Suppr超能文献

经导管与外科手术封堵房间隔缺损的临床结局比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Transcatheter versus surgical closure of atrial septal defects: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes.

机构信息

College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Department of General Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.

出版信息

Cardiol Young. 2022 Jan;32(1):1-9. doi: 10.1017/S1047951121004583. Epub 2021 Nov 25.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Atrial septal defects are a common form of CHD and dependent on the size and nature of atrial septal defects, closure may be warranted. The paper aims to compare outcomes of transcatheter versus surgical repair of atrial septal defects.

METHODS

A comprehensive electronic literature search was conducted. Primary studies were included if they compared both closure techniques. Primary outcomes included procedural success, mortality, and reintervention rate. Secondary outcomes included residual defect and mean hospital stay.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies were included in meta-analysis. Mean total hospital stay was significantly shorter in the transcatheter cohort across both the adult (95% confidence interval, mean difference -4.05 (-4.78, -3.32) p < 0.00001) and paediatric populations (95% confidence interval, mean difference -4.78 (-5.97, -3.60) p < 0.00001). There were significantly fewer complications in the transcatheter group across both the adult (odds ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval, [0.28, 0.72], p < 0.00001) and paediatric cohorts (odds ratio 0.26, 95% confidence interval, [0.14, 0.49], p < 0.00001). No significant difference in overall mortality was found between transcatheter versus surgical closure across the two groups, adult (odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval, [0.40, 1.45], p = 0.41), paediatrics (odds ratio 0.62, 95% confidence interval, [0.21, 1.83], p = 0.39).

CONCLUSION

Both transcatheter and surgical approaches are safe and effective techniques for atrial septal defect closure. Our study has demonstrated the benefits of transcatheter closure in terms of lower complication rates and mean hospital stay. However, surgery still has a place for more complex closure and, as we have demonstrated, shows no difference in mortality.

摘要

背景

房间隔缺损是常见的先天性心脏病,取决于房间隔缺损的大小和性质,可能需要进行封堵。本文旨在比较经导管与手术修复房间隔缺损的结果。

方法

进行了全面的电子文献检索。如果研究比较了两种封堵技术,则将其纳入主要研究。主要结局包括手术成功率、死亡率和再干预率。次要结局包括残余缺损和平均住院时间。

结果

共有 33 项研究纳入荟萃分析。在成人(95%置信区间,平均差异-4.05[-4.78,-3.32],p<0.00001)和儿科人群(95%置信区间,平均差异-4.78[-5.97,-3.60],p<0.00001)中,经导管组的平均总住院时间明显更短。在成人(比值比 0.45,95%置信区间,[0.28,0.72],p<0.00001)和儿科(比值比 0.26,95%置信区间,[0.14,0.49],p<0.00001)两组中,经导管组的并发症明显更少。在两组中,经导管与手术封堵的总死亡率均无显著差异,成人(比值比 0.76,95%置信区间,[0.40,1.45],p=0.41),儿科(比值比 0.62,95%置信区间,[0.21,1.83],p=0.39)。

结论

经导管和手术方法都是安全有效的房间隔缺损封堵技术。我们的研究表明,经导管封堵在降低并发症发生率和平均住院时间方面具有优势。然而,手术仍然适用于更复杂的封堵,并且如我们所证明的那样,在死亡率方面没有差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验