Li Dongxu, Li Mengsi, Zhou Xu, An Qi
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery.
Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Jul;98(29):e16554. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016554.
The benefits of fenestration for patients undergoing Fontan procedure seem controversial at early and late postoperative stages.
We aimed to compare the outcomes between the fenestrated and non-fenestrated Fontan procedures.
Studies comparing the fenestrated and non-fenestrated Fontan procedures were identified by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases until July 2018. The assessed variables included postoperative oxygen saturation (SaO2), pulmonary artery pressure, mortality, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, ventilation time, intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, chest tube duration, protein-losing enteropathy, arrhythmia, and other follow-up outcomes including reintervention, stroke/thrombosis, and peak oxygen consumption. A random-effect/fixed-effect model was used to summarize the estimates of the mean difference (MD)/odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup analysis stratified by early and late outcomes was performed.
A total of 1929 Fontan patients from 14 studies were included. The early postoperative SaO2 was lower with fenestration than without fenestration (MD -2.52, 95% CI -4.16 to -0.87, P <.05); however, the late postoperative SaO2 showed no difference between the 2 approaches. The CPB time was shorter without fenestration than with fenestration (MD 10.72, 95% CI 2.54-18.9, P <.05); however, the incidence of arrhythmia was lower with fenestration than without fenestration (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25-0.75, P <.05). Other variables showed no significant differences between the 2 approaches in Fontan patients.
Fenestration appears to result in a lower incidence of arrhythmia but with a longer CPB time and lower early SaO2. Other outcomes are comparable between the 2 approaches.
在术后早期和晚期,开窗术对接受Fontan手术的患者的益处似乎存在争议。
我们旨在比较开窗Fontan手术和非开窗Fontan手术的结果。
通过检索PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆数据库,直至2018年7月,确定比较开窗Fontan手术和非开窗Fontan手术的研究。评估的变量包括术后氧饱和度(SaO2)、肺动脉压力、死亡率、体外循环(CPB)时间、通气时间、重症监护病房停留时间、住院时间、胸管留置时间、蛋白丢失性肠病、心律失常以及其他随访结果,包括再次干预、中风/血栓形成和峰值耗氧量。采用随机效应/固定效应模型总结平均差(MD)/比值比(OR)的估计值,并给出95%置信区间(CI)。进行了按早期和晚期结果分层的亚组分析。
共纳入14项研究中的1929例Fontan患者。开窗组术后早期SaO2低于非开窗组(MD -2.52,95%CI -4.16至-0.87,P<0.05);然而,两种手术方式术后晚期SaO2无差异。非开窗组的CPB时间比开窗组短(MD 10.72,95%CI 2.54-18.9,P<0.05);然而,开窗组心律失常的发生率低于非开窗组(OR 0.43,95%CI 0.25-0.75,P<0.05)。Fontan患者的其他变量在两种手术方式之间无显著差异。
开窗术似乎导致心律失常的发生率较低,但CPB时间较长且早期SaO2较低。两种手术方式的其他结果相当。