The effects of posterior pericardiotomy on pericardial effusion, tamponade, and atrial fibrillation after coronary artery surgery

Pericardiotomy and atrial fibrillation after isolated coronary artery bypass grafting: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 16 randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and pericardial effusion are notable complications following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), contributing to increased morbidity and healthcare costs. Posterior pericardiotomy has been proposed to mitigate these complications. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the efficacy of posterior pericardiotomy in reducing postoperative AF and pericardial effusion in isolated CABG patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search, adhering to PRISMA guidelines, was conducted across PubMed, MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase, Scopus, the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2023. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylactic posterior pericardiotomy to control treatments in adult CABG patients were included. The primary outcomes assessed were the incidences of postoperative AF and pericardial effusion.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis incorporated 16 RCTs with a total of 2414 patients. The findings demonstrated a significant reduction in the incidence of postoperative AF (Odds Ratio = 0.34, 95 % CI: 0.25-0.48, P < 0.00001) and pericardial effusion (Odd Ratio = 0.24, 95 % CI: 0.15-0.38, P < 0.0001) in the group undergoing posterior pericardiotomy. However, the analysis revealed substantial heterogeneity and publication bias in the included studies.

CONCLUSION

The posterior pericardiotomy is effective in reducing the incidences of AF and pericardial effusion in patients undergoing isolated CABG. Despite the positive outcomes, the presence of heterogeneity and publication bias warrants a cautious interpretation of the results and underscores the need for further multicentre RCTs in this area.

Posterior pericardiotomy for the prevention of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 25 randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) associated with postoperative pericardial effusion is the most commonly reported adverse event after cardiac surgery.

AIMS

We aimed to determine the role of posterior pericardiotomy in preventing postoperative AF (POAF).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid, and EBSCO from inception until 30 June 2022. We included randomised clinical trials (RCTs) that compared posterior pericardiotomy (PP) versus control (no PP) in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. The primary endpoint was the incidence of POAF after cardiac surgery. The secondary endpoints were supraventricular arrhythmias, early/late pericardial effusion, pericardial tamponade, pleural effusion, length of hospital/intensive care unit stay, intra-aortic balloon pump use, revision surgery for bleeding, and mortality.

RESULTS

Twenty-five RCTs comprising 4,467 patients were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall incidence rate of POAF was 11.7% in the PP group compared with 23.67% in the no PP or control group, with a significant decrease in the risk of POAF following PP (odds ratio [OR] 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38-0.61). Compared with the control group, the risk of supraventricular tachycardia (OR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.43-0.89), early pericardial effusion (OR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.22-0.46), late pericardial effusion (OR 0.15, 95% CI: 0.09-0.25), and pericardiac tamponade (OR 0.18, 95% CI: 0.10-0.33) were lower in the PP group.

CONCLUSIONS

PP is an effective intervention for reducing the risk of POAF after cardiac surgery. Also, PP is economically efficient in terms of decreasing the length of hospital stay.

Effect of posterior pericardiotomy in cardiac surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Posterior pericardiotomy (PP) has been shown to reduce the incidence of pericardial effusion and postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) after cardiac surgery. However, the procedure and the totality of its effects are poorly known in the cardiac surgery community. We performed a study-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the impact of PP in cardiac surgery patients.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted on three medical databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Cochrane Library) to identify RCTs reporting outcomes of patients that received a PP or no intervention after cardiac surgery. The primary outcome was the incidence of POAF. Key secondary outcomes were operative mortality, incidence of pericardial and pleural effusion, cardiac tamponade, length of stay (LOS), pulmonary complications, amount of chest drainage, need for intra-aortic balloon pump, and re-exploration for bleeding.

Results

Eighteen RCTs totaling 3,531 patients were included. PP was associated with a significantly lower incidence of POAF (odds ratio [OR] 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32-0.64, P < 0.0001), early (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.10-0.34, P < 0.0001) and late pericardial effusion (incidence rate ratio 0.13, 95% CI 0.06-0.29, P < 0.0001), and cardiac tamponade (risk difference -0.02, 95% CI -0.04 to -0.01, P = 0.001). PP was associated with a higher incidence of pleural effusion (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.06-1.90, P = 0.02), but not pulmonary complications (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.56-1.19; P = 0.38). No differences in other outcomes, including operative mortality, were found.

Conclusions

PP is a safe and effective intervention that significantly decreases the incidence of POAF and pericardial effusion following cardiac surgery.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=261485, identifier: CRD42021261485.

Posterior pericardiotomy to prevent new-onset atrial fibrillation after coronary artery bypass grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 10 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with adverse events after cardiac surgery. Multiple studies have reported that posterior pericardiotomy (PP) may be effective for preventing AF after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), but some conflicting results have been reported and the quality of evidence from previous meta-analyses has been limited. The present study aimed to systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of PP for preventing AF after CABG in adults.

METHODS

We conducted a quantitative meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before May 31, 2021. The primary outcome was AF after CABG under cardiopulmonary bypass. Secondary outcomes included early pericardial effusion, late pericardial effusion, pericardial tamponade, pleural effusion, length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, pulmonary complications, intra-aortic balloon pump use, revision surgery for bleeding, and mortality.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs with 1829 patients (910 in the PP group and 919 in the control group) were included in the current meta-analysis. The incidence of AF was 10.3% (94/910) in the PP group and 25.7% (236/919) in the control group. A random-effects model indicated that incidence of AF after CABG significantly lower in the PP group than in the control group (risk ratio = 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.64, P < 0.0001). PP also effectively reduced the post-CABG occurrence of early pericardial effusion (RR = 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.50; P < 0.05), late pericardial effusion (RR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.02-0.16; P < 0.05), and pericardial tamponade (RR = 0.08, 95% CI 0.02-0.33; P < 0.05) as well as the length of ICU stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 0.91,95% CI 0.57-1.24; P < 0.05), while increasing the occurrence pleural effusion (RR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.19-1.92; P < 0.05). No significant differences length of hospital stay (WMD =  - 0.45, 95% CI - 2.44 to 1.54, P = 0.66), pulmonary complications (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.71-1.39, P = 0.97), revision surgery for bleeding (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.43-1.63, P = 0.60), use of IABP (RR = 1, 95% CI 0.61-1.65, P = 1.0), or death (RR = 0.45, 95% CI 0.07-3.03, P = 0.41) were observed between the PP and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PP may be a safe, effective, and economical method for preventing AF after CABG in adult patients.