Open AccessPre-operative stress testing in the evaluation of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Author(s) -
Bindu Kalesan,
Heidi Nicewarner,
Sunny Intwala,
Christopher Kai-Shun Leung,
Gary J. Balady
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0219145
Subject(s) - medicine , meta analysis , confidence interval , relative risk , sample size determination , medline , stress testing (software) , surgery , statistics , computer science , law , programming language , mathematics , political science
Background Pre-operative stress testing is widely used to evaluate patients for non-cardiac surgeries. However, its value in predicting peri-operative mortality is uncertain. The objective of this study is to assess the type and quality of available evidence in a comprehensive and statistically rigorous evaluation regarding the effectiveness of pre-operative stress testing in reducing 30-day post -operative mortality following non -cardiac surgery. Methods The databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases (from inception to January 27, 2016) were searched for all studies in English. We included studies with pre-operative stress testing prior to 10 different non-cardiac surgery among adults and excluded studies with sample size<15. The data on study characteristics, methodology and outcomes were extracted independently by two observers and checked by two other observers. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. We performed random effects meta-analysis to estimate relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) in two-group comparison and pooled the rates for stress test alone. Heterogeneity was assessed using I 2 and methodological quality of studies using Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The predefined protocol was registered in PROSPERO #CRD42016049212. Results From 1807 abstracts, 79 studies were eligible (297,534 patients): 40 had information on 30-day mortality, of which 6 studies compared stress test versus no stress test. The risk of 30-day mortality was not significant in the comparison of stress testing versus none (RR: 0.79, 95% CI = 0.35–1.80) along with weak evidence for heterogeneity. For the studies that evaluated stress testing without a comparison group, the pooled rates are 1.98% (95% CI = 1.25–2.85) with a high heterogeneity. There was evidence of potential publication bias and small study effects. Conclusions Despite substantial interest and research over the past 40 years to predict 30-day mortality risk among patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery, the current body of evidence is insufficient to derive a definitive conclusion as to whether stress testing leads to reduced peri-operative mortality.