Home > Journals > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery > Past Issues > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2018 December;59(6) > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2018 December;59(6):817-29

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as

 

REVIEW  CARDIAC SECTION 

The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2018 December;59(6):817-29

DOI: 10.23736/S0021-9509.18.10462-9

Copyright © 2018 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Cardiac rehabilitation for patients having cardiac surgery: a systematic review

Fredrike BLOKZIJL 1 , Willem DIEPERINK 2, Frederik KEUS 2, Michiel F. RENEMAN 3, Massimo A. MARIANI 1, Iwan C. van der HORST 2

1 Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands; 2 Department of Critical Care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands; 3 Department of Rehabilitation Medicine University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands



INTRODUCTION: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recommended for all cardiac patients including patients after cardiac surgery. Since the effect of CR after cardiac surgery has not been well established yet, we conducted a systematic review on the effects of CR for patients after cardiac surgery compared to treatment as usual.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), quasi-randomized and prospective observational studies in The Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE was undertaken until October 18th, 2017. Adults after any kind of cardiac surgery were included. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality, other outcomes were serious adverse events, health-related quality of life, work participation, functioning and costs/cost-effectiveness. Risk of bias was evaluated, and the quality of evidence was assessed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eighteen RCTs and 15 observational studies were included. Low risk of bias was only observed in one observational study. Meta-analysis of RCTs suggested no significant difference of CR compared to control on mortality (random-effects relative risk (RR) 0.93 (95% CI: 0.40-1.81), while observational studies suggested statistically significant beneficial effect associated with CR (random-effects RR=0.49, 95% CI: 0.35 - 0.68). CR did not significantly affect any of the other outcomes. Due to the limited data TSA could not be performed.
CONCLUSIONS: The body of evidence does not allow us to reach any reliable conclusions about the effectiveness of CR following cardiac surgery. Future trials need to be conducted with low risks of bias and clearly defined outcomes.


KEY WORDS: Cardiac surgical procedures - Cardiac rehabilitation - Review - Meta-analysis

top of page