Saad Khalid1, Mahima Khatri2, Mishal Shan Siddiqui2, Jawad Ahmed3. 1. Dow Medical College, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan. Electronic address: saadkhalidonly@gmail.com. 2. Dow Medical College, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The effect of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of aorta (REBOA) in lowering mortality rate compared to resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) is inconclusive. In this updated systematic review and meta-analysis, we determined the effectiveness of the two techniques in patients with noncompressible torso hemorrhage (NCTH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Online databases (PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE) were searched until April 23, 2021, for original articles investigating the effect of REBOA on relevant outcomes (e.g., mortality in ED, mortality before discharge, in-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay and length of ICU stay) among NCTH patients in contrast to open aortic occlusion by RT. Data on baseline characteristics and endpoints were extracted. Review Manager version 5.4.1 and OpenMetaAnalyst were used for analyses. Risk ratios (RR) and the weighted mean differences (WMD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Eight studies were included having 3241 patients in total (REBOA: 1179 and RT: 2062). The pooled analysis demonstrated that compared to RT, mortality was significantly lower in the REBOA group in all settings: In emergency department (ED) (RR 0.63 [0.45, 0.87], P = 0.006, I2 = 81%), before discharge (RR= 0.86 [0.75, 0.98], P = 0.03, I2 = 93%), and in-hospital mortality (RR 0.80 [0.68, 0.95], P = 0.009, I2 = 85%). Similarly, the length of ICU stay was significantly lower in REBOA group (WMD = 0.50 [-0.48, 1.48], P = 0.32, I2 =97%). However, no significant differences were observed in the length of hospital stay (WMD = 0.0 [-0.26, 0.26] P = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Our pooled analysis shows REBOA to be effective in reducing mortality among NCTH patients. However, due to limited studies, the positive findings should be viewed discreetly and call for further investigation.
BACKGROUND: The effect of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of aorta (REBOA) in lowering mortality rate compared to resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) is inconclusive. In this updated systematic review and meta-analysis, we determined the effectiveness of the two techniques in patients with noncompressible torso hemorrhage (NCTH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Online databases (PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE) were searched until April 23, 2021, for original articles investigating the effect of REBOA on relevant outcomes (e.g., mortality in ED, mortality before discharge, in-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay and length of ICU stay) among NCTH patients in contrast to open aortic occlusion by RT. Data on baseline characteristics and endpoints were extracted. Review Manager version 5.4.1 and OpenMetaAnalyst were used for analyses. Risk ratios (RR) and the weighted mean differences (WMD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Eight studies were included having 3241 patients in total (REBOA: 1179 and RT: 2062). The pooled analysis demonstrated that compared to RT, mortality was significantly lower in the REBOA group in all settings: In emergency department (ED) (RR 0.63 [0.45, 0.87], P = 0.006, I2 = 81%), before discharge (RR= 0.86 [0.75, 0.98], P = 0.03, I2 = 93%), and in-hospital mortality (RR 0.80 [0.68, 0.95], P = 0.009, I2 = 85%). Similarly, the length of ICU stay was significantly lower in REBOA group (WMD = 0.50 [-0.48, 1.48], P = 0.32, I2 =97%). However, no significant differences were observed in the length of hospital stay (WMD = 0.0 [-0.26, 0.26] P = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Our pooled analysis shows REBOA to be effective in reducing mortality among NCTH patients. However, due to limited studies, the positive findings should be viewed discreetly and call for further investigation.