首页> 外文期刊>European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: Official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery >Which cannulation (axillary cannulation or femoral cannulation) is better for acute type A aortic dissection repair? A meta-analysis of nine clinical studies
【24h】

Which cannulation (axillary cannulation or femoral cannulation) is better for acute type A aortic dissection repair? A meta-analysis of nine clinical studies

机译:哪种插管(腋下插管或股骨插管)更适合急性A型主动脉夹层修复术?九项临床研究的荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

There is a trend towards using the axillary artery cannulation (AXC) site for cardiopulmonary bypass surgery in patients requiring acute type A aortic dissection (AAD) repair. However, AXC has not been established as a routine procedure, because there is controversy about its clinical advantage when compared with femoral artery cannulation (FAC). This meta-analysis assesses major short-term outcomes in patients undergoing acute AAD repair with AXC or FAC using non-randomized retrospective studies dating from 1992 to 2011 comparing AXC and FAC for major outcomes. Outcomes of interest were short-term mortality, neurological dysfunction and malperfusion. The fixed-effects model was used. Sensitivity and heterogeneity were analysed. Analysis of nine non-randomized studies comprising 715 patients [AXC, 359 (50.2%) and FAC, 356 (49.8%)] showed a significantly lower incidence of short-term mortality in the AXC group [odds ratio, 0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.15, 0.42), chi(2) = 7.23, P < 0.01]. The pattern of incidence of neurological dysfunction among the AXC group [odds ratio, 0.46, 95% CI (0.29, 0.72), chi(2) = 9.01, P < 0.01] was similar. The incidence of malperfusion did not differ [odds ratio, 0.84, 95% CI (0.37, 1.90), chi(2) = 2.25, P = 0.67]. Because no study was a randomized trial, our results are more uncertain than indicated by the 95% CI. Nevertheless, AXC seems to give better short-term mortality and neurological dysfunction rates than FAC.
机译:在需要急性A型主动脉夹层(AAD)修复的患者中,有使用腋动脉插管(AXC)部位进行心肺分流手术的趋势。但是,由于与股动脉插管(FAC)相比其临床优势存在争议,因此AXC尚未确立为常规程序。这项荟萃分析使用1992年至2011年之间的非随机回顾性研究评估了AXC或FAC进行急性AAD修复的患者的主要近期结局,比较了AXC和FAC的主要结局。感兴趣的结果是短期死亡率,神经功能障碍和灌注不足。使用了固定效果模型。敏感性和异质性进行了分析。对包括715名患者的9项非随机研究的分析[AXC,359(50.2%)和FAC,356(49.8%)]显示,AXC组的短期死亡率显着降低[赔率,0.25,95%置信度区间(CI)(0.15,0.42),chi(2)= 7.23,P <0.01]。 AXC组之间神经功能障碍的发生模式[赔率,0.46、95%CI(0.29,0.72),chi(2)= 9.01,P <0.01]相似。灌注不足的发生率没有差异[赔率,0.84,95%CI(0.37,1.90),chi(2)= 2.25,P = 0.67]。因为没有一项研究是一项随机试验,所以我们的结果比95%CI所表明的更具不确定性。尽管如此,AXC似乎比FAC的短期死亡率和神经功能障碍率更高。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号