Published in

BMJ Publishing Group, BMJ Open, 6(13), p. e072545, 2023

DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072545

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Comparative effects of off-pump and multiple cardiopulmonary bypass strategies in coronary artery bypass grafting surgery: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Journal article published in 2023 by Jia Tan, Sizhe Gao, Yongnan Li ORCID, Xuehan Li, Lei Du ORCID, Bingyang Ji
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

IntroductionMultiple revascularisation strategies with or without cardiac arrest have been developed to minimise the negative effects of cardiopulmonary bypass interventions during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. Several observational and randomised studies have evaluated the efficacy of these interventions. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of four prevalent revascularisation strategies with/without cardiopulmonary bypass interventions in CABG surgery.Methods and analysisWe will search on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials and observational cohort studies comparing outcomes of CABG surgery under conventional on-pump, off-pump, on-pump beating heart and minimal extracorporeal circulation technology. All English articles published before 30 November 2022 will be considered. The primary outcome will be 30‐day mortality. The secondary outcomes will be various early and late adverse events after CABG surgery. The Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale will be used to assess the quality of included articles. A random-effects pairwise meta-analysis will be performed to report the head-to-head comparison. Then, the network meta-analysis will be performed using a Bayesian framework with random-effects models.Ethics and disseminationThis research does not require the approval of an ethics committee as it relies on reviewing literature and does not involve dealing with humans or animals. The findings of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42023381279.