肺移植术中体外支持:系统回顾和网络荟萃分析。

Tommaso Pettenuzzo, Honoria Ocagli, Nicolò Sella, Alessandro De Cassai, Francesco Zarantonello, Sabrina Congedi, Maria Vittoria Chiaruttini, Elisa Pistollato, Marco Nardelli, Martina Biscaro, Mara Bassi, Giordana Coniglio, Eleonora Faccioli, Federico Rea, Dario Gregori, Paolo Navalesi, Annalisa Boscolo
{"title":"肺移植术中体外支持:系统回顾和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Tommaso Pettenuzzo, Honoria Ocagli, Nicolò Sella, Alessandro De Cassai, Francesco Zarantonello, Sabrina Congedi, Maria Vittoria Chiaruttini, Elisa Pistollato, Marco Nardelli, Martina Biscaro, Mara Bassi, Giordana Coniglio, Eleonora Faccioli, Federico Rea, Dario Gregori, Paolo Navalesi, Annalisa Boscolo","doi":"10.1186/s44158-024-00214-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the last decades, veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) has been gaining in popularity for intraoperative support during lung transplant (LT), being advocated for routinely use also in uncomplicated cases. Compared to off-pump strategy and, secondarily, to traditional cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), V-A ECMO seems to offer a better hemodynamic stability and oxygenation, while data regarding blood product transfusions, postoperative recovery, and mortality remain unclear. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of V-A ECMO and CPB as compared to OffPump strategy during LT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases (PubMed Embase, Cochrane, Scopus) and was updated in February 2024. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), with a fixed-effect approach, was performed to compare outcomes, such as intraoperative needing of blood products, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) duration, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), surgical duration, needing of postoperative ECMO, and mortality, across different supports (i.e., intraoperative V-A (default (d) or rescue (r)) ECMO, CPB, or OffPump).</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Twenty-seven observational studies (6113 patients) were included. As compared to OffPump surgery, V-A ECMOd, V-A ECMOr, and CPB recorded a higher consumption of all blood products, longer IMV durations, prolonged ICU LOS, surgical duration, and higher mortalities. Comparing different extracorporeal supports, V-A ECMOd and, secondarily, V-A ECMOr overperformed CPB in nearly all above mentioned outcomes, except for RBC transfusions. The lowest rate of postoperative ECMO was recorded after OffPump surgery, while no differences were found comparing different extracorporeal supports. Finally, older age, male gender, and body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m<sup>2</sup> negatively impacted on RBC transfusions, ICU LOS, surgical duration, need of postoperative ECMO, and mortality, regardless of the intraoperative extracorporeal support investigated.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>This comparative network meta-analysis highlights that OffPump overperformed ECMO and CPB in all outcomes of interest, while, comparing different extracorporeal supports, V-A ECMOd and, secondarily, V-A ECMOr overperformed CPB in nearly all above mentioned outcomes, except for RBC transfusions. Older age, male gender, and higher BMI negatively affect several outcomes across different intraoperative strategies, regardless of the intraoperative extracorporeal support investigated. Future prospective studies are necessary to optimize and standardize the intraoperative management of LT.</p>","PeriodicalId":73597,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)","volume":"4 1","pages":"81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11658095/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intraoperative extracorporeal support for lung transplant: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Tommaso Pettenuzzo, Honoria Ocagli, Nicolò Sella, Alessandro De Cassai, Francesco Zarantonello, Sabrina Congedi, Maria Vittoria Chiaruttini, Elisa Pistollato, Marco Nardelli, Martina Biscaro, Mara Bassi, Giordana Coniglio, Eleonora Faccioli, Federico Rea, Dario Gregori, Paolo Navalesi, Annalisa Boscolo\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s44158-024-00214-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the last decades, veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) has been gaining in popularity for intraoperative support during lung transplant (LT), being advocated for routinely use also in uncomplicated cases. Compared to off-pump strategy and, secondarily, to traditional cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), V-A ECMO seems to offer a better hemodynamic stability and oxygenation, while data regarding blood product transfusions, postoperative recovery, and mortality remain unclear. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of V-A ECMO and CPB as compared to OffPump strategy during LT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases (PubMed Embase, Cochrane, Scopus) and was updated in February 2024. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), with a fixed-effect approach, was performed to compare outcomes, such as intraoperative needing of blood products, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) duration, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), surgical duration, needing of postoperative ECMO, and mortality, across different supports (i.e., intraoperative V-A (default (d) or rescue (r)) ECMO, CPB, or OffPump).</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Twenty-seven observational studies (6113 patients) were included. As compared to OffPump surgery, V-A ECMOd, V-A ECMOr, and CPB recorded a higher consumption of all blood products, longer IMV durations, prolonged ICU LOS, surgical duration, and higher mortalities. Comparing different extracorporeal supports, V-A ECMOd and, secondarily, V-A ECMOr overperformed CPB in nearly all above mentioned outcomes, except for RBC transfusions. The lowest rate of postoperative ECMO was recorded after OffPump surgery, while no differences were found comparing different extracorporeal supports. Finally, older age, male gender, and body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m<sup>2</sup> negatively impacted on RBC transfusions, ICU LOS, surgical duration, need of postoperative ECMO, and mortality, regardless of the intraoperative extracorporeal support investigated.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>This comparative network meta-analysis highlights that OffPump overperformed ECMO and CPB in all outcomes of interest, while, comparing different extracorporeal supports, V-A ECMOd and, secondarily, V-A ECMOr overperformed CPB in nearly all above mentioned outcomes, except for RBC transfusions. Older age, male gender, and higher BMI negatively affect several outcomes across different intraoperative strategies, regardless of the intraoperative extracorporeal support investigated. Future prospective studies are necessary to optimize and standardize the intraoperative management of LT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73597,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"81\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11658095/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s44158-024-00214-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s44158-024-00214-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在过去的几十年里,静脉-动脉体外膜氧合(V-A ECMO)在肺移植(LT)术中支持越来越受欢迎,也被提倡在无并发症的病例中常规使用。与非体外泵策略相比,其次是与传统的体外循环(CPB)相比,V-A ECMO似乎提供了更好的血流动力学稳定性和氧合,但有关血液制品输血、术后恢复和死亡率的数据仍不清楚。本系统综述和网络荟萃分析旨在评估V-A ECMO和CPB在lt期间与OffPump策略相比的比较疗效和安全性。方法:在多个数据库(PubMed Embase, Cochrane, Scopus)中进行了全面的文献检索,并于2024年2月更新。采用固定效应方法进行贝叶斯网络meta分析(NMA),比较不同支持(即术中V-A(默认(d)或抢救(r) ECMO、CPB或OffPump)的结果,如术中血液制品需求、有创机械通气(IMV)持续时间、重症监护病房(ICU)住院时间(LOS)、手术持续时间、术后ECMO需求和死亡率。结果:纳入27项观察性研究(6113例患者)。与OffPump手术相比,V-A ECMOd、V-A ECMOr和CPB记录了更高的所有血液制品消耗、更长的IMV持续时间、更长的ICU LOS、手术时间和更高的死亡率。比较不同的体外支持,V-A ECMOd和V-A ECMOr在几乎所有上述结果中都优于CPB,除了红细胞输注。OffPump手术后ECMO发生率最低,不同体外支架间无差异。最后,无论采用何种术中体外支持,年龄、男性和体重指数≥25kg /m2对RBC输注、ICU LOS、手术时间、术后ECMO需求和死亡率都有负面影响。解释:这项比较网络荟萃分析强调,OffPump在所有相关结果中都优于ECMO和CPB,而在比较不同的体外支持时,V-A ECMOd和V-A ECMOr在几乎所有上述结果中都优于CPB,除了红细胞输注。无论采用何种术中体外支持,年龄较大、男性和较高的BMI都会对不同术中策略的几个结果产生负面影响。未来的前瞻性研究对于优化和规范LT术中管理是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Intraoperative extracorporeal support for lung transplant: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background: In the last decades, veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) has been gaining in popularity for intraoperative support during lung transplant (LT), being advocated for routinely use also in uncomplicated cases. Compared to off-pump strategy and, secondarily, to traditional cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), V-A ECMO seems to offer a better hemodynamic stability and oxygenation, while data regarding blood product transfusions, postoperative recovery, and mortality remain unclear. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of V-A ECMO and CPB as compared to OffPump strategy during LT.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases (PubMed Embase, Cochrane, Scopus) and was updated in February 2024. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), with a fixed-effect approach, was performed to compare outcomes, such as intraoperative needing of blood products, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) duration, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), surgical duration, needing of postoperative ECMO, and mortality, across different supports (i.e., intraoperative V-A (default (d) or rescue (r)) ECMO, CPB, or OffPump).

Findings: Twenty-seven observational studies (6113 patients) were included. As compared to OffPump surgery, V-A ECMOd, V-A ECMOr, and CPB recorded a higher consumption of all blood products, longer IMV durations, prolonged ICU LOS, surgical duration, and higher mortalities. Comparing different extracorporeal supports, V-A ECMOd and, secondarily, V-A ECMOr overperformed CPB in nearly all above mentioned outcomes, except for RBC transfusions. The lowest rate of postoperative ECMO was recorded after OffPump surgery, while no differences were found comparing different extracorporeal supports. Finally, older age, male gender, and body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2 negatively impacted on RBC transfusions, ICU LOS, surgical duration, need of postoperative ECMO, and mortality, regardless of the intraoperative extracorporeal support investigated.

Interpretation: This comparative network meta-analysis highlights that OffPump overperformed ECMO and CPB in all outcomes of interest, while, comparing different extracorporeal supports, V-A ECMOd and, secondarily, V-A ECMOr overperformed CPB in nearly all above mentioned outcomes, except for RBC transfusions. Older age, male gender, and higher BMI negatively affect several outcomes across different intraoperative strategies, regardless of the intraoperative extracorporeal support investigated. Future prospective studies are necessary to optimize and standardize the intraoperative management of LT.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
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