BACKGROUND: The use of thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) is increasing. Similar to open repair, TEVAR carries a risk of spinal cord ischemia (SCI). We undertook a systematic review to determine whether preoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage reduces SCI. METHODS: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and conference abstracts were searched using the keywords thoracic endovascular aortic repair, cerebrospinal fluid, spinal cord ischaemia, TEVAR, and aneurysm. Studies reporting SCI rates and CSF drain rates for TEVAR patients were eligible for inclusion. SCI rates across studies were pooled using random-effects modeling. Study quality was evaluated using the Downs and Black score. RESULTS: Study quality was generally poor to moderate (median Downs and Black score, 9). The systematic review identified 46 eligible studies comprising 4936 patients; overall, SCI affected 3.89% (95% confidence interval, 2.95.05%-4.95%). Series reporting routine prophylactic drain placement or no prophylactic drain placement reported pooled SCI rates of 3.2% and 3.47%, respectively. The pooled SCI rate from 24 series stating that prophylactic drainage was used selectively was 5.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal chord injury is uncommon after TEVAR. The role of prophylactic CSF drainage is difficult to establish from the available literature. High-quality studies are required to determine the role of prophylactic CSF drainage in TEVAR.
BACKGROUND: The use of thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) is increasing. Similar to open repair, TEVAR carries a risk of spinal cord ischemia (SCI). We undertook a systematic review to determine whether preoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage reduces SCI. METHODS: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and conference abstracts were searched using the keywords thoracic endovascular aortic repair, cerebrospinal fluid, spinal cord ischaemia, TEVAR, and aneurysm. Studies reporting SCI rates and CSF drain rates for TEVAR patients were eligible for inclusion. SCI rates across studies were pooled using random-effects modeling. Study quality was evaluated using the Downs and Black score. RESULTS: Study quality was generally poor to moderate (median Downs and Black score, 9). The systematic review identified 46 eligible studies comprising 4936 patients; overall, SCI affected 3.89% (95% confidence interval, 2.95.05%-4.95%). Series reporting routine prophylactic drain placement or no prophylactic drain placement reported pooled SCI rates of 3.2% and 3.47%, respectively. The pooled SCI rate from 24 series stating that prophylactic drainage was used selectively was 5.6%. CONCLUSIONS:Spinal chord injury is uncommon after TEVAR. The role of prophylactic CSF drainage is difficult to establish from the available literature. High-quality studies are required to determine the role of prophylactic CSF drainage in TEVAR.
Authors: Manuel Alonso Pérez; José Manuel Llaneza Coto; José Antonio Del Castro Madrazo; Carlota Fernández Prendes; Mario González Gay; Amer Zanabili Al-Sibbai Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Anna M Sailer; Patricia J Nelemans; Trevor J Hastie; Anne S Chin; Mark Huininga; Peter Chiu; Michael P Fischbein; Michael D Dake; D Craig Miller; G W Schurink; Dominik Fleischmann Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2017-05-16 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Anna M Sailer; Sander M J van Kuijk; Patricia J Nelemans; Anne S Chin; Aya Kino; Mark Huininga; Johanna Schmidt; Gabriel Mistelbauer; Kathrin Bäumler; Peter Chiu; Michael P Fischbein; Michael D Dake; D Craig Miller; Geert Willem H Schurink; Dominik Fleischmann Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Hamdy Awad; Mohamed Ehab Ramadan; Hosam F El Sayed; Daniel A Tolpin; Esmerina Tili; Charles D Collard Journal: Can J Anaesth Date: 2017-10-10 Impact factor: 5.063