Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29016381›Full record

Trial reportInnovations (Philadelphia, Pa.)

Randomized Study Comparing the Effect of Carbon Dioxide Insufflation on Veins Using 2 Types of Endoscopic and Open Vein Harvesting.

Bhuvaneswari Krishnamoorthy, William R Critchley, Janesh Nair, Ignacio Malagon, John Carey, James B Barnard, Paul D Waterworth, Rajamiyer V Venkateswaran, James E Fildes, Ann L Caress and 1 more

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Innovations (Philadelphia, Pa.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Bhuvaneswari KrishnamoorthyFrom the *Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom; †Faculty of Health and Social Care, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, Lancashire, United Kingdom; ‡Manchester Collaborative Centre for Inflammation Research, Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom; and §School of Nursing and Midwifery, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
William R Critchley
Janesh Nair
Ignacio Malagon
John Carey
James B Barnard
Paul D Waterworth
Rajamiyer V Venkateswaran
James E Fildes
Ann L Caress
Nizar Yonan

Funding

Department of Health CDRF-2013-04-040
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of the study was to assess whether the use of carbon dioxide insufflation has any impact on integrity of long saphenous vein comparing 2 types of endoscopic vein harvesting and traditional open vein harvesting.

methodsA total of 301 patients were prospectively randomized into 3 groups. Group 1 control arm of open vein harvesting (n = 101), group 2 closed tunnel (carbon dioxide) endoscopic vein harvesting (n = 100) and Group 3 open tunnel (carbon dioxide) endoscopic vein harvesting (open tunnel endoscopic vein harvesting) (n = 100). Each group was assessed to determine the systemic level of partial arterial carbon dioxide, end-tidal carbon dioxide, and pH. Three blood samples were obtained at baseline, 10 minutes after start of endoscopic vein harvesting, and 10 minutes after the vein was retrieved. Vein samples were taken immediately after vein harvesting without further surgical handling to measure the histological level of endothelial damage. A modified validated endothelial scoring system was used to compare the extent of endothelial stretching and detachment.

resultsThe level of end-tidal carbon dioxide was maintained in the open tunnel endoscopic vein harvesting and open vein harvesting groups but increased significantly in the closed tunnel endoscopic vein harvesting group (P = 0.451, P = 0.385, and P < 0.001). Interestingly, partial arterial carbon dioxide also did not differ over time in the open tunnel endoscopic vein harvesting group (P = 0.241), whereas partial arterial carbon dioxide reduced significantly over time in the open vein harvesting group (P = 0.001). A profound increase in partial arterial carbon dioxide was observed in the closed tunnel endoscopic vein harvesting group (P < 0.001). Consistent with these patterns, only the closed tunnel endoscopic vein harvesting group demonstrated a sudden drop in pH over time (P < 0.001), whereas pH remained stable for both open tunnel endoscopic vein harvesting and open vein harvesting groups (P = 0.105 and P = 0.869, respectively). Endothelial integrity was better preserved in the open vein harvesting group compared with open tunnel endoscopic vein harvesting or closed tunnel endoscopic vein harvesting groups (P = 0.012) and was not affected by changes in carbon dioxide or low pH. Significantly greater stretching of the endothelium was observed in the open tunnel endoscopic open tunnel endoscopic vein harvesting group compared with the other groups (P = 0.003).

conclusionsThis study demonstrated that the different vein harvesting techniques impact on endothelial integrity; however, this does not seem to be related to the increase in systemic absorption of carbon dioxide or to the pressurized endoscopic tunnel. The open tunnel endoscopic harvesting technique vein had more endothelial stretching compared with the closed tunnel endoscopic technique; this may be due to manual dissection of the vein. Further research is required to evaluate the long-term clinical outcome of these vein grafts.

Indexed as

AgedCarbon DioxideCoronary Artery BypassEndoscopyEndothelial CellsEndothelium, VascularFemaleHumansInsufflationMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSaphenous VeinTissue and Organ HarvestingVascular Surgical ProceduresCarbon Dioxide

Identifiers

PMID29016381
PMCPMC5768240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.