Athanasiou Thanos, Aziz Omer, Al-Ruzzeh Sharif, Philippidis Pandelis, Jones Catherine, Purkayastha Sanjay, Casula Roberto, Glenville Brian
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, The National Heart and Lung Institute, St Mary's Hospital London, 70 St Olaf's Road, Fulham, London SW6 7DN, UK.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2004 Nov;26(5):1015-26. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2004.07.013.
Minimally invasive great saphenous vein harvest for coronary artery bypass grafting aims to reduce post-operative leg-wound related morbidity. In a meta-analysis of randomised trials we have shown leg wound infection rates to be significantly lower in patients undergoing minimally invasive harvest. This study aims to use meta-analysis to compare the two techniques with regards to non-infective wound healing disturbances (NIWHD) (wound drainage, haematoma, dehiscence, necrosis, need for surgical debridement, and seroma formation). A meta-analysis of all studies published between 1995 and 2002 reporting a comparison between the two techniques was performed. Primary outcomes of interest were the six wound healing disturbances mentioned above and length of hospital stay. Heterogeneity was assessed using graphical exploration and sensitivity analysis with subgroup analysis. Twenty-seven studies published between 1997 and 2002 matched our selection criteria, with a combined total of 4953 subjects, of which 2442(49%) underwent minimally invasive harvest and 2511(51%) underwent conventional surgery. When considering only randomised studies, the total number of non-infective wound disturbances was lower in minimally invasive (4%) as compared to the conventional (13%) group (random effect OR 0.24, CI 0.16-0.38). Similar results were found when only fully matched studies were considered. The absolute risk reduction when comparing the two techniques was calculated to be 0.10, which translates to a number of patients needed to treat of 10. Length of stay was significantly reduced in the minimally invasive group in comparison to the conventional group (random effect weighted mean difference of -1.04, CI -1.92 to -0.16). Our results suggest that NIWHD all reduced with minimally invasive harvest techniques. Despite the limitations of this meta-analysis, we feel we have once again illustrated an important link between minimally invasive great saphenous vein harvest and improved tissue healing when compared to conventional open surgery. This has the potential to reduce wound-related morbidity, infection, post-operative pain, length of hospital stay, and re-admission rate.
微创大隐静脉采集用于冠状动脉旁路移植术旨在降低术后腿部伤口相关的发病率。在一项随机试验的荟萃分析中,我们发现接受微创采集的患者腿部伤口感染率显著较低。本研究旨在使用荟萃分析比较这两种技术在非感染性伤口愈合障碍(NIWHD)(伤口引流、血肿、裂开、坏死、手术清创需求和血清肿形成)方面的差异。对1995年至2002年间发表的所有报告这两种技术比较的研究进行了荟萃分析。感兴趣的主要结局是上述六种伤口愈合障碍以及住院时间。使用图形探索和敏感性分析以及亚组分析评估异质性。1997年至2002年间发表的27项研究符合我们的选择标准,共有4953名受试者,其中2442名(49%)接受了微创采集,2511名(51%)接受了传统手术。仅考虑随机研究时,微创组的非感染性伤口障碍总数(4%)低于传统组(13%)(随机效应OR 0.24,CI 0.16 - 0.38)。仅考虑完全匹配的研究时也发现了类似结果。两种技术比较时的绝对风险降低计算为0.10,这意味着需要治疗的患者数量为10。与传统组相比,微创组的住院时间显著缩短(随机效应加权平均差为 -1.04,CI -1.92至 -0.16)。我们的结果表明,微创采集技术可降低NIWHD。尽管本荟萃分析存在局限性,但我们认为我们再次证明了与传统开放手术相比,微创大隐静脉采集与改善组织愈合之间的重要联系。这有可能降低伤口相关的发病率、感染、术后疼痛、住院时间和再入院率。