Right ventricular outlet tract reconstruction for tetralogy of fallot: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

0 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Akira Yamaguchi, Tomonari Shimoda, Hiroo Kinami, Jun Yasuhara, Hisato Takagi, Shinichi Fukuhara, Toshiki Kuno
{"title":"Right ventricular outlet tract reconstruction for tetralogy of fallot: systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Akira Yamaguchi, Tomonari Shimoda, Hiroo Kinami, Jun Yasuhara, Hisato Takagi, Shinichi Fukuhara, Toshiki Kuno","doi":"10.1093/icvts/ivae180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Concerns persist regarding pulmonary regurgitation after transannular patch repair (TAP) for Tetralogy of Fallot. Despite various architectural preservation techniques being introduced, the optimal strategy remains controversial. We aimed to compare different right ventricular outlet tract reconstruction techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central were searched through March 2024 to identify comparative studies on right ventricular outlet tract reconstruction techniques (PROSPERO ID: CRD42024519404). The primary outcome was mid-term pulmonary regurgitation, with secondary outcomes including postoperative mortality, postoperative pulmonary regurgitation, length of intensive care unit stays, postoperative right ventricular outlet tract pressure gradient, and mid-term mortality. We performed a network meta-analysis to compare outcomes among TAP, valve-repairing (VR), TAP with neo-valve creation (TAPN), and valve-sparing (VS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two randomized controlled studies and 32 observational studies were identified with 8,890 patients. TAP carried a higher risk of mid-term pulmonary regurgitation compared to TAPN (HR, 0.53; 95%CI [0.33; 0.85]) and VS (HR, 0.27; 95% CI [0.19; 0.39]), with no significant difference compared to VR. VS was also associated with reduced postoperative mortality compared to TAP (RR, 0.31; 95% CI [0.18; 0.56]), in addition to reduced ventilation time. TAP also carried an increased risk of postoperative pulmonary regurgitation compared to the other groups. The groups were comparable in terms of length of intensive care unit stay, right ventricular outlet tract pressure gradient, and mid-term mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>VR was associated with a reduced risk of postoperative pulmonary regurgitation, while TAPN was associated with reduced risks of both postoperative and mid-term pulmonary regurgitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":73406,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivae180","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Concerns persist regarding pulmonary regurgitation after transannular patch repair (TAP) for Tetralogy of Fallot. Despite various architectural preservation techniques being introduced, the optimal strategy remains controversial. We aimed to compare different right ventricular outlet tract reconstruction techniques.

Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central were searched through March 2024 to identify comparative studies on right ventricular outlet tract reconstruction techniques (PROSPERO ID: CRD42024519404). The primary outcome was mid-term pulmonary regurgitation, with secondary outcomes including postoperative mortality, postoperative pulmonary regurgitation, length of intensive care unit stays, postoperative right ventricular outlet tract pressure gradient, and mid-term mortality. We performed a network meta-analysis to compare outcomes among TAP, valve-repairing (VR), TAP with neo-valve creation (TAPN), and valve-sparing (VS).

Results: Two randomized controlled studies and 32 observational studies were identified with 8,890 patients. TAP carried a higher risk of mid-term pulmonary regurgitation compared to TAPN (HR, 0.53; 95%CI [0.33; 0.85]) and VS (HR, 0.27; 95% CI [0.19; 0.39]), with no significant difference compared to VR. VS was also associated with reduced postoperative mortality compared to TAP (RR, 0.31; 95% CI [0.18; 0.56]), in addition to reduced ventilation time. TAP also carried an increased risk of postoperative pulmonary regurgitation compared to the other groups. The groups were comparable in terms of length of intensive care unit stay, right ventricular outlet tract pressure gradient, and mid-term mortality.

Conclusions: VR was associated with a reduced risk of postoperative pulmonary regurgitation, while TAPN was associated with reduced risks of both postoperative and mid-term pulmonary regurgitation.

治疗法洛氏四联症的右心室出口道重建:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。
目的:法洛氏四联症经环补片修补术(TAP)后的肺动脉反流问题一直备受关注。尽管目前有多种结构保留技术,但最佳策略仍存在争议。我们旨在比较不同的右心室出口道重建技术:方法:检索了截至 2024 年 3 月的 PubMed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane Central,以确定有关右心室出口道重建技术的比较研究(PROSPERO ID:CRD42024519404)。主要结果是中期肺动脉反流,次要结果包括术后死亡率、术后肺动脉反流、重症监护室住院时间、术后右心室出口道压力梯度和中期死亡率。我们进行了一项网络荟萃分析,比较了TAP、瓣膜修补术(VR)、TAP伴新瓣膜创建术(TAPN)和保瓣术(VS)的结果:结果:共发现了两项随机对照研究和 32 项观察性研究,涉及 8890 名患者。与 TAPN(HR,0.53;95%CI [0.33;0.85])和 VS(HR,0.27;95%CI [0.19;0.39])相比,TAP 发生中期肺动脉反流的风险更高,与 VR 相比则无显著差异。与 TAP 相比,VS 还能降低术后死亡率(RR,0.31;95% CI [0.18;0.56]),此外还能缩短通气时间。与其他组别相比,TAP 还增加了术后肺动脉反流的风险。两组在重症监护室住院时间、右心室出口道压力梯度和中期死亡率方面具有可比性:结论:VR 可降低术后肺动脉反流的风险,而 TAPN 可降低术后和中期肺动脉反流的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信