Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2018 Feb;81(2):147-154.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcma.2017.08.017. Epub 2017 Oct 16.

Surgical treatment of active native mitral infective endocarditis: A meta-analysis of current evidence

Jian-Zhou Liu  1 , Xiao-Feng Li  1 , Qi Miao  1 , Chao-Ji Zhang  2
Affiliations
Free article
Meta-Analysis

Surgical treatment of active native mitral infective endocarditis: A meta-analysis of current evidence

Jian-Zhou Liu et al. J Chin Med Assoc. 2018 Feb.
Free article

Abstract

Background: The native mitral lesion of active infective endocarditis implies a poor prognosis and is associated with adverse short- or long-term results without surgical treatment. Both mitral valvuloplasty (MVP) and mitral valve replacement (MVR) have been performed in the treatment of active native mitral infective endocarditis (ANMIE). However, the outcomes of the two approaches remain unclear. The aim of this study was to systematically review the two procedures with mortality and survival as the primary endpoints.

Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify all relevant studies with comparative data on MVP versus MVR for the treatment of ANMIE. Information on baseline characteristics of patients, operation method, quality of literature, follow-up, and so forth was abstracted using standardized protocols. Pooled odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) was calculated and possible publication bias was tested.

Results: Nine comparative observational studies with a total of 633 patients (MVP = 265, MVR = 368) were identified for qualitative assessment, data extraction, and analysis. The summary OR for operative mortality, comparing repair with replacement, was 0.37 (95% CI 0.0.18-0.80; p = 0.0005). Summary 1- and 5-year HRs for event-free survival were 0.43 (95% CI 0.20-0.92; p = 0.03) and 0.44 (95% CI 0.25-0.77, p = 0.004), respectively (repair vs. replacement). Summary 1- and 5-year survival HRs were 0.51 (95% CI 0.24-1.08; p = 0.08) and 0.55 (95% CI 0.32-0.96; p = 0.004), respectively (repair vs. replacement). No heterogeneity was revealed between studies, and possible publication bias was insignificant.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that MVP may be associated with superior postoperative survival outcomes compared with MVR. MVP is desirable, if possible, as a durable alternative to replacement. However, we must consider the influence of different patient characteristics and surgeons' preferences on the choice of surgical approach, and additional powered clinical trials will be required to confirm these findings.

Keywords: Infective endocarditis; Meta-analysis; Mitral valve replacement; Mitral valvuloplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer