Operative management of colonic diverticular disease in the setting of immunosuppression: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: Indications for surgical decompression of gunshot wounds to the lumbosacral spine are controversial and based on limited data. Methods: A systematic review of literature was conducted to identify studies that directly compare neurologic outcomes following operative and non-operative management of gunshot wounds to the lumbosacral spine. Studies were evaluated for degree of neurologic improvement, complications, and antibiotic usage. An odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were calculated for dichotomous outcomes which were then pooled by random-effects model meta-analysis. Results: Five studies were included that met inclusion criteria. The total rate of neurologic improvement was 72.3% following surgical intervention and 61.7% following non-operative intervention. A random-effects model meta-analysis was carried out which failed to show a statistically significant difference in the rate of neurologic improvement between surgical and non-operative intervention (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.45, 2.53; P = 0.88). In civilian only studies, a random-effects model meta-analysis failed to show a statistically significant difference in the rate of neurologic improvement between surgical and non-operative intervention (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.21, 2.72; P = 0.66). Meta-analysis further failed to show a statistically significant difference in the rate of neurologic improvement between patients with either complete (OR 4.13; 95% CI 0.55, 30.80; P = 0.17) or incomplete (OR 0.38; 95% CI 0.10, 1.52; P = 0.17) neurologic injuries who underwent surgical and non-operative intervention. There were no significant differences in the number of infections and other complications between patients who underwent surgical and non-operative intervention. Conclusions: There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of neurologic improvement between those who underwent surgical or non-operative intervention. Further research is necessary to determine if surgical intervention for gunshot wounds to the lumbosacral spine, including in the case of retained bullet within the spinal canal, is efficacious.

Download Full-text

Interventional radiology versus operative management for splenic injuries: a study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028172 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (8) ◽

pp. e028172

Author(s):

Masahiro Kashiura ◽

Noritaka Yada ◽

Kazuma Yamakawa

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Interventional Radiology ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Operative Management ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Definitive Treatment ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Statistical Heterogeneity ◽

Non Operative Management

IntroductionOver the past decades, the treatment for blunt splenic injuries has shifted from operative to non-operative management. Interventional radiology such as splenic arterial embolisation generally increases the success rate of non-operative management. However, the type of intervention, such as the first definitive treatment for haemostasis (interventional radiology or surgery) in blunt splenic injuries is unclear. Therefore, we aim to clarify whether interventional radiology improves mortality in patients with blunt splenic trauma compared with operative management by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods and analysisWe will search the following electronic bibliographic databases to retrieve relevant articles for the literature review: Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We will include controlled trials and observational studies published until September 2018. We will screen search results, assess the study population, extract data and assess the risk of bias. Two review authors will extract data independently, and discrepancies will be identified and resolved through a discussion with a third author where necessary. Data from eligible studies will be pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed by using the Mantel-Haenszel χ² test and the I² statistic, and any observed heterogeneity will be quantified using the I² statistic. We will conduct sensitivity analyses according to several factors relevant for the heterogeneity.Ethics and disseminationOur study does not require ethical approval as it is based on the findings of previously published articles. This systematic review will provide guidance on selecting a method for haemostasis of splenic injuries and may also identify knowledge gaps that could direct further research in the field. Results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations at relevant conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018108304.

Download Full-text