Literature DB >> 26606882

A network meta-analysis comparing perioperative outcomes of interventions aiming to decrease ischemia reperfusion injury during elective liver resection.

Constantinos Simillis1, Francis P Robertson2, Thalia Afxentiou2, Brian R Davidson2, Kurinchi S Gurusamy2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to compare the perioperative outcomes of interventions aiming to decrease ischemia-reperfusion (IR) injury during elective liver resection.
METHOD: A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method in WinBUGS following the guidelines of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Decision Support Unit. Odds ratios for binary outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes were calculated using a fixed effect model or a random effects model according to model fit.
RESULTS: Forty-four trials with 2,457 patients having undergone liver resection were included and were divided into 8 classes of interventions aimed at decreasing IR injury and a control group, which was hepatectomy alone. There was no difference between the different interventions in mortality, quantity of blood transfusion, and durations of stay in an intensive therapy unit between any pairwise comparisons. Patients treated with ischemic preconditioning, cardiovascular modulators, and miscellaneous interventions had significantly fewer serious adverse events compared with patients undergoing liver resection alone. Ischemic preconditioning patients had significantly fewer transfusion proportions and shorter operative time than patients treated with steroids. Ischemic preconditioning had significantly less operative blood loss compared with all other interventions, and a lesser duration of hospital stay than hepatectomy alone. Sensitivity analysis showed that the drugs sevoflurane (a volatile anesthetic), verapamil (a calcium channel blocker), and gabexate mesilate (a thrombin inhibitor) produced fewer serious adverse events compared with hepatectomy alone.
CONCLUSION: Ischemic preconditioning resulted in multiple beneficial clinical endpoints and further RCTs seem to be needed to confirm its clinical benefits.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26606882     DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.10.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   3.982


  5 in total

1.  Interaction between anesthetic conditioning and ischemic preconditioning on metabolic function after hepatic ischemia-reperfusion in rabbits.

Authors:  Takashige Yamada; Hiromasa Nagata; Shizuko Kosugi; Takeshi Suzuki; Hiroshi Morisaki; Yoshifumi Kotake
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2018-06-21       Impact factor: 2.078

2.  Protocol for a prospective randomized controlled trial of recipient remote ischaemic preconditioning in orthotopic liver transplantation (RIPCOLT trial).

Authors:  Francis P Robertson; Rup Goswami; Graham P Wright; Barry Fuller; Brian R Davidson
Journal:  Transplant Res       Date:  2016-04-06

Review 3.  Ischemic preconditioning modulates ROS to confer protection in liver ischemia and reperfusion.

Authors:  Phillip Bystrom; Nicole Foley; Luis Toledo-Pereyra; Kelly Quesnelle
Journal:  EXCLI J       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 4.068

4.  Effect of Remote Ischaemic Preconditioning on Liver Injury in Patients Undergoing Major Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastasis: A Pilot Randomised Controlled Feasibility Trial.

Authors:  Sanjeev Kanoria; Francis P Robertson; Naimish N Mehta; Giuseppe Fusai; Dinesh Sharma; Brian R Davidson
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Transcriptional changes during hepatic ischemia-reperfusion in the rat.

Authors:  Valerie Zabala; Joan M Boylan; Paul Thevenot; Anderson Frank; Dewahar Senthoor; Varun Iyengar; Hannah Kim; Ari Cohen; Philip A Gruppuso; Jennifer A Sanders
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-31       Impact factor: 3.752

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.