Safety of gelatin solutions for the priming of cardiopulmonary bypass in cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Ghijselings Idris1,Himpe Dirk2,Rex Steffen13

Affiliation:

1. Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospitals of Leuven, KULeuven, Leuven, Belgium

2. Department of Anaesthesiology, ZNA Middelheim, Antwerp, Belgium

3. Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University Hospitals of Leuven, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety of gelatin versus hydroxyethyl starches (HES) and crystalloids when used for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB)-priming in cardiac surgery. MEDLINE (Pubmed), Embase and CENTRAL were searched. We included only randomized, controlled trials comparing CPB-priming with gelatin with either crystalloids or HES-solutions of the newest generation. The primary endpoint was the blood loss during the first 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included perioperative transfusion requirements, postoperative kidney function, postoperative ventilation times and length of stay on the intensive care unit. Sixteen studies were identified, of which only ten met the inclusion criteria, representing a total of 824 adult patients: 4 studies compared gelatin with crystalloid, and 6 studies gelatin with HES priming. Only 2 of the studies comparing HES and gelatin reported postoperative blood loss after 24 hours. No significant difference in postoperative blood loss was found when results of both studies were pooled (SMD -0.12; 95% CI: -0.49, 0.25; P=0.52). Likewise, the pooled results of 3 studies comparing gelatin and crystalloids as a priming solution could not demonstrate significant differences in postoperative bleeding after 24 hours (SMD -0.07; 95% CI: -0.40, 0.26; P=0.68). No differences regarding any of the secondary outcomes could be identified. This systematic review suggests gelatins to have a safety profile which is non-inferior to modern-generation tetrastarches or crystalloids. However, the grade of evidence is rated low owing to the poor methodological quality of the included studies, due to inconsistent outcome reporting and lack of uniform endpoint definitions.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Advanced and Specialised Nursing,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Safety Research,Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging,General Medicine

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