Comparison of the fenestrated and non-fenestrated Fontan procedures: A meta-analysis.

backgroundThe benefits of fenestration for patients undergoing Fontan procedure seem controversial at early and late postoperative stages.

objectiveWe aimed to compare the outcomes between the fenestrated and non-fenestrated Fontan procedures.

methodsStudies comparing the fenestrated and non-fenestrated Fontan procedures were identified by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases until July 2018. The assessed variables included postoperative oxygen saturation (SaO2), pulmonary artery pressure, mortality, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, ventilation time, intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, chest tube duration, protein-losing enteropathy, arrhythmia, and other follow-up outcomes including reintervention, stroke/thrombosis, and peak oxygen consumption. A random-effect/fixed-effect model was used to summarize the estimates of the mean difference (MD)/odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup analysis stratified by early and late outcomes was performed.

resultsA total of 1929 Fontan patients from 14 studies were included. The early postoperative SaO2 was lower with fenestration than without fenestration (MD -2.52, 95% CI -4.16 to -0.87, P <.05); however, the late postoperative SaO2 showed no difference between the 2 approaches. The CPB time was shorter without fenestration than with fenestration (MD 10.72, 95% CI 2.54-18.9, P <.05); however, the incidence of arrhythmia was lower with fenestration than without fenestration (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25-0.75, P <.05). Other variables showed no significant differences between the 2 approaches in Fontan patients.

conclusionFenestration appears to result in a lower incidence of arrhythmia but with a longer CPB time and lower early SaO2. Other outcomes are comparable between the 2 approaches.