The great vessel freeze-out: A meta-analysis of conventional versus frozen elephant trunks in aortic arch surgery

9Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The optimal treatment strategy for complex aortic arch and proximal descending aortic pathologies remains controversial. Despite the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique's increasing popularity, its use over the conventional elephant trunk (CET) remains a matter of physician preference and outcomes are varied. Methods: This meta-analysis of available comparative studies of FET versus CET sought to examine differences in survival, reintervention, and adverse events. The following databases were searched from inception—May 2020: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library. Studies retrieved were then screened for eligibility against predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria with a protocol registered on Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/hrfze/. Results: The search identified 1911 citations, with five studies included. The resultant meta-analysis included 313 CET and 292 FET cases. FET had lower perioperative mortality (risk ratio [RR]: 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.42; 0.60], p

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Vernice, N. A., Wingo, M. E., Walker, P. B., Demetres, M., Stalter, L. N., Yang, Q., & de Biasi, A. R. (2022, August 1). The great vessel freeze-out: A meta-analysis of conventional versus frozen elephant trunks in aortic arch surgery. Journal of Cardiac Surgery. John Wiley and Sons Inc. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocs.16596

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free