Duct stenting versus modified Blalock–Taussig shunt in neonates and infants with duct-dependent pulmonary blood flow: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate whether duct stenting is associated with better survival and other clinical outcomes compared with the modified Blalock–Taussig shunt in infants with duct-dependent pulmonary flow. MethodsA systematic search of the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by 4 independent reviewers from inception to March 2019. Meta-analysis was performed using the DerSimonian and Laird method with inverse-variance weighting. The quality of evidence was summarized using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. ResultsSix comparative observational studies were included, of which 3 were rated low risk of bias. There was no difference in 30-day mortality between the Blalock–Taussig shunt and duct stenting groups (risk ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-2.27; P = .96; I2 = 0%). However, there was benefit in favor of duct stenting for medium-term mortality (risk ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.99; P = .05; I2 = 0%). Duct stenting demonstrated a reduced risk for procedural complications compared with the Blalock–Taussig shunt (risk ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.81; P = .005; I2 = 0%). However, there was an increased risk for unplanned reintervention for duct stenting (risk ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-2.26; P < .00001; I2 = 10%). Duct stenting demonstrated shorter mean intensive care unit length of stay (mean difference, −4.69 days; 95% confidence interval, −7.30 to −2.07; P = .0004; I2 = 80%), as well as shorter hospital length of stay (mean difference, −5.78 days; 95% confidence interval, −9.27 to −2.28; P = .0009, I2 = 75%). The overall quality of evidence was rated low using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. ConclusionsDuct stenting demonstrated comparable early mortality, lower medium-term mortality, lower risk of procedural complications, and higher risk of reintervention compared with the Blalock–Taussig shunt.