Soetisna Tri Wisesa, Thamrin Ahmad Muslim Hidayat, Ilham Mahardika Budjana Sutan, Darmawan Marko, Irfan Faris Maulana, Supit Vicky, Hanafy Dudy Arman, Tjubandi Amin, Wartono Dicky Aligheri, Graha Wirya Ayu
Adult Cardiac Surgery Division, Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Harapan Kita National Cardiovascular Center Hospital, S. Parman Street Cavling 87, Jakarta, 11420 Indonesia.
Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Indonesia, Jakarta, 10430 Indonesia.
Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2025 Jan;41(1):7-17. doi: 10.1007/s12055-024-01788-5. Epub 2024 Aug 16.
The no-touch (NT) technique for saphenous vein graft (SVG) harvesting has been gaining popularity as several trials have shown its superiority in maintaining graft patency. However, this technique's clinical outcome and safety are still disputed and the results vary widely. The aim of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was to assess the effectiveness and safety of this method.
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were conducted for this systematic review and meta-analysis. A comprehensive search of the literature was carried out with Embase, Scopus, and PubMed databases. The articles underwent extensive evaluation and analysis.
Six RCTs comparing the NT and conventional (CON) techniques were included. Primary outcomes were measured using graft occlusion. Graft failure rates and clinical outcomes including major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), all-cause death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and leg wound complications were evaluated as secondary outcomes. The NT technique significantly decreased graft occlusion (risk ratio (RR) = 0.58; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.46 to 0.72; < 0.001) and failure (RR = 0.65; 95% CI = 0.54 to 0.77; < 0.001). Safety analysis also showed no significant risk difference for clinical outcomes, and although significantly higher, leg complications in the NT technique are minor and avoidable.
The NT technique increases long-term graft patency with no significant risk difference for clinical outcomes compared to the CON technique. However, the leg wound complications are significantly higher in the NT technique compared to the CON technique.
大隐静脉移植(SVG)获取的非接触(NT)技术越来越受欢迎,因为多项试验表明其在维持移植血管通畅方面具有优越性。然而,该技术的临床疗效和安全性仍存在争议,结果差异很大。本随机对照试验(RCT)的荟萃分析旨在评估该方法的有效性和安全性。
本系统评价和荟萃分析遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南。使用Embase、Scopus和PubMed数据库对文献进行全面检索。对文章进行了广泛的评估和分析。
纳入了6项比较NT技术和传统(CON)技术的RCT。主要结局指标采用移植血管闭塞情况。将移植血管失败率和临床结局,包括主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)、全因死亡、心肌梗死、再次血运重建和腿部伤口并发症作为次要结局进行评估。NT技术显著降低了移植血管闭塞(风险比(RR)=0.58;95%置信区间(CI)=0.46至0.72;P<0.001)和失败率(RR=0.65;95%CI=0.54至0.77;P<0.001)。安全性分析还显示,临床结局的风险差异无统计学意义,尽管NT技术中的腿部并发症明显更高,但属于轻微且可避免的。
与CON技术相比,NT技术可提高移植血管的长期通畅率,且临床结局的风险差异无统计学意义。然而,与CON技术相比,NT技术中的腿部伤口并发症明显更高。