Improving coronary artery bypass grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of adopting transit-time flow measurement

Author:

Thuijs Daniel J F M1,Bekker Margreet W A1,Taggart David P2,Kappetein A Pieter1,Kieser Teresa M3,Wendt Daniel4,Di Giammarco Gabriele5,Trachiotis Gregory D6,Puskas John D7,Head Stuart J1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands

2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK

3. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiac Sciences, Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada

4. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, West German Heart and Vascular Centre, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany

5. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Università degli Studi “G. D’Annunzio” Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy

6. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Veterans Affairs Medical Centre, Washington, DC, USA

7. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mount Sinai Saint Luke’s, New York, NY, USA

Abstract

Summary Despite there being numerous studies of intraoperative graft flow assessment by transit-time flow measurement (TTFM) on outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the adoption of contemporary TTFM is low. Therefore, on 31 January 2018, a systematic literature search was performed to identify articles that reported (i) the amount of grafts classified as abnormal or which were revised or (ii) an association between TTFM and outcomes during follow-up. Random-effects models were used to create pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of (i) the rate of graft revision per patient, (ii) the rate of graft revision per graft and (iii) the rate of graft revision among grafts deemed abnormal based on TTFM parameters. The search yielded 242 articles, and 66 original articles were included in the systematic review. Of those articles, 35 studies reported on abnormal grafts or graft revisions (8943 patients, 15 673 grafts) and were included in the meta-analysis. In 4.3% of patients (95% CI 3.3–5.7%, I2 = 73.9) a revision was required and 2.0% of grafts (95% CI 1.5–2.5%; I2 = 66.0) were revised. The pooled rate of graft revisions among abnormal grafts was 25.1% (95% CI 15.5–37.9%; I2 = 80.2). Studies reported sensitivity ranging from 0.250 to 0.457 and the specificity from 0.939 to 0.984. Reported negative predictive values ranged from 0.719 to 0.980 and reported positive predictive values ranged from 0.100 to 0.840. This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that TTFM could improve CABG procedures. However, due to heterogeneous data, drawing uniform conclusions appeared challenging. Future studies should focus on determining the optimal use of TTFM and assessing its diagnostic accuracy.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine,General Medicine,Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3