Sutureless technique versus conventional surgery in the primary treatment of total anomalous pulmonary venous connection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

无缝线技术与传统手术在全肺静脉异位引流一期治疗中的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUD: A meta-analysis was performed to compare the differences in outcomes between sutureless technique and conventional surgery for primary repair of Total Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection(TAPVC). METHODS: Electronic databases, including PubMed, EMbase, Medline, CNKI, Wanfang Data and Weipu Data were searched systematically for the literature aimed mainly at comparing the therapeutic effects for primary repair of TAPVC administered by sutureless technique and conventional surgery. Corresponding data sets were extracted and two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality. RESULTS: Seven studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included, involving a total of 1293 subjects. It was observed that sutureless technique entailed a lower occurrence rate of post-operative Pulmonary Veins Obstruction (PVO) (OR, 0.52 95%CI, 0.32-0.86; P = 0.01) and re-operation due to PVO (OR, 0.28;95%CI, 0.09-0.87; P = 0.03). However, meta-analyses of hospitalization time (WMD, 5.92; 95%CI, - 7.97-19.80; P = 0.40) and post-operative mortality (OR, 0.65; 95%CI, 0.41-1.04; P = 0.07) showed no significant differences between sutureless technique and conventional surgery. Meta-analysis of Cardiopulmonary Bypass (CPB) time and aortic cross-clamp time also showed no significant differences between the two surgical approaches (WMD, 5.07; 95%CI, - 9.29-19.42; P = 0.49); (WMD, 5.73; 95%CI, - 7.76-19.23; P = 0.40), but the result remained inconclusive due to pooling result changes after sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional surgery, a lower occurrence rate of post-operative PVO and re-operation due to PVO were associated with sutureless technique. Meanwhile, hospitalization time and post-operative mortality were not statistically different between the two surgical approaches. Pooling result of CPB and aortic cross-clamp time between the two groups remained inconclusive.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。