Mylonas Konstantinos S, Tzani Aspasia, Metaxas Panagiotis, Schizas Dimitrios, Boikou Vasileios, Economopoulos Konstantinos P
Division of Pediatric Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Warren 11, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Surgery Working Group, Society of Junior Doctors, Athens, Greece.
Pediatr Cardiol. 2017 Dec;38(8):1527-1539. doi: 10.1007/s00246-017-1732-4. Epub 2017 Sep 25.
The benefit of blood cardioplegia (BCP) compared to crystalloid cardioplegia (CCP) is still debatable. Our aim was to systematically review and synthesize all available evidence on the use of BCP and CCP to assess if any modality provides superior outcomes in pediatric cardiac surgery. A systematic literature search of the PubMed and Cochrane databases was performed with respect to the PRISMA statement (end-of-search date: January 30th, 2017). We extracted data on study design, demographics, cardioplegia regimens, and perioperative outcomes as well as relevant biochemical markers, namely cardiac troponin I (cTnI), lactate, and ATP levels at baseline, after reperfusion and postoperatively at 1, 4, 12, and 24 h as applicable. Data were appropriately pooled using random and mixed effects models. Our systematic review includes 56 studies reporting on a total of 7711 pediatric patients. A meta-analysis of the 10 eligible studies directly comparing BCP (n = 416) to CCP (n = 281) was also performed. There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to cTnI and Lac at any measured time point, ATP levels after reperfusion, length of intensive care unit stay (WMD: -0.08, 95% CI -1.52 to 1.36), length of hospital stay (WMD: 0.13, 95% CI -0.85 to 1.12), and 30-day mortality (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.43-2.88). Only cTnI levels at 4 h postoperatively were significantly lower with BCP (WMD: -1.62, 95% CI -2.07 to -1.18). Based on the available data, neither cardioplegia modality seems to be superior in terms of clinical outcomes, ischemia severity, and overall functional recovery.
与晶体停搏液(CCP)相比,血液停搏液(BCP)的益处仍存在争议。我们的目的是系统回顾和综合所有关于BCP和CCP使用的现有证据,以评估在小儿心脏手术中是否有任何一种方式能提供更好的结果。根据PRISMA声明(检索截止日期:2017年1月30日),对PubMed和Cochrane数据库进行了系统的文献检索。我们提取了关于研究设计、人口统计学、停搏液方案、围手术期结果以及相关生化标志物的数据,即基线时、再灌注后以及术后1、4、12和24小时(如适用)的心肌肌钙蛋白I(cTnI)、乳酸和ATP水平。使用随机和混合效应模型对数据进行了适当汇总。我们的系统评价纳入了56项研究,共报道了7711例小儿患者。还对10项直接比较BCP(n = 416)和CCP(n = 281)的合格研究进行了荟萃分析。在任何测量时间点,两组在cTnI和乳酸方面均无显著差异,再灌注后的ATP水平、重症监护病房住院时间(加权均数差:-0.08,95%可信区间-1.52至1.36)、住院时间(加权均数差:0.13,95%可信区间-0.85至1.12)以及30天死亡率(比值比1.11,95%可信区间0.43 - 2.88)方面也无显著差异。仅术后4小时BCP组的cTnI水平显著较低(加权均数差:-1.62,95%可信区间-2.07至-1.18)。基于现有数据,就临床结果、缺血严重程度和整体功能恢复而言,两种停搏液方式似乎都不具有优势。