D'Arrigo Sonia, Perna Francesco, Annetta Maria Giuseppina, Pittiruti Mauro
Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
J Vasc Access. 2023 Jul;24(4):854-863. doi: 10.1177/11297298211054621. Epub 2021 Nov 1.
The aims of our systematic review were to quantify the expected rate of procedural success, early and late complications during CIED implantation using US-guided puncture of the axillary vein and to perform a meta-analysis of those studies that compared the US technique (intervention) versus conventional techniques (control) in terms of complication rates. MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched for eligible studies. Pooled Odds Ratio (OR) and Pooled Mean Difference (PMD) for each predictor were calculated. The quality of evidence (QOE) was evaluated according to the GRADE guidelines. Thirteen studies were included a total of 2073 patients. The overall success of US-guided venipuncture for CIED implantation was 96.8%. As regards early complications, pneumothorax occurred in 0.19%, arterial puncture in 0.63%, and severe hematoma/bleeding requiring intervention in 1.1%. No cases of hemothorax, brachial plexus, or phrenic nerve injury were reported. As regards late complications, the incidence of pocket infection, venous thromboembolism, and leads dislodgement was respectively 0.4%, 0.8%, and 1.2%. In the meta-analysis (five studies), the intervention group (US-guided venipuncture) had a trend versus a lower likelihood of having a pneumothorax (0.19% vs 0.75%, = 0.21), pocket hematoma (0.8% vs 1.7%, = 0.32), infection (0.28% vs 1.05%, = 0.29) than the control group, but this did not reach statistical significance. The overall QOE was low or very low. In conclusions we found that the US-guided axillary venipuncture for CIEDs implantation was associated with a low incidence of early and late complications and a steep learning curve.
我们系统评价的目的是量化使用超声引导穿刺腋静脉进行心脏植入电子设备(CIED)植入术的预期手术成功率、早期和晚期并发症发生率,并对那些比较超声技术(干预)与传统技术(对照)并发症发生率的研究进行荟萃分析。检索了MEDLINE、ISI科学网和EMBASE以查找符合条件的研究。计算每个预测指标的合并比值比(OR)和合并平均差(PMD)。根据GRADE指南评估证据质量(QOE)。纳入了13项研究,共2073例患者。超声引导下CIED植入术的静脉穿刺总体成功率为96.8%。关于早期并发症,气胸发生率为0.19%,动脉穿刺发生率为0.63%,严重血肿/出血需要干预的发生率为1.1%。未报告血胸、臂丛神经或膈神经损伤病例。关于晚期并发症,囊袋感染、静脉血栓栓塞和导线移位的发生率分别为0.4%、0.8%和1.2%。在荟萃分析(五项研究)中,干预组(超声引导静脉穿刺)与对照组相比,发生气胸(0.19%对0.75%,P = 0.21)、囊袋血肿(0.8%对1.7%,P = 0.32)、感染(0.28%对1.05%,P = 0.29)的可能性有降低趋势,但未达到统计学意义。总体证据质量低或非常低。总之,我们发现超声引导下腋静脉穿刺进行CIED植入术的早期和晚期并发症发生率低,且学习曲线较陡。