Background: The optimal nadir temperature for hypothermic circulatory arrest during aortic arch surgery remains unclear. We aimed to assess and compare clinical outcomes of all three temperature strategies (deep, moderate, and mild hypothermia) using a network meta-analysis.
Methods: After literature search with MEDLINE and EMBASE through December 2021, studies comparing clinical outcomes with deep (<20°C), moderate (20-28°C), or mild (>28°C) hypothermic circulatory arrest were included. The outcomes of interest were perioperative mortality, stroke, transient ischemia attack (TIA), acute kidney injury (AKI), postoperative bleeding, operative time, and length of hospital stay.
Results: Twenty-four comparative studies were identified, including 6018 patients undergoing aortic arch surgery using hypothermic circulatory arrest (deep: 2,978, moderate: 2,525, and mild: 515). Compared to deep hypothermia, mild and moderate hypothermia were associated with lower mortality (mild vs. deep: odds ratio [OR] 0.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.87, moderate vs. deep: OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.54-0.86). In addition, mild hypothermia was associated with lower stroke (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.28-0.89), AKI (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.15-0.88) and postoperative bleeding (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.31-0.97) compared to deep hypothermia. There was no significant difference between mild and moderate hypothermia in mortality, AKI or bleeding occurrence, while mild hypothermia was associated with shorter operative time and hospital stay. There was no significant difference in TIA rate among three groups.
Conclusions: Mild hypothermia was associated with overall more favorable clinical outcomes with comparable neurological complications compared to deep hypothermia. Furthermore, considering the shorter operative time and hospital stay compared with moderate hypothermia, mild hypothermia may be warranted when appropriate adjunctive cerebral perfusion is employed.
Keywords: Aortic arch; hypothermic circulatory arrest; network meta-analysis; systematic review.