IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0322041.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative effects of transcatheter versus surgical pulmonary valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Bunchai Chongmelaxme
  • Kok Pim Kua
  • Chanokpol Amornvetchayakul
  • Nichapond Chawviriyathep
  • Thunyapat Kerdklinhom

Abstract

Introduction: Transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement (TPVR) is developed as a non-surgical, minimally invasive procedure to reduce the need for re-do cardiac surgical interventions. However, its impacts on patient outcomes are less clear. This study aims to investigate the effects of TPVR among patients with pulmonary valve or right ventricular outflow tract dysfunctions. Materials and methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL Complete, and Web of Science, from database inception to March 1, 2024, to identify studies that assessed the comparative effectiveness of transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement (TPVR) and surgical pulmonary valve replacement (SPVR). The key outcomes of interest included mortality, pulmonary regurgitation (PR), infective endocarditis (IE), re-intervention, improvements in cardiac failure based on the New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classification, and adverse events. Meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed. Results: A total of 28 studies (n = 16,150) were included. The meta-analyses depicted that when compared with SPVR, TPVR reduced risks of mortality by 36% (odds ratio [OR] = 0.64 [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.43, 0.95]), but conferred a three-fold greater odd of IE over the follow-up duration (OR = 3.10 [95% CI: 2.22, 4.33]). No significant differences were observed for 30-day mortality, and the early PR, IE and re-intervention, as well as the PR and re-intervention during follow-up. Meta-analyzed results across the outcome measures varied according to geographical region, publication year cut-off, and income status of country. All patients who had undergone valve replacement showed improvements in heart function and experienced relevant post-procedural complications. Conclusions: TPVR afforded significant clinical benefits in patient survival, but nonetheless, it was associated with an elevated risk for infective endocarditis.

Suggested Citation

  • Bunchai Chongmelaxme & Kok Pim Kua & Chanokpol Amornvetchayakul & Nichapond Chawviriyathep & Thunyapat Kerdklinhom, 2025. "Comparative effects of transcatheter versus surgical pulmonary valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(5), pages 1-23, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0322041
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0322041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0322041
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0322041&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0322041?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0322041. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.