Acta diabetologica · 2016
Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Wang Yushu, Shi Xiuli, Du Rongsheng, Chen Yucheng, Zhang Qing
Аннотация
AIMS: The effects of off-pump CABG (OFF-CABG) versus on-pump CABG (ON-CABG) in diabetic patients remain controversial. The aim of our study was to compare mortality and postoperative morbidity between OFF-CABG and ON-CABG for diabetic patients.
METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for studies investigating clinical outcomes of OFF-CABG versus ON-CABG in diabetic patients were searched, collecting data from inception until June 2016. We pooled the odds ratios from individual studies and performed heterogeneity, quality assessment and publication bias analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 543,220 diabetic patients in 10 studies were included. The overall mortality (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.58-1.31; p = 0.50) was comparable between the OFF-CABG and ON-CABG. OFF-CABG was associated with significantly fewer cerebrovascular accidents (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.31-0.65; p < 0.0001), bleeding complications (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.80; p < 0.001) and pulmonary complications. However, no differences in myocardial infarction (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.52-1.12; p = 0.16), renal failure (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.50-1.11; p = 0.14) and other postoperative morbidity outcomes were found.
CONCLUSIONS: OFF-CABG significantly reduces the incidence of postoperative cerebrovascular accidents and bleeding complications compared with ON-CABG in diabetic patients. No differences were found regarding mortality, myocardial infarction and renal failure between these two techniques. Our study suggests that OFF-CABG may be an optimal strategy for diabetic patients although adequately powered randomized trials are needed to further verify the finding.
METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for studies investigating clinical outcomes of OFF-CABG versus ON-CABG in diabetic patients were searched, collecting data from inception until June 2016. We pooled the odds ratios from individual studies and performed heterogeneity, quality assessment and publication bias analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 543,220 diabetic patients in 10 studies were included. The overall mortality (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.58-1.31; p = 0.50) was comparable between the OFF-CABG and ON-CABG. OFF-CABG was associated with significantly fewer cerebrovascular accidents (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.31-0.65; p < 0.0001), bleeding complications (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.80; p < 0.001) and pulmonary complications. However, no differences in myocardial infarction (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.52-1.12; p = 0.16), renal failure (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.50-1.11; p = 0.14) and other postoperative morbidity outcomes were found.
CONCLUSIONS: OFF-CABG significantly reduces the incidence of postoperative cerebrovascular accidents and bleeding complications compared with ON-CABG in diabetic patients. No differences were found regarding mortality, myocardial infarction and renal failure between these two techniques. Our study suggests that OFF-CABG may be an optimal strategy for diabetic patients although adequately powered randomized trials are needed to further verify the finding.