Central versus peripheral arterial cannulation and neurological outcomes after thoracic aortic surgery: meta-analysis and meta-regression of 4459 patients

Central and Peripheral Cannulation for Cardiopulmonary Bypass in Fetal Sheep: A Comparative Study

Objective:In-utero correction is an option for treatment of critical congenital heart diseases (CHDs). Fetal cardiac surgery for CHDs is dependent on the reliable use of fetal cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), but this technology remains experimental. In this study, we established fetal CPB models with central and peripheral cannulation to explore the differences between the two cannulation strategies.

Methods: Ten fetal sheep with 90–110 gestational days were randomized into central cannulation (n = 5) and peripheral cannulation (n = 5) groups. All fetal CPB models were successfully established. At each time point (0, 30, and 60 min after initiation of CPB), echocardiography was performed. Blood samples were also collected for blood gas analysis and tests of myocardial enzymes and liver and kidney function.

Results: In the central cannulation group, right ventricular Tei index significantly increased (p = 0.016) over time. Compared with the peripheral cannulation group, the left ventricular Tei index of the central cannulation group was significantly higher (1.96 ± 0.31 vs. 0.45 ± 0.19, respectively; p = 0.028) and the stroke volume was lower (0.46 ± 0.55 vs. 2.13 ± 0.05, respectively; p = 0.008) at 60 min after CPB. Levels of liver and kidney injury markers and of acid-base balance, including alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase/ALT ratio, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), BUN/creatinine ratio, base excess and bicarbonates, were significantly higher for peripheral than for central cannulation. Other important physiologic parameters, including heart rate, blood pressure, myocardial enzymes, umbilical artery beat index and resistance index, left ventricular Tei index, and left and right ventricular stroke volume, were comparable between the two groups.

Conclusions: Both central and peripheral cannulations can be used to establish fetal CPB models. Central cannulation causes more adverse impacts for cardiac function, whereas peripheral cannulation is more susceptible to complications related to inadequate organ perfusion.

Intraoperative inadvertent piercing of the aortic arch: case report

Aortic injury is a rarely encountered complication of spinal surgery. The authors report a case of a 32-year-old woman with a T3 tumor who experienced an intraoperative aortic arch injury during T3 spondylectomy. The patient was successfully treated with no postoperative neurological deficits.

Innominate vs. Axillary Artery Cannulation in Aortic Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether axillary artery cannulation has supremacy over innominate artery cannulation in thoracic aortic surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was undertaken among the four major databases (PubMed, Excerpta Medica dataBASE [EMBASE], Scopus, and Ovid) to identify all randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials comparing axillary to innominate artery cannulation in thoracic aortic surgery. Databases were evaluated and assessed up to March 2017.

RESULTS

Only three studies fulfilled the criteria for this meta-analysis, including 534 patients. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was significantly shorter in the innominate group (P=0.004). However, the innominate group had significantly higher risk of prolonged intubation > 48 hours (P=0.04) than the axillary group. Further analysis revealed no significant difference between the innominate and axillary groups for deep hypothermic circulatory arrest time (P=0.06). The relative risks for temporary and permanent neurological deficits as well as in-hospital mortality were not significantly different for both groups (P=0.90, P=0.49, and P=0.55, respectively). Length of hospital stay was similar for both groups.

CONCLUSION

There is no superiority of axillary over innominate artery cannulation in thoracic aortic surgery in terms of perioperative outcomes; however, as the studies were limited, larger scale comparative studies are required to provide a solid evidence base for choosing optimal arterial cannulation site.