Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Minimally invasive versus conventional continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation for heart failure: a meta-analysis.
Zhang, Bufan; Guo, Shaohua; Fu, Zean; Liu, Zhigang.
Afiliación
  • Zhang B; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, TEDA International Cardiovascular Hospital, Cardiovascular Clinical College of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, People's Republic of China.
  • Guo S; Tianjin Key Laboratory of Ionic-Molecular Function of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Cardiology, Tianjin Institute of Cardiology, Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, People's Republic of China.
  • Fu Z; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, TEDA International Cardiovascular Hospital, Cardiovascular Clinical College of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, People's Republic of China.
  • Liu Z; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, TEDA International Cardiovascular Hospital, Cardiovascular Clinical College of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, People's Republic of China. liuzg@tedaich.com.
Heart Fail Rev ; 27(4): 1053-1061, 2022 07.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33811570
ABSTRACT
Many studies have reported various minimally invasive techniques for continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation. There is no consensus on whether minimally invasive techniques can bring more benefits for patients compared with the conventional technique, due to the limited number of patients and diverse results in current studies. Our meta-analysis mainly discussed the comparison of minimally invasive and conventional techniques. We searched controlled trials from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases until Dec 11, 2020. Perioperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed among 10 included studies. The protocol has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020221532). There were no statistical differences in the 30-day mortality (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.29 to 1.14), 6-month mortality (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.41 to 1.05), neurological dysfunction (OR 1.10; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.76), major infection (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.36 to 1.28), and pump thrombus (OR 1.49; 95% CI 0.63 to 3.52) among the cohorts. Minimally invasive techniques were associated with lower incidences of major bleeding (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.68), severe right heart failure (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.81), and less blood-product utilization (SMD -0.44). Sensitivity analysis suggested that minimally invasive techniques were associated with a lower incidence of respiratory failure (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.96) and shorter mechanical ventilation time (SMD -0.53). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients, implanted with a centrifugal pump by minimally invasive techniques, were associated with a shorter length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (SMD -0.27) and hospital stay (SMD -0.42), and less blood-product utilization (SMD -0.26). In conclusion, minimally invasive techniques can reduce the risks of major bleeding, severe right heart failure, and blood-product utilization, as well as have positive impacts on reducing mechanical ventilation time and the risk of respiratory failure. Minimally invasive centrifugal pump implantation can reduce the length of ICU and hospital stay.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Insuficiencia Respiratoria / Corazón Auxiliar / Insuficiencia Cardíaca Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Heart Fail Rev Asunto de la revista: CARDIOLOGIA Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Insuficiencia Respiratoria / Corazón Auxiliar / Insuficiencia Cardíaca Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Heart Fail Rev Asunto de la revista: CARDIOLOGIA Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article