Suppr超能文献

哪种腔静脉吻合技术在肝移植后即刻和短期结果方面更优:文献系统评价和专家小组建议。

Which cava anastomotic techniques are optimal regarding immediate and short-term outcomes after liver transplantation: A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations.

机构信息

Division of Transplant, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

James D. Eason Transplant Institute, University of Tennessee, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.

出版信息

Clin Transplant. 2022 Oct;36(10):e14681. doi: 10.1111/ctr.14681.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

It has long been debated whether cava anastomosis should be performed with the piggyback technique or cava replacement, with or without veno-venous bypass (VVB), with or without temporary portocaval shunt (PCS) in the setting of liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To identify whether different cava anastomotic techniques and other maneuvers benefit the recipient regarding short-term outcomes and to provide international expert panel recommendations.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.

METHODS

A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel (CRD42021240979).

RESULTS

Of 3205 records screened, 307 publications underwent full-text assessment for eligibility and 47 were included in qualitative synthesis. Four studies were randomized control trials. Eighteen studies were comparative. The remaining 25 were single-center retrospective noncomparative studies.

CONCLUSION

Based on existing data and expert opinion, the panel cannot recommend one cava reconstruction technique over another, rather the surgical approach should be based on surgeon preference and center dependent, with special consideration toward patient circumstances (Quality of evidence: Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong). The panel recommends against routine use of vevo-venous bypass (Quality of evidence: Very Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong) and against the routine use of temporary porto-caval shunt (Quality of evidence: Very Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong).

摘要

背景

在肝移植中,关于是否应采用劈离式原位肝移植技术(即背驮式技术)或腔静脉置换术,是否应联合或不联合静脉-静脉旁路(venous-venous bypass,VVB),是否应联合或不联合临时门腔分流术(temporary portocaval shunt,PCS)进行腔静脉吻合一直存在争议。

目的

旨在确定不同的腔静脉吻合技术和其他操作对受体的短期结局是否有益,并提供国际专家小组的建议。

资料来源

Ovid MEDLINE、Embase、Scopus、Google Scholar 和 Cochrane Central。

方法

采用 PRISMA 指南和 GRADE 方法进行系统评价,结论来源于国际专家小组(CRD42021240979)。

结果

在筛选出的 3205 条记录中,有 307 篇文献进行了全文评估以确定其是否符合纳入标准,最终有 47 篇文献被纳入定性分析。其中有 4 项研究为随机对照试验,18 项为对照研究,其余 25 项为单中心回顾性非对照研究。

结论

基于现有数据和专家意见,专家组不能推荐一种腔静脉重建技术优于另一种,而应根据外科医生的偏好和中心情况选择手术方式,同时要特别考虑患者的具体情况(证据质量:低 |推荐强度:强)。专家组建议不要常规使用 VVB(证据质量:极低 |推荐强度:强),也不建议常规使用临时 PCS(证据质量:极低 |推荐强度:强)。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f1a5/10078200/6c07a17a0ea4/CTR-36-0-g001.jpg

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