studies reported that the concomitant Cox‐Maze procedure was associated with higher freedom from AF at 12‐month follow‐up than PVI. Regarding AF recurrence, estimates pooled across the three RCTs indicated large heterogeneity and high uncertainty. In the largest and highest quality RCT, 12‐month AF recurrence was higher in the PVI arm (risk ratio = 1.58, 95% CI: 0.91–2.73). In two out of three higher‐quality observational studies, 12‐month AF recurrence was higher in PVI than in the Cox‐Maze arm (estimated adjusted probabilities 11% vs. 8% and 35% vs. 17%, respectively). RCTs demonstrated comparable 12‐month mortality between concomitant Cox‐Maze and PVI, while observational studies demonstrated the survival benefit of Cox‐Maze. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant Cox‐Maze in AF patients undergoing MV surgery is associated with better mid‐term freedom from AF when compared to PVI with comparable mid‐term survival. Large observational studies suggest that there might be a mid‐term survival benefit among patients after concomitant Cox‐Maze. Further large RCTs with longer standardized follow‐up are required to clarify the benefits of concomitant Cox‐Maze in AF patients during MV surgery. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-08-30 2022-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9804989/ /pubmed/36040710 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jocs.16888 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Cardiac Surgery published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Review
Sef, Davorin
Trkulja, Vladimir
Raja, Shahzad G.
Hooper, Joanne
Turina, Marko I.
Comparing mid‐term outcomes of Cox‐Maze procedure and pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation after concomitant mitral valve surgery: A systematic review
title Comparing mid‐term outcomes of Cox‐Maze procedure and pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation after concomitant mitral valve surgery: A systematic review
title_full Comparing mid‐term outcomes of Cox‐Maze procedure and pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation after concomitant mitral valve surgery: A systematic review
title_fullStr Comparing mid‐term outcomes of Cox‐Maze procedure and pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation after concomitant mitral valve surgery: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Comparing mid‐term outcomes of Cox‐Maze procedure and pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation after concomitant mitral valve surgery: A systematic review
title_short Comparing mid‐term outcomes of Cox‐Maze procedure and pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation after concomitant mitral valve surgery: A systematic review
title_sort comparing mid‐term outcomes of cox‐maze procedure and pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation after concomitant mitral valve surgery: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9804989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36040710
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jocs.16888
work_keys_str_mv AT sefdavorin comparingmidtermoutcomesofcoxmazeprocedureandpulmonaryveinisolationforatrialfibrillationafterconcomitantmitralvalvesurgeryasystematicreview
AT trkuljavladimir comparingmidtermoutcomesofcoxmazeprocedureandpulmonaryveinisolationforatrialfibrillationafterconcomitantmitralvalvesurgeryasystematicreview
AT rajashahzadg comparingmidtermoutcomesofcoxmazeprocedureandpulmonaryveinisolationforatrialfibrillationafterconcomitantmitralvalvesurgeryasystematicreview
AT hooperjoanne comparingmidtermoutcomesofcoxmazeprocedureandpulmonaryveinisolationforatrialfibrillationafterconcomitantmitralvalvesurgeryasystematicreview
AT turinamarkoi comparingmidtermoutcomesofcoxmazeprocedureandpulmonaryveinisolationforatrialfibrillationafterconcomitantmitralvalvesurgeryasystematicreview