The heart surgery forum · 2020
The Effect of Different Types of Mechanical Circulatory Support on Mortality of Patients after Adult Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Guan Zhiyuan, Guan Xiaoqing, Gu Kaiyun, Li Yanqi, Lin Jin, Zhou Wenjun, Xu Ming, Song Chunli, Zhang Zhe, Wan Feng
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Sample size may limit the ability of individual studies to detect differences in clinical outcomes between extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) alone and ECMO plus intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) after adult cardiac surgery. Therefore, we undertook a meta-analysis of the best evidence available on the comparison of clinical outcomes of ECMO alone and ECMO plus IABP after adult cardiac surgery.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Center Registry of Controlled Trials were searched for studies comparing the use of ECMO alone and ECMO plus IABP after adult cardiac surgery. A meta-analysis and a sensitivity analysis were conducted.
RESULTS: Among the 472 screened articles, 24 studies (1302 cases of ECMO plus IABP and 1603 cases of ECMO) were included. A significant relationship between patient risk profile and benefits from IABP plus ECMO was found in terms of the 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62 to 0.91; P = .004) with postcardiotomy shock (PCS). However, ECMO alone was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.06 to 3.01; Z = 2.19; P = .03) compared with ECMO plus IABP without PCS.
CONCLUSIONS: Pooled data show that patients receiving IABP plus ECMO with PCS have lower 30-day mortality than those receiving ECMO also, which in turn show higher 30-day mortality in patients with IABP plus ECMO without PCS. Further randomized studies are warranted to corroborate these observational data.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Center Registry of Controlled Trials were searched for studies comparing the use of ECMO alone and ECMO plus IABP after adult cardiac surgery. A meta-analysis and a sensitivity analysis were conducted.
RESULTS: Among the 472 screened articles, 24 studies (1302 cases of ECMO plus IABP and 1603 cases of ECMO) were included. A significant relationship between patient risk profile and benefits from IABP plus ECMO was found in terms of the 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62 to 0.91; P = .004) with postcardiotomy shock (PCS). However, ECMO alone was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.06 to 3.01; Z = 2.19; P = .03) compared with ECMO plus IABP without PCS.
CONCLUSIONS: Pooled data show that patients receiving IABP plus ECMO with PCS have lower 30-day mortality than those receiving ECMO also, which in turn show higher 30-day mortality in patients with IABP plus ECMO without PCS. Further randomized studies are warranted to corroborate these observational data.