Yanagawa Bobby, Tam Derrick Y, Mazine Amine, Tricco Andrea C
Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, St Michael's Hospital.
Division of Epidemiology, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto.
Curr Opin Cardiol. 2018 Mar;33(2):184-189. doi: 10.1097/HCO.0000000000000496.
The purpose of this article is to review the strengths and weaknesses of systematic reviews and meta-analyses to inform our current understanding of cardiac surgery.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of a focused topic can provide a quantitative estimate for the effect of a treatment intervention or exposure. In cardiac surgery, observational studies and small, single-center prospective trials provide most of the clinical outcomes that form the evidence base for patient management and guideline recommendations. As such, meta-analyses can be particularly valuable in synthesizing the literature for a particular focused surgical question. Since the year 2000, there are over 800 meta-analysis-related publications in our field. There are some limitations to this technique, including clinical, methodological and statistical heterogeneity, among other challenges. Despite these caveats, results of meta-analyses have been useful in forming treatment recommendations or in providing guidance in the design of future clinical trials.
There is a growing number of meta-analyses in the field of cardiac surgery. Knowledge translation via meta-analyses will continue to guide and inform cardiac surgical practice and our practice guidelines.
本文旨在回顾系统评价和荟萃分析的优缺点，以增进我们目前对心脏外科手术的理解。
针对特定主题的系统评价和荟萃分析能够对治疗干预或暴露的效果提供定量评估。在心脏外科手术中，观察性研究以及小型单中心前瞻性试验提供了构成患者管理和指南推荐证据基础的大部分临床结局。因此，荟萃分析在综合特定聚焦手术问题的文献方面可能特别有价值。自2000年以来，我们这个领域有800多篇与荟萃分析相关的出版物。这项技术存在一些局限性，包括临床、方法学和统计学异质性等其他挑战。尽管有这些注意事项，荟萃分析的结果在形成治疗推荐或为未来临床试验设计提供指导方面一直很有用。
心脏外科领域的荟萃分析数量不断增加。通过荟萃分析进行知识转化将继续指导心脏外科实践及我们的实践指南。
