麻醉在房颤导管消融中的应用:观察性研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析

Q2 Medicine
K. H. C. Li, T. Sang, C. Chan, M. Gong, Yingzhi Liu, A. Jesuthasan, Guangping Li, Tong Liu, M. H. S. Lam, William K. K. Wu, M. Chan, Fang-zhou Liu, Cheng Chen, J. Ho, Yunlong Xia, G. Tse
{"title":"麻醉在房颤导管消融中的应用:观察性研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"K. H. C. Li, T. Sang, C. Chan, M. Gong, Yingzhi Liu, A. Jesuthasan, Guangping Li, Tong Liu, M. H. S. Lam, William K. K. Wu, M. Chan, Fang-zhou Liu, Cheng Chen, J. Ho, Yunlong Xia, G. Tse","doi":"10.1136/heartasia-2018-011155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives This meta-analysis and systematic review seeks to compare both characteristic parameters and procedural outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation in patients under general anaesthesia (GA)/deep sedation and mild/moderate sedation. Background Catheter ablation has become a widely applied intervention for treating symptomatic AF and arrhythmias that are refractory to medical therapy. It can be conducted through from mild sedation to GA. Methods PubMed and Embase were searched up to July 2018 for randomised controlled trials, cohort and observational studies that assessed the outcomes of catheter ablation under GA/deep sedation or mild/moderate sedation. Nine studies were included in this meta-analysis after screening with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Heterogeneity between studies and publication bias was evaluated by I2 index and Egger’s regression, respectively. Results Our meta-analysis found catheter AF ablation with GA/deep sedation to be associated with reduced risk of recurrence (RR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.13, p=0.20) and complications (RR: 0.95, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.42, p=0.82), though statistically insignificant. In terms of procedural parameters, there was no significant difference between the two groups for both procedural time (SMD: −0.13, 95% CI −0.90 to 0.63, p=0.74) and fluoroscopy time (SMD: −0.41, 95% CI −1.40 to 0.58, p=0.41). Univariate meta-regression did not reveal any covariates as a moderating factor for complication and recurrence risk. Conclusion Apart from an increased likelihood of procedural success, ablation by GA/deep sedation was found to be non-significantly different from the mild/moderate sedation approach in both procedural parameters and outcome measures.","PeriodicalId":12858,"journal":{"name":"Heart Asia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/heartasia-2018-011155","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anaesthesia use in catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies\",\"authors\":\"K. H. C. Li, T. Sang, C. Chan, M. Gong, Yingzhi Liu, A. Jesuthasan, Guangping Li, Tong Liu, M. H. S. Lam, William K. K. Wu, M. Chan, Fang-zhou Liu, Cheng Chen, J. Ho, Yunlong Xia, G. Tse\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/heartasia-2018-011155\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives This meta-analysis and systematic review seeks to compare both characteristic parameters and procedural outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation in patients under general anaesthesia (GA)/deep sedation and mild/moderate sedation. Background Catheter ablation has become a widely applied intervention for treating symptomatic AF and arrhythmias that are refractory to medical therapy. It can be conducted through from mild sedation to GA. Methods PubMed and Embase were searched up to July 2018 for randomised controlled trials, cohort and observational studies that assessed the outcomes of catheter ablation under GA/deep sedation or mild/moderate sedation. Nine studies were included in this meta-analysis after screening with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Heterogeneity between studies and publication bias was evaluated by I2 index and Egger’s regression, respectively. Results Our meta-analysis found catheter AF ablation with GA/deep sedation to be associated with reduced risk of recurrence (RR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.13, p=0.20) and complications (RR: 0.95, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.42, p=0.82), though statistically insignificant. In terms of procedural parameters, there was no significant difference between the two groups for both procedural time (SMD: −0.13, 95% CI −0.90 to 0.63, p=0.74) and fluoroscopy time (SMD: −0.41, 95% CI −1.40 to 0.58, p=0.41). Univariate meta-regression did not reveal any covariates as a moderating factor for complication and recurrence risk. Conclusion Apart from an increased likelihood of procedural success, ablation by GA/deep sedation was found to be non-significantly different from the mild/moderate sedation approach in both procedural parameters and outcome measures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12858,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heart Asia\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/heartasia-2018-011155\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heart Asia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/heartasia-2018-011155\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart Asia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/heartasia-2018-011155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

目的本荟萃分析和系统综述旨在比较全麻(GA)/深度镇静和轻度/中度镇静患者心房颤动(AF)导管消融的特征参数和手术结果。背景导管消融术已成为一种广泛应用的干预措施,用于治疗药物治疗难治的症状性房颤和心律失常。它可以从轻度镇静到GA进行。方法截至2018年7月,检索PubMed和Embase的随机对照试验、队列和观察性研究,评估GA/深度镇静或轻度/中度镇静下导管消融的结果。根据纳入和排除标准进行筛选后,9项研究被纳入该荟萃分析。研究和发表偏倚之间的异质性分别通过I2指数和Egger回归进行评估。结果我们的荟萃分析发现,采用GA/深度镇静的导管房颤消融与复发风险(RR:0.79,95%CI 0.56-1.13,p=0.020)和并发症风险(RR=0.95,95%CI 0.64-1.42,p=0.082)的降低有关,尽管在统计学上不显著。就手术参数而言,两组在手术时间(SMD:−0.13,95%CI−0.90至0.63,p=0.74)和荧光检查时间(SMD:−0.41,95%CI–1.40至0.58,p=0.41)方面均无显著差异。单变量元回归未发现任何协变量作为并发症和复发风险的调节因素。结论除了增加手术成功的可能性外,GA/深度镇静消融在手术参数和结果测量方面与轻度/中度镇静方法没有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Anaesthesia use in catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies
Objectives This meta-analysis and systematic review seeks to compare both characteristic parameters and procedural outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) catheter ablation in patients under general anaesthesia (GA)/deep sedation and mild/moderate sedation. Background Catheter ablation has become a widely applied intervention for treating symptomatic AF and arrhythmias that are refractory to medical therapy. It can be conducted through from mild sedation to GA. Methods PubMed and Embase were searched up to July 2018 for randomised controlled trials, cohort and observational studies that assessed the outcomes of catheter ablation under GA/deep sedation or mild/moderate sedation. Nine studies were included in this meta-analysis after screening with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Heterogeneity between studies and publication bias was evaluated by I2 index and Egger’s regression, respectively. Results Our meta-analysis found catheter AF ablation with GA/deep sedation to be associated with reduced risk of recurrence (RR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.13, p=0.20) and complications (RR: 0.95, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.42, p=0.82), though statistically insignificant. In terms of procedural parameters, there was no significant difference between the two groups for both procedural time (SMD: −0.13, 95% CI −0.90 to 0.63, p=0.74) and fluoroscopy time (SMD: −0.41, 95% CI −1.40 to 0.58, p=0.41). Univariate meta-regression did not reveal any covariates as a moderating factor for complication and recurrence risk. Conclusion Apart from an increased likelihood of procedural success, ablation by GA/deep sedation was found to be non-significantly different from the mild/moderate sedation approach in both procedural parameters and outcome measures.
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
Heart Asia
Heart Asia Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
2.90
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