S T Chalegre1, M P B O Sá2, F Gonçalves de Rueda3, P R Salerno3, F P Vasconcelos3, R C Lima2. 1. Division of Cardiovascular Surgery of Pronto Socorro Cardiológico de Pernambuco - PROCAPE, Recife, Brazil University of Pernambuco - UPE, Recife, Brazil Nucleus of Postgraduate and Research in Health Sciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences and Biological Sciences Institute - FCM/ICB, Recife, Brazil schalegre@hotmail.com. 2. Division of Cardiovascular Surgery of Pronto Socorro Cardiológico de Pernambuco - PROCAPE, Recife, Brazil University of Pernambuco - UPE, Recife, Brazil Nucleus of Postgraduate and Research in Health Sciences, Faculty of Medical Sciences and Biological Sciences Institute - FCM/ICB, Recife, Brazil. 3. Division of Cardiovascular Surgery of Pronto Socorro Cardiológico de Pernambuco - PROCAPE, Recife, Brazil University of Pernambuco - UPE, Recife, Brazil.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thoracic aortic surgeries remain with high mortality rates, often associated with postoperative neurological complications. The choice of the right cannulation site is extremely important for suitable blood supply and maintenance of vital functions, especially of the central nervous system. OBJECTIVES: To compare the influence of central versus peripheral arterial cannulation on neurological outcomes in patients undergoing thoracic aortic surgery through systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL/CCTR, SciELO, LILACS and reference lists of relevant articles were searched for clinical studies that reported in-hospital neurological outcomes after central or peripheral arterial cannulation during thoracic aortic surgery procedures until December 2013. The principal summary measures were Odds Ratio (OR) for central compared to peripheral arterial cannulation with 95% confidence interval (CI) and p-values considered statistically significant when <0.05. The ORs were combined across studies, using the DerSimonian-Laird random effects model and fixed effects model using the Mantel-Haenszel model--both models were weighted. The meta-analysis was completed using the software Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 2 (Biostat Inc., Englewood, NJ). RESULTS: Six studies were identified and included a total of 4459 patients (1180 for central and 3279 for peripheral cannulation). There was no significant difference between the central and peripheral groups regarding neurological outcomes. The meta-regression evidenced no relationship between neurological outcomes and the variables age, sex, previous coronary event, previous neurological event, urgency surgery, cardiopulmonary bypass time, activated clotting time and esophageal temperature with p > 0,05. CONCLUSION: When it comes to neurological outcomes in patients undergoing thoracic aortic surgery, there was no evidence that argues in favor of any choice of arterial cannulation site, which makes us reject any superiority of one approach over the other in this regard.
BACKGROUND: Thoracic aortic surgeries remain with high mortality rates, often associated with postoperative neurological complications. The choice of the right cannulation site is extremely important for suitable blood supply and maintenance of vital functions, especially of the central nervous system. OBJECTIVES: To compare the influence of central versus peripheral arterial cannulation on neurological outcomes in patients undergoing thoracic aortic surgery through systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL/CCTR, SciELO, LILACS and reference lists of relevant articles were searched for clinical studies that reported in-hospital neurological outcomes after central or peripheral arterial cannulation during thoracic aortic surgery procedures until December 2013. The principal summary measures were Odds Ratio (OR) for central compared to peripheral arterial cannulation with 95% confidence interval (CI) and p-values considered statistically significant when <0.05. The ORs were combined across studies, using the DerSimonian-Laird random effects model and fixed effects model using the Mantel-Haenszel model--both models were weighted. The meta-analysis was completed using the software Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 2 (Biostat Inc., Englewood, NJ). RESULTS: Six studies were identified and included a total of 4459 patients (1180 for central and 3279 for peripheral cannulation). There was no significant difference between the central and peripheral groups regarding neurological outcomes. The meta-regression evidenced no relationship between neurological outcomes and the variables age, sex, previous coronary event, previous neurological event, urgency surgery, cardiopulmonary bypass time, activated clotting time and esophageal temperature with p > 0,05. CONCLUSION: When it comes to neurological outcomes in patients undergoing thoracic aortic surgery, there was no evidence that argues in favor of any choice of arterial cannulation site, which makes us reject any superiority of one approach over the other in this regard.