Short‐term outcomes of intra‐aortic balloon pump combined with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 561-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Wang ◽  
Zhen Xing
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Intra Aortic Balloon Pump ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with intra-aortic balloon pump for postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Perfusion ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 026765912110425
Author(s):  
Daochao Huang ◽  
Anyi Xu ◽  
QiongChan Guan ◽  
Jie Qin ◽  
Chuang Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Intra Aortic Balloon Pump ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Va Ecmo ◽  
Postcardiotomy Cardiogenic Shock

Objective: Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is currently recommended as a strategy to address the increased afterload in patients who received venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). The benefit of VA-ECMO with IABP in postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock is inconclusive. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the influence of VA-ECMO with IABP for postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCS). Methods: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase were searched for all articles published from 1 January, 1964 to July 11, 2020. Retrospective cohort studies targeting the comparison of VA-ECMO with IABP and isolated VA-ECMO were included in this study. Results: We included 2251 patients in the present study (917 patients in the VA-ECMO with IABP group and 1334 patients in the isolated VA-ECMO group). Deaths occurred in 589 of 917 patients (64.2%) in the VA-ECMO with IABP group and occurred in 885 of 1334 patients (66.3%) in isolated VA-ECMO group. Pooling the results of all studies showed that VA-ECMO with IABP was not related to a reduced in-hospital mortality in patients who received VA-ECMO for PCS (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86–1.04; p = 0.231). In addition, VA-ECMO with IABP was not related to an increased rate of VA-ECMO weaning in patients who received VA-ECMO for PCS (RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.99–1.66; p = 0.058). Conclusions: This study indicates that VA-ECMO with IABP did not improve either in-hospital survival or weaning for VA-ECMO in postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock patients.

scholarly journals Efficacy of left ventricular unloading strategies during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with cardiogenic shock: a protocol for a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pengbin Zhang ◽  
Shilin Wei ◽  
Kerong Zhai ◽  
Jian Huang ◽  
Xingdong Cheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Bayesian Network ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Va Ecmo

Abstract Background: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) has been widely used for patients with refractory cardiogenic shock (CS). A common side-effect of this technic is the resultant increase in left ventricular (LV) afterload which could potentially aggravate myocardial ischemia, delay ventricular recovery, and increase the risk of pulmonary congestion. Several LV unloading strategies have been proposed and implemented to mitigate these complications. However, it is still indistinct that which one is the best choice for clinical application. The objective of this Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) is to summarize the evidence and compare the efficacy of different LV unloading strategies during VA-ECMO.Methods: We will perform a systematic search to identify random controlled trials and cohort studies comparing different LV unloading strategies during VA-ECMO. PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) will be explored from their inception to 31 December 2020. The primary outcome will be in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes will include neurological complications, hemolysis, bleeding, limb ischemia, renal failure, gastrointestinal complications, sepsis, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit, and hospital stays. Pairwise and network meta-analysis will respectively be conducted using Stata (V.16, StataCorp) and Aggregate Data Drug Information System (ADDIS V.1.16.5), and the cumulative probability will be used to rank the included LV unloading strategies. The risk of bias will be conducted using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool or Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) according to their study design. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias assessment will be performed. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) will be conducted to explore the quality of evidence.Discussion: This Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) will address the problem that which strategy could achieve left ventricular (LV) unloading most effectively during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and increase cardiogenic shock patient survival benefit, and will provide evidence for clinical decision-making.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registry number: CRD42020165093.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document