Avila Maria L, Shah Prakeshkumar S, Brandão Leonardo R
The Hospital for Sick Children, Division of Haematology-Oncology, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, Canada, M5G 1X8.
University of Toronto Mount Sinai Hospital, Department of Paediatrics and Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, 600 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, Canada, M5G 1XB.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Feb 17;2(2):CD010196. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010196.pub3.
The role of cardiac catheterization in pediatrics has progressed significantly over the last two decades, evolving from a primary diagnostic tool to a primary treatment modality in children with congenital heart disease. Vascular complications, particularly arterial thrombosis, are among the most common unwanted post-cardiac catheterization events. In 1974, unfractionated heparin proved to be superior to placebo in decreasing the incidence of arterial thrombosis in pediatric patients. However, the optimal dose of unfractionated heparin to be utilized in this setting remains a matter of controversy. This is an update of the review first published in 2014.
To evaluate the use of low-dose (< 100 units/kg) versus high-dose (≥ 100 units/kg) unfractionated heparin administered as an intravenous bolus at the time of initiation of cardiac catheterization (that is, immediately after arterial puncture), with or without subsequent heparin maintenance doses, for the prevention of post-procedural arterial thrombosis in children.
The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 15 October 2019. We planned to undertake reference checking of identified trials to identify additional studies. No language restrictions were applied.
We included randomized or quasi-randomized trials that compared low dose to high dose unfractionated heparin administered prior to cardiac catheterization. We selected studies conducted in children aged 0 to 18 years.
The first screening of potentially eligible studies was conducted by one of the authors (MLA). The second screening, risk of bias assessment and data extraction were independently conducted by two authors (MLA, LRB). Outcomes (thrombotic events, bleeding complications, other complications) were treated as dichotomous variables. The effect measures used were risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD) and number needed to treat (NNT), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.
We identified no new studies for inclusion in this review. In total, two studies with a total of 492 participants were included. We had concerns about risk of bias for one of the two studies. The certainty of the evidence for our key outcomes was downgraded to moderate due to risk of bias concerns and imprecision. The confidence interval for the risk of arterial thrombotic events was compatible with benefits of either high or low unfractionated heparin dose regimens (RR low-dose versus high-dose 1.06, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.92). Only one of the studies reported the frequency of bleeding events and found no clear difference in the incidence of major or minor bleeding events between arms (RR low-dose versus high-dose 2.96, 95% CI 0.12 to 71.34 for major bleeding events; RR low-dose versus high-dose 1.38, 95% CI 0.46 to 4.13 for minor bleeding). This study also reported on the incidence of deep vein thrombosis when comparing the high versus low dose of heparin and reported a non-significant difference (RR low-dose versus high-dose 0.34, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.28). The other study lacked information about bleeding. Additional side effects of heparin other than bleeding events were not reported in either of the studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to the limitations of the current evidence, small number of included studies, and lack of details reported in one study, we are unable to determine the effects of different dosing regimens of unfractionated heparin for the prevention of vascular thrombosis during cardiac catheterization in children. Further adequately powered, randomized clinical trials are needed.
在过去二十年中,儿科心导管检查的作用有了显著进展,已从主要的诊断工具演变为先天性心脏病患儿的主要治疗方式。血管并发症,尤其是动脉血栓形成,是心导管检查后最常见的不良事件。1974年,普通肝素在降低儿科患者动脉血栓形成发生率方面被证明优于安慰剂。然而,在这种情况下使用普通肝素的最佳剂量仍存在争议。这是对2014年首次发表的综述的更新。
评估在开始心导管检查时(即动脉穿刺后立即)静脉推注低剂量(<100单位/千克)与高剂量(≥100单位/千克)普通肝素,无论是否随后给予肝素维持剂量,对预防儿童术后动脉血栓形成的效果。
Cochrane血管信息专家检索了Cochrane血管专业注册库、CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase和CINAHL数据库以及世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台和ClinicalTrials.gov试验注册库,检索截至2019年10月15日。我们计划对已识别的试验进行参考文献核对以识别其他研究。未应用语言限制。
我们纳入了比较心导管检查前低剂量与高剂量普通肝素的随机或半随机试验。我们选择了在0至18岁儿童中进行的研究。
由一位作者(MLA)对潜在符合条件的研究进行首次筛选。第二次筛选、偏倚风险评估和数据提取由两位作者(MLA、LRB)独立进行。结局(血栓形成事件、出血并发症、其他并发症)被视为二分变量。使用的效应量为风险比(RR)、风险差(RD)和需治疗人数(NNT),并带有95%置信区间(CI)。我们使用GRADE方法评估每个结局的证据确定性。
我们未识别出可纳入本综述的新研究。总共纳入了两项研究,共有492名参与者。我们对两项研究中的一项的偏倚风险存在担忧。由于存在偏倚风险担忧和不精确性,我们关键结局的证据确定性被降级为中等。动脉血栓形成事件风险的置信区间与高剂量或低剂量普通肝素方案的益处相符(低剂量与高剂量的RR为1.06,95%CI为0.58至1.92)。只有一项研究报告了出血事件的频率,并且发现两组之间主要或轻微出血事件的发生率没有明显差异(主要出血事件的低剂量与高剂量RR为2.96,95%CI为0.12至71.34;轻微出血的低剂量与高剂量RR为1.38,95%CI为0.46至4.13)。该研究还报告了比较高剂量与低剂量肝素时深静脉血栓形成的发生率,并报告无显著差异(低剂量与高剂量的RR为0.34,95%CI为0.01至8.28)。另一项研究缺乏关于出血的信息。两项研究均未报告除出血事件外肝素的其他副作用。
由于现有证据的局限性、纳入研究数量少以及一项研究报告细节不足,我们无法确定不同剂量方案的普通肝素在预防儿童心导管检查期间血管血栓形成方面的效果。需要进一步开展有足够样本量的随机临床试验。