scholarly journals Short-term outcomes in robot-assisted compared to laparoscopic colon cancer resections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedja Cuk ◽  
Mie Dilling Kjær ◽  
Christian Backer Mogensen ◽  
Michael Festersen Nielsen ◽  
Andreas Kristian Pedersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Colon Surgery ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Laparoscopic Colon ◽  
Robot Assisted Surgery

Abstract Background Robot-assisted surgery is increasingly adopted in colorectal surgery. However, evidence for the implementation of robot-assisted surgery for colon cancer is sparse. This study aims to evaluate the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted colon surgery (RCS) for cancer compared to laparoscopic colon surgery (LCS). Methods Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library were searched between January 1, 2005 and October 2, 2020. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies were included. Non-original literature was excluded. Primary endpoints were anastomotic leakage rate, conversion to open surgery, operative time, and length of hospital stay. Secondary endpoints were surgical efficacy and postoperative morbidity. We evaluated risk of bias using RoB2 and ROBINS-I quality assessment tools. We performed a pooled analysis of primary and secondary endpoints. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2, and possible causes were explored by sensitivity- and meta-regression analyses. Publication bias was evaluated by Funnel plots and Eggers linear regression test. The level of evidence was assessed by GRADE. Results Twenty studies enrolling 13,799 patients (RCS 1740 (12.6%) and LCS 12,059 (87.4%) were included in the meta-analysis that demonstrated RCS was superior regarding: anastomotic leakage (odds ratio (OR) = 0.54, 95% CI [0.32, 0.94]), conversion (OR = 0.31, 95% CI [0.23, 0.41]), overall complication rate (OR = 0.85, 95% CI [0.73, 1.00]) and time to regular diet (MD =  − 0.29, 95% CI [− 0.56, 0.02]). LCS proved to have a shortened operative time compared to RCS (MD = 42.99, 95% CI [28.37, 57.60]). Level of evidence was very low according to GRADE. Conclusion RCS showed advantages in colonic cancer surgery regarding surgical efficacy and morbidity compared to LCS despite a predominant inclusion of non-RCT with serious risk of bias assessment and a very low level of evidence.

Exercise interventions in lateral elbow tendinopathy have better outcomes than passive interventions, but the effects are small: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 2123 subjects in 30 trials

2020 ◽  
pp. bjsports-2020-102525
Author(s):  
Stefanos Karanasios ◽  
Vasileios Korakakis ◽  
Rod Whiteley ◽  
Ioannis Vasilogeorgis ◽  
Sarah Woodbridge ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Lateral Elbow ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Wait And See ◽  
Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of exercise compared with other conservative interventions in the management of lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) on pain and function.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsWe used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool 2 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to assess risk of bias and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to grade the certainty of evidence. Self-perceived improvement, pain intensity, pain-free grip strength (PFGS) and elbow disability were used as primary outcome measures.Eligibility criteriaRCTs assessing the effectiveness of exercise alone or as an additive intervention compared with passive interventions, wait-and-see or injections in patients with LET.Results30 RCTs (2123 participants, 5 comparator interventions) were identified. Exercise outperformed (low certainty) corticosteroid injections in all outcomes at all time points except short-term pain reduction. Clinically significant differences were found in PFGS at short-term (mean difference (MD): 12.15, (95% CI) 1.69 to 22.6), mid-term (MD: 22.45, 95% CI 3.63 to 41.3) and long-term follow-up (MD: 18, 95% CI 11.17 to 24.84). Statistically significant differences (very low certainty) for exercise compared with wait-and-see were found only in self-perceived improvement at short-term, pain reduction and elbow disability at short-term and long-term follow-up. Substantial heterogeneity in descriptions of equipment, load, duration and frequency of exercise programmes were evident.ConclusionsLow and very low certainty evidence suggests exercise is effective compared with passive interventions with or without invasive treatment in LET, but the effect is small.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018082703.

scholarly journals Robot-assisted thoracic surgery versus video-assisted thoracic surgery for lung lobectomy or segmentectomy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianglei Ma ◽  
Xiaoyao Li ◽  
Shifu Zhao ◽  
Jiawei Wang ◽  
Wujia Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Thoracic Surgery ◽  
Conversion Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Short Term

Abstract Background It remains no clear conclusion about which is better between robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to compare the short-term and long-term efficacy between RATS and VATS for NSCLC. Methods Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Medline, and Web of Science databases were comprehensively searched for studies published before December 2020. The quality of the articles was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the data analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Fixed or random effect models were applied according to heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were conducted. Results A total of 18 studies including 11,247 patients were included in the meta-analyses, of which 5114 patients were in the RATS group and 6133 in the VATS group. Compared with VATS, RATS was associated with less blood loss (WMD = − 50.40, 95% CI -90.32 ~ − 10.48, P = 0.010), lower conversion rate (OR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.43 ~ 0.60, P < 0.001), more harvested lymph nodes (WMD = 1.72, 95% CI 0.63 ~ 2.81, P = 0.002) and stations (WMD = 0.51, 95% CI 0.15 ~ 0.86, P = 0.005), shorter duration of postoperative chest tube drainage (WMD = − 0.61, 95% CI -0.78 ~ − 0.44, P < 0.001) and hospital stay (WMD = − 1.12, 95% CI -1.58 ~ − 0.66, P < 0.001), lower overall complication rate (OR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 ~ 0.99, P = 0.020), lower recurrence rate (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.36 ~ 0.72, P < 0.001), and higher cost (WMD = 3909.87 USD, 95% CI 3706.90 ~ 4112.84, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between RATS and VATS in operative time, mortality, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Sensitivity analysis showed that no significant differences were found between the two techniques in conversion rate, number of harvested lymph nodes and stations, and overall complication. Conclusions The results revealed that RATS is a feasible and safe technique compared with VATS in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes. Moreover, more randomized controlled trials comparing the two techniques with rigorous study designs are still essential to evaluate the value of robotic surgery for NSCLC.

scholarly journals Prevention of incisional hernia at the site of stoma closure with different reinforcing mesh types: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Hernia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Peltrini ◽  
Nicola Imperatore ◽  
Gaia Altieri ◽  
Simone Castiglioni ◽  
Maria Michela Di Nuzzo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Incisional Hernia ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Mesh Group ◽  
Closure Technique ◽  
Mesh Placement ◽  
Mesh Reinforcement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Significant Superiority

Abstract Purpose To evaluate safety and efficacy of a mesh reinforcement following stoma reversal to prevent stoma site incisional hernia (SSIH) and differences across the prostheses used. Methods A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify comparative studies until September 2020. A meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes and a network meta-analysis for a multiple comparison of the prostheses with each other were performed. Results Seven studies were included in the analysis (78.4% ileostomy and 21.6% colostomy) with a total of 1716 patients with (n = 684) or without (n = 1032) mesh. Mesh placement was associated with lower risk of SSIH (7.8%vs18.1%, OR0.266,95% CI 0.123–0.577, p < 0.001) than no mesh procedures but also with a longer operative time (SMD 0.941, 95% CI 0.462–1.421, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of Surgical Site infection (11.5% vs 11.1%, OR 1.074, 95% CI 0.78–1.48, p = 0.66), seroma formation (4.4% vs 7.1%, OR 1.052, 95% CI 0.64–1.73, p = 0.84), anastomotic leakage (3.7% vs 2.7%, OR 1.598, 95% CI 0.846–3.019, p = 0.149) and length of stay (SMD − 0.579,95% CI − 1.261 to 0.102, p = 0.096) between mesh and no mesh groups. Use of prosthesis was associated with a significant lower need for a reoperation than no mesh group (8.1% vs 12.1%, OR 0.332, 95% CI 0.119–0.930, p = 0.036). Incidence of seroma is lower with biologic than polypropylene meshes but they showed a trend towards poor results compared with polypropylene or biosynthetic meshes. Conclusion Despite longer operative time, mesh prophylactic reinforcement at the site of stoma seems a safe and effective procedure with lower incidence of SSIH, need for reoperation and comparable short-term outcomes than standard closure technique. A significant superiority of a specific mesh type was not identified.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Davide Papola ◽  
Giovanni Ostuzzi ◽  
Federico Tedeschi ◽  
Chiara Gastaldon ◽  
Marianna Purgato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Panic Disorder ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Psychodynamic Therapy ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
First Line ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background Psychotherapies are the treatment of choice for panic disorder, but which should be considered as first-line treatment is yet to be substantiated by evidence. Aims To examine the most effective and accepted psychotherapy for the acute phase of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia via a network meta-analysis. Method We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the most effective and accepted psychotherapy for the acute phase of panic disorder. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CENTRAL, from inception to 1 Jan 2021 for RCTs. Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines were used. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). The protocol was published in a peer-reviewed journal and in PROSPERO (CRD42020206258). Results We included 136 RCTs in the systematic review. Taking into consideration efficacy (7352 participants), acceptability (6862 participants) and the CINeMA confidence in evidence appraisal, the best interventions in comparison with treatment as usual (TAU) were cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) (for efficacy: standardised mean differences s.m.d. = −0.67, 95% CI −0.95 to −0.39; CINeMA: moderate; for acceptability: relative risk RR = 1.21, 95% CI −0.94 to 1.56; CINeMA: moderate) and short-term psychodynamic therapy (for efficacy: s.m.d. = −0.61, 95% CI −1.15 to −0.07; CINeMA: low; for acceptability: RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.54–1.54; CINeMA: moderate). After removing RCTs at high risk of bias only CBT remained more efficacious than TAU. Conclusions CBT and short-term psychodynamic therapy are reasonable first-line choices. Studies with high risk of bias tend to inflate the overall efficacy of treatments. Results from this systematic review and network meta-analysis should inform clinicians and guidelines.

scholarly journals Acupuncture for Managing Cancer-Related Insomnia: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae-Young Choi ◽  
Jong In Kim ◽  
Hyun-Ja Lim ◽  
Myeong Soo Lee
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Sleep Quality ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sham Acupuncture ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
The Other ◽  
Level Of Evidence

Background. Insomnia is a prominent complaint of cancer patients that can significantly affect their quality of life and symptoms related to sleep quality. Conventional drug approaches have a low rate of success in alleviating those suffering insomnia. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of acupuncture in the management of cancer-related insomnia. Methods. A total of 12 databases were searched from their inception through January 2016 without language restriction. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were included if acupuncture was used as the sole intervention or as an adjunct to another standard treatment for any cancer-related insomnia. The data extraction and the risk of bias assessments were performed by 2 independent reviewers. Results. Of the 90 studies screened, 6 RCTs were included. The risk of bias was generally unclear or low. Three RCTs showed equivalent effects on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and 2 RCTs showed the similar effects on response rate to those of conventional drugs at the end of treatment. The other RCT showed acupuncture was better than hormone therapy in the numbers of hours slept each night and number of times woken up each night. The 3 weeks of follow-up in 2 RCTs showed superior effects of acupuncture compared with conventional drugs, and a meta-analysis showed significant effects of acupuncture. Two RCTs tested the effects of acupuncture on cancer-related insomnia compared with sham acupuncture. One RCT showed favourable effects, while the other trial failed to do so. Conclusion. There is a low level of evidence that acupuncture may be superior to sham acupuncture, drugs or hormones therapy. However, the number of studies and effect size are small for clinical significance. Further clinical trials are warranted.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation versus Nissen Fundoplication for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Short Term: A Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ming-yu Chen ◽  
Di-yu Huang ◽  
Angela Wu ◽  
Yi-bin Zhu ◽  
He-pan Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease ◽  
Proton Pump Inhibitor ◽  
Gastroesophageal Reflux ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Reflux Disease ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation ◽  
Short Term

Background. The efficacy of Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation (MSA) and its outcomes for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) are uncertain. Therefore, we aimed to summarize and analyze the efficacy of two treatments for GERD.Methods. The meta-analysis search was performed, using four databases. All studies from 2005 to 2016 were included. Pooled effect was calculated using either the fixed or random effects model.Results. A total of 4 trials included 624 patients and aimed to evaluate the differences in proton-pump inhibitor use, complications, and adverse events. MSA had a shorter operative time (MSA and NF: RR = −18.80, 95% CI: −24.57 to −13.04, andP=0.001) and length of stay (RR = −14.21, 95% CI: −24.18 to −4.23, andP=0.005). Similar proton-pump inhibitor use, complication (P=0.19), and severe dysphagia for dilation were shown in both groups. Although there is no difference between the MSA and NF in the number of adverse events, the incidence of postoperative gas or bloating (RR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54–0.94, andP=0.02) showed significantly different results. However, there is no significant difference in ability to belch and ability to vomit.Conclusions. MSA can be recommended as an alternative treatment for GERD according to their short-term studies, especially in main-features of gas-bloating, due to shorter operative time and less complication of gas or bloating.

scholarly journals Lisfranc injuries: fix or fuse?

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (10) ◽  
pp. 842-849
Author(s):  
Noortje Anna Clasina van den Boom ◽  
Guido A. N. L. Stollenwerck ◽  
Laureanne Lodewijks ◽  
Jeroen Bransen ◽  
Silvia M. A. A. Evers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Lisfranc Injuries

Aims This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with primary arthrodesis (PA) in the treatment of Lisfranc injuries, regarding patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and risk of secondary surgery. The aim was to conclusively determine the best available treatment based on the most complete and recent evidence available. Methods A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, and SPORTDiscus. Additionally, ongoing trial registers and reference lists of included articles were screened. Risk of bias (RoB) and level of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. The random and fixed-effect models were used for the statistical analysis. Results A total of 20 studies were selected for this review, of which 12 were comparative studies fit for meta-analysis, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This resulted in a total analyzed population of 392 patients treated with ORIF and 249 patients treated with PA. The mean differences between the two groups in American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS), VAS, and SF-36 scores were -7.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) -13.31 to -1.51), 0.77 (95% CI -0.85 to 2.39), and -1.20 (95% CI -3.86 to 1.46), respectively. Conclusion This is the first study to find a statistically significant difference in PROMs, as measured by the AOFAS score, in favour of PA for the treatment of Lisfranc injuries. However, this difference may not be clinically relevant, and therefore drawing a definitive conclusion requires confirmation by a large prospective high-quality RCT. Such a study should also assess cost-effectiveness, as cost considerations might be decisive in decision-making. Level of Evidence: I Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):842–849.

scholarly journals Anticipation, teamwork and cognitive load: chasing efficiency during robot-assisted surgery

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 148-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Sexton ◽  
Amanda Johnson ◽  
Amanda Gotsch ◽  
Ahmed A Hussein ◽  
Lora Cavuoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Surgical Team ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Task Load ◽  
Video And Audio ◽  
Team Familiarity ◽  
Robot Assisted Surgery

IntroductionRobot-assisted surgery (RAS) has changed the traditional operating room (OR), occupying more space with equipment and isolating console surgeons away from the patients and their team. We aimed to evaluate how anticipation of surgical steps and familiarity between team members impacted efficiency.MethodsWe analysed recordings (video and audio) of 12 robot-assisted radical prostatectomies. Any requests between surgeon and the team members were documented and classified by personnel, equipment type, mode of communication, level of inconvenience in fulfilling the request and anticipation. Surgical team members completed questionnaires assessing team familiarity and cognitive load (National Aeronautics and Space Administration – Task Load Index). Predictors of team efficiency were assessed using Pearson correlation and stepwise linear regression.Results1330 requests were documented, of which 413 (31%) were anticipated. Anticipation correlated negatively with operative time, resulting in overall 8% reduction of OR time. Team familiarity negatively correlated with inconveniences. Anticipation ratio, per cent of requests that were non-verbal and total request duration were significantly correlated with the console surgeons’ cognitive load (r=0.77, p=0.006; r=0.63, p=0.04; and r=0.70, p=0.02, respectively).ConclusionsAnticipation and active engagement by the surgical team resulted in shorter operative time, and higher familiarity scores were associated with fewer inconveniences. Less anticipation and non-verbal requests were also associated with lower cognitive load for the console surgeon. Training efforts to increase anticipation and team familiarity can improve team efficiency during RAS.

scholarly journals Mechanical circulatory support in patients with cardiogenic shock not secondary to cardiotomy: a network meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Benenati ◽  
Matteo Toma ◽  
Claudia Canale ◽  
Rocco Vergallo ◽  
Roberta Della Bona ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Circulatory Support ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Circulatory Support ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Axial Pump ◽  
Short Term Mortality ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Important Quality ◽  
Significant Publication Bias

Abstract To compare the efficacy and safety of different mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in CS. A total of 24 studies (7 randomized controlled trials—RCTs—and 17 non-RCTs) involving 11,117 patients were entered in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were stroke and bleeding (requiring transfusion and/or intracranial and/or fatal). Compared with no MCS, extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) reduced 30-day mortality when used both alone (OR 0.37, 95% CrI 0.15–0.90) and together with the micro-axial pump Impella (OR 0.13, 95% CrI 0.02–0.80) or intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) (OR 0.19, 95% CrI 0.05–0.63), although the relevant articles were affected by significant publication bias. Consistent results were obtained in a sensitivity analysis including only studies of CS due to myocardial infarction. After halving the weight of studies with a non-RCT design, only the benefit of ECMO + IABP on 30-day mortality was maintained (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.057–0.76). The risk of bleeding was increased by TandemHeart (OR 13, 95% CrI 3.50–59), Impella (OR 5, 95% CrI 1.60–18), and IABP (OR 2.2, 95% CrI 1.10–4.4). No significant differences were found across MCS strategies regarding stroke. Although limited by important quality issues, the studies performed so far indicate that ECMO, especially if combined with Impella or IABP, reduces short-term mortality in CS. MCS increases the hazard of bleeding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document