OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of the bicaval and the biatrial standard techniques in orthotopic heart transplantation. METHODS: A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. As data sources, we used the electronic databases EMBASE and Medline (1966-August 2006), hand searching in 4 journals, expert consultation, and reference lists of reviews. Observational and randomized and prospective and retrospective controlled trials that reported outcomes on the 2 techniques of heart transplantation were considered. RESULTS: A total of 23 retrospective and 18 prospective studies were included. Meta-analyses of prospective trials including between 228 and 472 patients revealed significant superiority of the bicaval technique in comparison with the biatrial procedure for early atrial pressure (weighted mean difference, -3.95; 95% confidence interval, -6.50 to -1.40), perioperative mortality (odds ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.17 to 0.98), tricuspid valve regurgitation (odds ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.15 to 0.36), and sinus rhythm (odds ratio, 7.01; 95% confidence interval, 2.57 to 19.13). The latter also showed a significant difference in the analysis of retrospective studies (odds ratio, 2.69; 95% confidence interval, 1.55 to 4.66). CONCLUSION: In summary, this systematic review and meta-analysis provides evidence of clinically relevant beneficial effects of the bicaval technique in comparison with those of the standard technique. Nevertheless, the longer-term beneficial effects of the bicaval technique remain to be evaluated.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of the bicaval and the biatrial standard techniques in orthotopic heart transplantation. METHODS: A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. As data sources, we used the electronic databases EMBASE and Medline (1966-August 2006), hand searching in 4 journals, expert consultation, and reference lists of reviews. Observational and randomized and prospective and retrospective controlled trials that reported outcomes on the 2 techniques of heart transplantation were considered. RESULTS: A total of 23 retrospective and 18 prospective studies were included. Meta-analyses of prospective trials including between 228 and 472 patients revealed significant superiority of the bicaval technique in comparison with the biatrial procedure for early atrial pressure (weighted mean difference, -3.95; 95% confidence interval, -6.50 to -1.40), perioperative mortality (odds ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.17 to 0.98), tricuspid valve regurgitation (odds ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.15 to 0.36), and sinus rhythm (odds ratio, 7.01; 95% confidence interval, 2.57 to 19.13). The latter also showed a significant difference in the analysis of retrospective studies (odds ratio, 2.69; 95% confidence interval, 1.55 to 4.66). CONCLUSION: In summary, this systematic review and meta-analysis provides evidence of clinically relevant beneficial effects of the bicaval technique in comparison with those of the standard technique. Nevertheless, the longer-term beneficial effects of the bicaval technique remain to be evaluated.
Authors: David J Goldberg; Michael D Quartermain; Andrew C Glatz; E Kevin Hall; Erin Davis; Stephanie A Kren; Brian D Hanna; Meryl S Cohen Journal: Pediatr Transplant Date: 2011-04-25
Authors: Srinivasan Sattiraju; Shashank Vats; Balaji Krishnan; Sun K Kim; Erin Austin; Ilknur Can; Venkatakrishna Tholakanahalli; David G Benditt; Lin Y Chen Journal: J Atr Fibrillation Date: 2012-12-16
Authors: Rasmus Rivinius; Matthias Helmschrott; Arjang Ruhparwar; Ann-Kathrin Rahm; Fabrice F Darche; Dierk Thomas; Tom Bruckner; Philipp Ehlermann; Hugo A Katus; Andreas O Doesch Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-11-02 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Osamah Aldoss; Nofil I Arain; Jeffrey M Vinocur; Jeremiah Menk; Rebecca K Ameduri; Roosevelt Bryant; Lazaros K Kochilas; Daniel H Gruenstein Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2013-04-12 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Wobbe Bouma; Johan Brügemann; Inez J Wijdh-den Hamer; Theo J Klinkenberg; Bart M Koene; Michiel Kuijpers; Michiel E Erasmus; Iwan Cc van der Horst; Massimo A Mariani Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2012-09-29 Impact factor: 1.637