ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of prophylactic use of intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation (IABP) before coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in high risk patients. MethodsDatabases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2014), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were electronically searched from inception to July 2014, to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies about prophylactic use of IABP before CABG in high risk patients. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 6 RCTs and 6 cohort studies involving 1 359 patients were included, of which 633 prophylactically used IABP before CABG (the IABP group) and 736 didn't prophylactically use IABP before CABG (the control group). The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with the control group, prophylactic use of IABP could significantly reduce perioperative mortality (RCT: OR=0.15, 95%CI 0.06 to 0.38, P<0.000 1; cohort study: OR=0.36, 95%CI 0.19 to 0.67, P=0.001) and postoperative LCOS (RCT: OR=0.23, 95%CI 0.12 to 0.43, P<0.000 01; cohort study: OR=0.21, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.43, P<0.000 1); there was no significant difference between two groups in incidence rate of postoperative myocardial infarction (MI) (RCT: OR=0.34, 95%CI 0.10 to 1.11, P=0.07; cohort study: OR=0.56, 95%CI 0.26 to 1.24, P=0.15); the results of combined analyses of RCTs showed that, prophylactic use of IABP could significantly reduce postoperative ICU stay (MD=-42.94, 95%CI -56.11 to -29.76, P<0.000 01) and postoperative hospital stay (MD=-3.83, 95%CI-5.82 to -1.85, P=0.0002), but these differences were not found in the results of combined analyses of cohort studies (MD=-4.68, 95%CI 20.69 to 11.33, P=0.57; MD=-0.77, 95%CI -1.80 to 0.26, P=0.14). ConclusionProphylactic use of IABP before CABG in high risk patients can significantly reduce the perioperative mortality, postoperative LCOS and the length of ICU stay, however it cannot reduce postoperative MI. Due to the limited quantity and quality of included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high quality studies.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of endoscopic radial artery harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). MethodsDatabases including The Cochrane Library (Issue2, 2015), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were searched electronically from inception to August 2015 to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies about endoscopic radial artery harvesting technique versus traditional incision technique for CABG. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 12 studies involving 1359 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that no significant differences were found between the two groups in perioperative mortality (OR=0.66, 95%CI 0.17 to 2.57, P=0.55), the incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction (OR=0.78, 95%CI 0.30 to 2.06, P=0.62), vascular graft patency rate (OR=1.40, 95%CI 0.80 to 2.45, P=0.24) and the incidence of wound infection (OR=0.59, 95%CI 0.33 to 1.07, P=0.08). The endoscopic group showed significantly lower incidence of hematoma formation (OR=0.39, 95%CI 0.20 to 0.74, P=0.004) and paresthesia (OR=0.44, 95%CI 0.22 to 0.88, P=0.02) than that of the incision group. ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that, compared with the incision technique, the endoscopic radial artery harvesting could significantly reduce the incidence of hematoma formation and paresthesia in patients underwent CABG. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by carrying out more high-quality studies.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with single-vessel disease of the left anterior descending artery (LAD). Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2015), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were searched electronically from inception to Oct. 2015, to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about MIDCAB versus PCI for single-vessel disease of the LAD. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. Results A total of 10 RCTs including 1 489 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with the PCI group, the MIDCAB group could significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative target vessel revascularization (OR=0.20，95%CI 0.13 to 2.29，P < 0.000 01), and the incidence of main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (OR=0.44, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.58, P < 0.000 01). No significant differences were found between the two groups in total case mortality (OR=1.23, 95%CI 0.83 to 1.83, P=0.31), cardiogenic death (OR=1.12, 95%CI 0.59 to 2.12, P=0.73), and the incidence of postoperative myocardial infarction (OR=2.16, 95%CI 0.83 to 5.59, P=0.11). Conclusion In reducing the incidences of postoperative target vessels again revascularization and MACCE of patients with single-vessel disease of the LAD, MIDCAB is superior to PCI. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusion still needs to be verified by carrying out more high-quality RCTs.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the long-term efficacy of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus drug-eluting stent implantation (DES-PCI) for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. MethodsWe searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2015), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about CABG versus DES-PCI for patients with coronary multivessel disease from the inception to October 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of seven RCTs, involving 5 723 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with the DES-PCI group, the CABG group had lower 1-year incidence of target vessel revascularization (OR=0.39, 95%CI 0.31 to 0.48, P<0.000 01), 5-year mortality (OR=0.78, 95%CI 0.65 to 0.94, P=0.008), and 5-year incidence of myocardial infarction (OR=0.46, 95%CI 0.37 to 0.58, P<0.000 01). However, 1-year, 2-year and 5-year incidences of stroke in the CABG group were significantly higher than that in the DES-PCI group (all P values <0.05). ConclusionThe available evidence suggests that CABG is superior to DES-PCI for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease in long-term effects, but CABG could increase the incidence of stroke. Due to the quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high-quality RCTs.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of totally thorascopic (TT) and median sternotomy (MS) approaches for atrial septal defect repair (ASDR). MethodsDatabases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2016), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were electronically searched from inception to June 2016, to collect randomized controlled trials or cohort studies about TT vs. MS approaches for ASDR. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 11 cohort studies involving 687 patients were included with 305 patients in the TT group, and 382 patients in the MS group. The results of meta-analysis showed that: The TT group had shorter postoperative ventilation time (MD=-1.49, 95%CI -2.27 to -0.71, P=0.000 2), postoperative ICU stay time (MD=-7.30, 95%CI -12.07 to -2.53, P=0.003), hospital stay time (MD=-2.06, 95%CI -2.80 to -1.32, P<0.000 01) and less postoperative drainage (MD=-199.83, 95%CI -325.96 to -73.70, P=0.002) than the MS group. But the bypass time (MD=9.42, 95%CI 1.55 to 17.30, P=0.02) and aortic clamping time (MD 6.78, 95%CI 3.48 to 10.07, P<0.000 1) of the TT group were significantly longer than those of the MS group. ConclusionCompared with MS, TT can significantly reduce the length of postoperative ventilation, postoperative ICU stay, hospital stay and postoperative drainage. But there are risks of prolonged bypass time and aortic clamping time in the TT group. Due to the quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions still needs to be verified by carrying out more studies.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the effectiveness and safety of aspirin-clopidogrel combined anti-platelet therapy after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). MethodsDatabases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2013), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were searched electronically from their inception to September 2013 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about aspirin-clopidogrel combined anti-platelet therapy after CABG. Two reviewers selected literature independently according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. After data extraction and methological quality assessment of the included studies, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of six RCTs involving 901 patients were included, of which 449 cases were in the aspirin-clopidogrel group (A+C) and 452 cases were in the aspirin with or without placebo group (A+P). The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with A+P, A+C significantly reduced occlusion rates of the saphenous vein graft (RR=0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.80, P=0.000 6). But no significant difference was found between the two groups in occlusion rates of the left internal mammary artery graft (RR=0.88, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.18, P=0.78), radial artery graft (RR=0.43, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.46, P=0.18), pleural fluid drainage volume (MD=-1.68, 95%CI-48.69 to 45.32, P=0.94), incidence of major bleeding events (RR=1.20, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.65, P=0.75), major cardiovascular events (OR=0.81, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.72, P=0.58), and mortality within 30 days (RR=0.64, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.44, P=0.52). ConclusionIn reducing occlusion rates of the saphenous vein graft, the A+C group is more effective than the A+P group. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusion still needs to be verified by carrying out more high-quality RCTs.