Cargando…

Ultrasound-guided versus anatomic landmark-guided vascular access in cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: Electrophysiology (EP) procedures are nowadays the gold-standard method for tachyarrhythmia treatment with impressive success rates, but also with a considerable risk of complications, mainly vascular. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the safety of ultras...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Triantafyllou, Konstantinos, Karkos, Christos D., Fragakis, Nikolaos, Antoniadis, Antonios P., Meletidou, Magdalini, Vassilikos, Vassilios
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9091764/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35143989
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipej.2022.01.005
_version_ 1784705000240316416
author Triantafyllou, Konstantinos
Karkos, Christos D.
Fragakis, Nikolaos
Antoniadis, Antonios P.
Meletidou, Magdalini
Vassilikos, Vassilios
author_facet Triantafyllou, Konstantinos
Karkos, Christos D.
Fragakis, Nikolaos
Antoniadis, Antonios P.
Meletidou, Magdalini
Vassilikos, Vassilios
author_sort Triantafyllou, Konstantinos
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Electrophysiology (EP) procedures are nowadays the gold-standard method for tachyarrhythmia treatment with impressive success rates, but also with a considerable risk of complications, mainly vascular. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the safety of ultrasound (US)-guided femoral vein access in EP procedures compared to the traditional anatomic landmark-guided method. METHODS: We searched Pubmed (MEDLINE), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane electronic databases for relevant entries, dated from January 1st, 2000 to June 30th, 2021. Only observational studies and randomized controlled trials were included in this analysis. Data extraction included study details, patient characteristics, procedure details, and all types of vascular complications. Complications were classified as major if any intervention, prolongation of hospitalization, or readmission was required. RESULTS: 9 studies (1 randomized controlled trial and 8 observational), with 7858 participants (3743 in the US-guided group, 4115 in the control group), were included in the meta-analysis. Overall vascular complication rates were significantly decreased in the US-guided group compared to the control group (1.2 versus 3.2%, RR = 0.38, 95% CI, 0.27–0.53), in all EP procedures. Sub-group analysis of AF ablation procedures yielded similar results (RR 0.41, 95% CI, 0.29–0.58, p < 0.00001). The event reduction effect was significant for both major and minor vascular complications. CONCLUSION: US-guided vascular access in EP procedures is associated with significantly reduced vascular complications, compared to the standard anatomic landmark-guided approach, regardless of procedure complexity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9091764
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90917642022-05-12 Ultrasound-guided versus anatomic landmark-guided vascular access in cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis Triantafyllou, Konstantinos Karkos, Christos D. Fragakis, Nikolaos Antoniadis, Antonios P. Meletidou, Magdalini Vassilikos, Vassilios Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J Review Article INTRODUCTION: Electrophysiology (EP) procedures are nowadays the gold-standard method for tachyarrhythmia treatment with impressive success rates, but also with a considerable risk of complications, mainly vascular. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the safety of ultrasound (US)-guided femoral vein access in EP procedures compared to the traditional anatomic landmark-guided method. METHODS: We searched Pubmed (MEDLINE), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane electronic databases for relevant entries, dated from January 1st, 2000 to June 30th, 2021. Only observational studies and randomized controlled trials were included in this analysis. Data extraction included study details, patient characteristics, procedure details, and all types of vascular complications. Complications were classified as major if any intervention, prolongation of hospitalization, or readmission was required. RESULTS: 9 studies (1 randomized controlled trial and 8 observational), with 7858 participants (3743 in the US-guided group, 4115 in the control group), were included in the meta-analysis. Overall vascular complication rates were significantly decreased in the US-guided group compared to the control group (1.2 versus 3.2%, RR = 0.38, 95% CI, 0.27–0.53), in all EP procedures. Sub-group analysis of AF ablation procedures yielded similar results (RR 0.41, 95% CI, 0.29–0.58, p < 0.00001). The event reduction effect was significant for both major and minor vascular complications. CONCLUSION: US-guided vascular access in EP procedures is associated with significantly reduced vascular complications, compared to the standard anatomic landmark-guided approach, regardless of procedure complexity. Elsevier 2022-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9091764/ /pubmed/35143989 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipej.2022.01.005 Text en © 2022 Indian Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier B.V. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review Article
Triantafyllou, Konstantinos
Karkos, Christos D.
Fragakis, Nikolaos
Antoniadis, Antonios P.
Meletidou, Magdalini
Vassilikos, Vassilios
Ultrasound-guided versus anatomic landmark-guided vascular access in cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title Ultrasound-guided versus anatomic landmark-guided vascular access in cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Ultrasound-guided versus anatomic landmark-guided vascular access in cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Ultrasound-guided versus anatomic landmark-guided vascular access in cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Ultrasound-guided versus anatomic landmark-guided vascular access in cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Ultrasound-guided versus anatomic landmark-guided vascular access in cardiac electrophysiology procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort ultrasound-guided versus anatomic landmark-guided vascular access in cardiac electrophysiology procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9091764/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35143989
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipej.2022.01.005
work_keys_str_mv AT triantafylloukonstantinos ultrasoundguidedversusanatomiclandmarkguidedvascularaccessincardiacelectrophysiologyproceduresasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT karkoschristosd ultrasoundguidedversusanatomiclandmarkguidedvascularaccessincardiacelectrophysiologyproceduresasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT fragakisnikolaos ultrasoundguidedversusanatomiclandmarkguidedvascularaccessincardiacelectrophysiologyproceduresasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT antoniadisantoniosp ultrasoundguidedversusanatomiclandmarkguidedvascularaccessincardiacelectrophysiologyproceduresasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT meletidoumagdalini ultrasoundguidedversusanatomiclandmarkguidedvascularaccessincardiacelectrophysiologyproceduresasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vassilikosvassilios ultrasoundguidedversusanatomiclandmarkguidedvascularaccessincardiacelectrophysiologyproceduresasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis