Optimizing Myocardial Protection in Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgeries: A Network Comparison of Del Nido, Histidine-Tryptophan-Ketoglutarate, and Blood Cardioplegia.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Journal of Clinical Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.3390/jcm13226977
Sadeq Al-Hasan-Al-Saegh, Sho Takemoto, Stefano Benenati, Saeed Shafiei, Senol Yavuz, Mattia Galli, Florian Helms, Lukman Amanov, Nunzio Davide De Manna, Saeed Torabi, Jan Karsten, Jan Dieter Schmitto, Fabio Ius, Tim Kaufeld, Jawad Salman, Aron-Frederik Popov, Bastian Schmack, Arjang Ruhparwar, Alina Zubarevich, Alexander Weymann
{"title":"Optimizing Myocardial Protection in Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgeries: A Network Comparison of Del Nido, Histidine-Tryptophan-Ketoglutarate, and Blood Cardioplegia.","authors":"Sadeq Al-Hasan-Al-Saegh, Sho Takemoto, Stefano Benenati, Saeed Shafiei, Senol Yavuz, Mattia Galli, Florian Helms, Lukman Amanov, Nunzio Davide De Manna, Saeed Torabi, Jan Karsten, Jan Dieter Schmitto, Fabio Ius, Tim Kaufeld, Jawad Salman, Aron-Frederik Popov, Bastian Schmack, Arjang Ruhparwar, Alina Zubarevich, Alexander Weymann","doi":"10.3390/jcm13226977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: The optimal choice of cardioplegia solution in minimally invasive cardiac surgeries (MICS) remains debated, as prolonged myocardial protection is essential to avoid interruptions to the surgical flow, which can prolong aortic cross-clamp time and cardiopulmonary bypass time, especially in the constrained surgical field. We conducted a network meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the del Nido (DN), histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK), blood cardioplegia (BC), and St. Thomas' (STH) solutions in MICS. <b>Methods</b>: Medical electronic databases were thoroughly searched without time restrictions, including all types of studies except for study protocols and animal research. The final search was completed in June 2024. Subsequently, a network meta-regression was performed on both primary and secondary endpoints, utilizing R (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, version 3.6.2) for the analysis. Meta-analyses were carried out using Review Manager software. <b>Results</b>: A total of 15 studies, enrolling 2282 patients, were included in the analysis. None of the comparisons showed statistically significant differences in in-hospital mortality between the four cardioplegia solutions (BC vs. HTK, OR: 3.21, 95% CI: 0.13-80.84; DN vs. HTK, OR: 1.42, 95% CI: 0.28-7.23; STH vs. HTK, OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 0.19-8.20). <b>Conclusions</b>: In this network meta-analysis of cardioplegia solutions in MICS, no significant differences were observed in major clinical outcomes across the solutions. Cardioplegia solutions that provide long-lasting myocardial protection with a single dose, such as DN and HTK, were found to be safely applied in MICS. DN was associated with shorter CPB times and HTK was associated with shorter hospital stays, though these differences may not have clinical implications.</p>","PeriodicalId":15533,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","volume":"13 22","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13226977","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives: The optimal choice of cardioplegia solution in minimally invasive cardiac surgeries (MICS) remains debated, as prolonged myocardial protection is essential to avoid interruptions to the surgical flow, which can prolong aortic cross-clamp time and cardiopulmonary bypass time, especially in the constrained surgical field. We conducted a network meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the del Nido (DN), histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK), blood cardioplegia (BC), and St. Thomas' (STH) solutions in MICS. Methods: Medical electronic databases were thoroughly searched without time restrictions, including all types of studies except for study protocols and animal research. The final search was completed in June 2024. Subsequently, a network meta-regression was performed on both primary and secondary endpoints, utilizing R (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, version 3.6.2) for the analysis. Meta-analyses were carried out using Review Manager software. Results: A total of 15 studies, enrolling 2282 patients, were included in the analysis. None of the comparisons showed statistically significant differences in in-hospital mortality between the four cardioplegia solutions (BC vs. HTK, OR: 3.21, 95% CI: 0.13-80.84; DN vs. HTK, OR: 1.42, 95% CI: 0.28-7.23; STH vs. HTK, OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 0.19-8.20). Conclusions: In this network meta-analysis of cardioplegia solutions in MICS, no significant differences were observed in major clinical outcomes across the solutions. Cardioplegia solutions that provide long-lasting myocardial protection with a single dose, such as DN and HTK, were found to be safely applied in MICS. DN was associated with shorter CPB times and HTK was associated with shorter hospital stays, though these differences may not have clinical implications.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
优化微创心脏手术中的心肌保护:Del Nido、组氨酸-色氨酸-酮戊二酸和血液心脏麻痹的网络比较。
背景/目的:微创心脏手术(MICS)中心脏麻痹溶液的最佳选择仍存在争议,因为延长心肌保护时间对于避免手术血流中断至关重要,而手术血流中断会延长主动脉交叉钳夹时间和心肺旁路时间,尤其是在受限的手术野中。我们进行了一项网络荟萃分析,以评估德尔尼多(DN)、组氨酸-色氨酸-酮戊二酸(HTK)、血液心脏麻痹(BC)和圣托马斯(STH)溶液在 MICS 中的安全性和有效性。方法:在没有时间限制的情况下,对医学电子数据库进行了全面搜索,包括除研究方案和动物研究外的所有类型的研究。最终搜索于 2024 年 6 月完成。随后,利用 R(R Foundation for Statistical Computing,3.6.2 版)对主要终点和次要终点进行了网络元回归分析。元分析使用 Review Manager 软件进行。结果共有 15 项研究纳入分析,共纳入 2282 名患者。比较结果显示,四种心脏麻痹溶液的院内死亡率差异均无统计学意义(BC vs. HTK,OR:3.21,95% CI:0.13-80.84;DN vs. HTK,OR:1.42,95% CI:0.28-7.23;STH vs. HTK,OR:1.25,95% CI:0.19-8.20)。结论在这项关于 MICS 中心脏麻痹溶液的网络荟萃分析中,未观察到不同溶液在主要临床结果上存在显著差异。在多器官功能综合征中,DN 和 HTK 等单剂量持久保护心肌的心脏麻痹方案被认为是安全的。DN 可缩短 CPB 时间,HTK 可缩短住院时间,但这些差异可能不会产生临床影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Journal of Clinical Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
6468
审稿时长
16.32 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Medicine (ISSN 2077-0383), is an international scientific open access journal, providing a platform for advances in health care/clinical practices, the study of direct observation of patients and general medical research. This multi-disciplinary journal is aimed at a wide audience of medical researchers and healthcare professionals. Unique features of this journal: manuscripts regarding original research and ideas will be particularly welcomed.JCM also accepts reviews, communications, and short notes. There is no limit to publication length: our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible.
期刊最新文献
Co-Occurrence of Psoriasis and Asthma in the Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Evaluation of Mesh Closure of Laparotomy and Extraction Incisions in Open and Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Anticoagulation Management for Veno-Venous ECMO in COVID-19 Patients: Argatroban as Rescue Therapy in Heparin-Associated Thrombocytopenia. Comparative Effect of Insulin Resistance Reduction and Hormonal Alterations on Type 2 Diabetes Remission After Bariatric Surgery. Association Between Anaesthesiologists' Sex and Anaesthesiology Quality Metrics and Postoperative Outcomes: A Retrospective Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1