Perfusion · 2021
Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with intra-aortic balloon pump for postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
МетаанализСистематический обзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Huang Daochao, Xu Anyi, Guan QiongChan, Qin Jie, Zhang Chuang
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is currently recommended as a strategy to address the increased afterload in patients who received venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). The benefit of VA-ECMO with IABP in postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock is inconclusive. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the influence of VA-ECMO with IABP for postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCS).
METHODS: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase were searched for all articles published from 1 January, 1964 to July 11, 2020. Retrospective cohort studies targeting the comparison of VA-ECMO with IABP and isolated VA-ECMO were included in this study.
RESULTS: We included 2251 patients in the present study (917 patients in the VA-ECMO with IABP group and 1334 patients in the isolated VA-ECMO group). Deaths occurred in 589 of 917 patients (64.2%) in the VA-ECMO with IABP group and occurred in 885 of 1334 patients (66.3%) in isolated VA-ECMO group. Pooling the results of all studies showed that VA-ECMO with IABP was not related to a reduced in-hospital mortality in patients who received VA-ECMO for PCS (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86-1.04; p = 0.231). In addition, VA-ECMO with IABP was not related to an increased rate of VA-ECMO weaning in patients who received VA-ECMO for PCS (RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.99-1.66; p = 0.058).
CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that VA-ECMO with IABP did not improve either in-hospital survival or weaning for VA-ECMO in postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock patients.
METHODS: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase were searched for all articles published from 1 January, 1964 to July 11, 2020. Retrospective cohort studies targeting the comparison of VA-ECMO with IABP and isolated VA-ECMO were included in this study.
RESULTS: We included 2251 patients in the present study (917 patients in the VA-ECMO with IABP group and 1334 patients in the isolated VA-ECMO group). Deaths occurred in 589 of 917 patients (64.2%) in the VA-ECMO with IABP group and occurred in 885 of 1334 patients (66.3%) in isolated VA-ECMO group. Pooling the results of all studies showed that VA-ECMO with IABP was not related to a reduced in-hospital mortality in patients who received VA-ECMO for PCS (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86-1.04; p = 0.231). In addition, VA-ECMO with IABP was not related to an increased rate of VA-ECMO weaning in patients who received VA-ECMO for PCS (RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.99-1.66; p = 0.058).
CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that VA-ECMO with IABP did not improve either in-hospital survival or weaning for VA-ECMO in postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock patients.