Cerebral Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

BackgroundThe use of embolic protection devices (EPD) may theoretically reduce the occurrence of cerebral embolic lesions during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Available evidence from single studies is inconclusive. The aim of the present meta‐analysis was to assess the safety and efficacy...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luca Testa, Azeem Latib, Matteo Casenghi, Riccardo Gorla, Antonio Colombo, Francesco Bedogni
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Wiley 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/18bed67fb46845f798d3fa0696d8e5cd
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:18bed67fb46845f798d3fa0696d8e5cd
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:18bed67fb46845f798d3fa0696d8e5cd2021-11-12T17:02:05ZCerebral Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis10.1161/JAHA.117.0084632047-9980https://doaj.org/article/18bed67fb46845f798d3fa0696d8e5cd2018-05-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.117.008463https://doaj.org/toc/2047-9980BackgroundThe use of embolic protection devices (EPD) may theoretically reduce the occurrence of cerebral embolic lesions during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Available evidence from single studies is inconclusive. The aim of the present meta‐analysis was to assess the safety and efficacy profile of current EPD. Methods and ResultsMajor medical databases were searched up to December 2017 for studies that evaluated patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation with or without EPD. End points of interest were 30‐day mortality, 30‐day stroke, the total number of new lesions, the ischemic volume per lesion, and the total volume of lesions. Eight studies involving 1285 patients were included. The EPD delivery success rate was reported in all studies and was achieved in 94.5% of patients. The use of EPD was not associated with significant differences in terms of 30‐day mortality (odds ratio 0.43 [0.18–1.05], P=0.3) but it was associated with a lower rate of 30‐day stroke (odds ratio 0.55 [0.31–0.98], P=0.04). No differences were detected with respect to the number of new lesions (standardized mean difference −0.19 [−0.71 to 0.34], P=0.49). The use of EPD was associated with a significantly smaller ischemic volume per lesion (standardized mean difference, −0.52 [−0.85 to −0.20], P=0.002) and smaller total volume of lesions (standardized mean difference, −0.23 [−0.42 to −0.03], P=0.02). ConclusionsThe use of EPD is not associated with a reduced rate of mortality and new ischemic cerebral lesions. The use of EPD during transcatheter aortic valve implantation seems to be associated with a lower 30‐day stroke rate, although this result is driven by a single nonrandomized study. The use of EPD is associated with a smaller volume of ischemic lesions, and smaller total volume of ischemic lesions.Luca TestaAzeem LatibMatteo CasenghiRiccardo GorlaAntonio ColomboFrancesco BedogniWileyarticleaortic valve stenosisstroketranscutaneous aortic valve implantationDiseases of the circulatory (Cardiovascular) systemRC666-701ENJournal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease, Vol 7, Iss 10 (2018)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic aortic valve stenosis
stroke
transcutaneous aortic valve implantation
Diseases of the circulatory (Cardiovascular) system
RC666-701
spellingShingle aortic valve stenosis
stroke
transcutaneous aortic valve implantation
Diseases of the circulatory (Cardiovascular) system
RC666-701
Luca Testa
Azeem Latib
Matteo Casenghi
Riccardo Gorla
Antonio Colombo
Francesco Bedogni
Cerebral Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
description BackgroundThe use of embolic protection devices (EPD) may theoretically reduce the occurrence of cerebral embolic lesions during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Available evidence from single studies is inconclusive. The aim of the present meta‐analysis was to assess the safety and efficacy profile of current EPD. Methods and ResultsMajor medical databases were searched up to December 2017 for studies that evaluated patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation with or without EPD. End points of interest were 30‐day mortality, 30‐day stroke, the total number of new lesions, the ischemic volume per lesion, and the total volume of lesions. Eight studies involving 1285 patients were included. The EPD delivery success rate was reported in all studies and was achieved in 94.5% of patients. The use of EPD was not associated with significant differences in terms of 30‐day mortality (odds ratio 0.43 [0.18–1.05], P=0.3) but it was associated with a lower rate of 30‐day stroke (odds ratio 0.55 [0.31–0.98], P=0.04). No differences were detected with respect to the number of new lesions (standardized mean difference −0.19 [−0.71 to 0.34], P=0.49). The use of EPD was associated with a significantly smaller ischemic volume per lesion (standardized mean difference, −0.52 [−0.85 to −0.20], P=0.002) and smaller total volume of lesions (standardized mean difference, −0.23 [−0.42 to −0.03], P=0.02). ConclusionsThe use of EPD is not associated with a reduced rate of mortality and new ischemic cerebral lesions. The use of EPD during transcatheter aortic valve implantation seems to be associated with a lower 30‐day stroke rate, although this result is driven by a single nonrandomized study. The use of EPD is associated with a smaller volume of ischemic lesions, and smaller total volume of ischemic lesions.
format article
author Luca Testa
Azeem Latib
Matteo Casenghi
Riccardo Gorla
Antonio Colombo
Francesco Bedogni
author_facet Luca Testa
Azeem Latib
Matteo Casenghi
Riccardo Gorla
Antonio Colombo
Francesco Bedogni
author_sort Luca Testa
title Cerebral Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
title_short Cerebral Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
title_full Cerebral Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
title_fullStr Cerebral Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Cerebral Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
title_sort cerebral protection during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: an updated systematic review and meta‐analysis
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2018
url https://doaj.org/article/18bed67fb46845f798d3fa0696d8e5cd
work_keys_str_mv AT lucatesta cerebralprotectionduringtranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationanupdatedsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT azeemlatib cerebralprotectionduringtranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationanupdatedsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT matteocasenghi cerebralprotectionduringtranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationanupdatedsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT riccardogorla cerebralprotectionduringtranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationanupdatedsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT antoniocolombo cerebralprotectionduringtranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationanupdatedsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT francescobedogni cerebralprotectionduringtranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationanupdatedsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
_version_ 1718430299674640384