¿Podría ser la videolaringoscopia la técnica de elección para intubación con paciente despierto?

La intubación orotraqueal (IOT) con fibrobroncoscopio es a menudo considerada la técnica de elección cuando nos encontramos ante una vía aérea difícil prevista. Sin embargo, los videolaringoscopios se usan con más frecuencia. Se realizaron búsquedas en la literatura actual y se realizó un metaanálisis para comparar el uso de la videolaringoscopia y la fibrobroncoscopia para la intubación traqueal despierta. El principal objetivo fue el tiempo necesario para intubación. Los objetivos secundarios incluyeron: intubación fallida; la tasa de intubación exitosa en el primer intento; satisfacción informada por el paciente con la técnica; y cualquier complicación resultante de la intubación. Ocho estudios donde se examinaron a 429 pacientes se incluyeron en esta revisión. El tiempo de intubación fue más corto cuando se utilizó la videolaringoscopia en lugar de la fibrobroncoscopia (siete ensayos, 408 participantes, diferencia significativa [IC del 95%] 45,7 (66,0 a 25,4) s, p <0,0001, bajo nivel de evidencia). No hubo diferencias significativas entre las dos técnicas en la tasa de fracaso (seis estudios, 355 participantes, riesgo relativo [IC 95%] 1,01 (0,24-4,35), p = 0,99, bajo nivel de evidencia) o la tasa de éxito de primer intento (seis estudios, 391 participantes, riesgo relativo (IC 95%) 1,01 (0,95-1,06), p = 0,8, nivel de evidencia moderado). El nivel de satisfacción del paciente fue similar entre ambos grupos. No se encontraron diferencias en los eventos adversos informados: ronquera / dolor de garganta (tres estudios, 167 participantes, riesgo relativo [IC 95%] 1,07 (0,62-1,85), p = 0,81, bajo nivel de evidencia) y baja saturación de oxígeno (cinco estudios, 337 participantes, riesgo relativo (IC 95%) 0,49 (0,22-1.12), p = 0,09, bajo nivel de evidencia). En resumen, la videolaringoscopia para la intubación traqueal despierta se asocia con un tiempo de intubación más corto. También parece tener una tasa de éxito y un perfil de seguridad comparable a la fibrobroncoscopia. ABSTRACT Could videolaryngoscopy be the chosen technique for awaken patient intubation? Awake fibreoptic intubation is often considered the technique of choice when a difficult airway is anticipated. However, videolaryngoscopes are being used more commonly. We searched the current literature and performed a meta-analysis to compare the use of videolaryngoscopy and fibreoptic bronchoscopy for awake tracheal intubation. Our primary outcome was the time needed to intubate the patient’s trachea. Secondary outcomes included: failed intubation; the rate of successful intubation at the first attempt; patient-reported satisfaction with the technique; and any complications resulting from intubation. Eight studies examining 429 patients were included in this review. The intubation time was shorter when videolaryngoscopy was used instead of fibreoptic bronchoscopy (seven trials, 408 participants, mean difference(95%CI) - 45.7 (- 66.0 to -25.4) s, p<0.0001, low-quality evidence). There was no significant difference between the two techniques in the failure rate (six studies, 355 participants, risk ratio (95%CI) 1.01 (0.24–4.35), p=0.99, low-quality evidence) or the first-attempt success rate (six studies, 391 participants, risk ratio (95%CI) 1.01 (0.95–1.06), p=0.8, moderate quality evidence). The level of patient satisfaction was similar between both groups. No difference was found in two reported adverse events: hoarseness/sore throat (three studies, 167 participants, risk ratio (95%CI) 1.07 (0.62–1.85), p=0.81, low-quality evidence),and low oxygen saturation (five studies, 337 participants, risk ratio (95%CI) 0.49 (0.22–1.12), p=0.09,low-quality evidence). In summary, videolaryngoscopy for awake tracheal intubation is associated with a shorter intubation time. It also seems to have a success rate and safety profile comparable to fibreoptic bronchoscopy.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Direct and Indirect Laryngoscopes in Vomitus and Hematemesis Settings: A Randomized Simulation Trial

BioMed Research International ◽

10.1155/2015/806243 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 2015 ◽

pp. 1-6 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

Ryosuke Mihara ◽

Nobuyasu Komasawa ◽

Sayuri Matsunami ◽

Toshiaki Minami

Keyword(s):

Tracheal Intubation ◽

Success Rate ◽

Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽

Intubation Time ◽

Direct Laryngoscope ◽

Mcgrath Mac ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Intubation Success ◽

Intubation Success Rate

Background.Videolaryngoscopes may not be useful in the presence of hematemesis or vomitus. We compared the utility of the Macintosh laryngoscope (McL), which is a direct laryngoscope, with that of the Pentax-AWS Airwayscope (AWS) and McGRATH MAC (McGRATH), which are videolaryngoscopes, in simulated hematemesis and vomitus settings.Methods.Seventeen anesthesiologists with more than 1 year of experience performed tracheal intubation on an adult manikin using McL, AWS, and McGRATH under normal, hematemesis, and vomitus simulations.Results.In the normal setting, the intubation success rate was 100% for all three laryngoscopes. In the hematemesis settings, the intubation success rate differed significantly among the three laryngoscopes (P=0.021). In the vomitus settings, all participants succeeded in tracheal intubation with McL or McGRATH, while five failed in the AWS trial with significant difference (P=0.003). The intubation time did not significantly differ in normal settings, while it was significantly longer in the AWS trial compared to McL or McGRATH trial in the hematemesis or vomitus settings (P<0.001, compared to McL or McGRATH in both settings).Conclusion.The performance of McGRATH and McL can be superior to that of AWS for tracheal intubation in vomitus and hematemesis settings in adults.

Download Full-text

Macintosh laryngoscope, i-view™, and C-MAC® video laryngoscopes for tracheal intubation with an aerosol box: A randomized, crossover, manikin study

10.21203/rs.3.rs-90522/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Toshiyuki Nakanishi ◽

Yoshiki Sento ◽

Yuji Kamimura ◽

Kazuya Sobue

Keyword(s):

Intensive Care ◽

Tracheal Intubation ◽

Success Rate ◽

Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽

Video Laryngoscope ◽

Interquartile Range ◽

Intubation Time ◽

Lehane Grade ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Difficulty Scale

Abstract Background: The aerosol box was designed to prevent cough droplets from spreading, but it can impede tracheal intubation. We tested the hypothesis that the C-MAC® video laryngoscope (C-MAC) with an external display is more useful than the i-view™ video laryngoscope (i-view) with an integrated display, or a Macintosh direct laryngoscope (Macintosh) for tracheal intubation with an aerosol box.Methods: This prospective, randomized, crossover simulation study was conducted at an operating room of the two hospitals (a university hospital and a tertiary teaching hospital). We recruited 37 medical personnel (36 anesthesiologists and 1 dental anesthesiologist) who were working in the fields of anesthesia and intensive care with > 2 years of dedicated anesthesia experience from five hospitals. We divided the participants into six groups to use the laryngoscope in a determined order. After the training using each laryngoscope without a box, the participants performed tracheal intubation thrice with each laryngoscope with at least two-hour intervals. The primary outcome was the intubation time. The secondary outcomes were the success rate, Cormack-Lehane grade, and subjective difficulty scale score (numeric rating scale 0–10, 0: no difficulty, 10: highest difficulty). We used the Friedman test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni adjustment. Data are shown as median [interquartile range].Results: Thirty-seven personnel (11 women and 26 men) with 12 [5–19] (median [interquartile range]) years of anesthesia and intensive care experience were enrolled. There was no significant difference in the intubation time: 30 [26–32] s for Macintosh, 29 [26–32] s for i-view, and 29 [25–31] s for C-MAC (P=0.247). The success rate was 95%–100% without significant difference (P=0.135). The i-view and C-MAC video laryngoscopes exhibited superior Cormack-Lehane grades and lower subjective difficulty scale scores than the Macintosh laryngoscope; however, there were no differences between the i-view and C-MAC video laryngoscopes.Conclusions: Rapid and highly successful tracheal intubation was possible with Macintosh laryngoscope, i-view, and C-MAC video laryngoscopes on a manikin with an aerosol box. Improved Cormack-Lehane grade and ease of procedure may support the use of video laryngoscopes.Trial registration: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, identifier UMIN000040269.

Download Full-text

Macintosh laryngoscope and i-view™ and C-MAC® video laryngoscopes for tracheal intubation with an aerosol box: a randomized crossover manikin study

JA Clinical Reports ◽

10.1186/s40981-021-00455-7 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Toshiyuki Nakanishi ◽

Yoshiki Sento ◽

Yuji Kamimura ◽

Kazuya Sobue

Keyword(s):

Tracheal Intubation ◽

Success Rate ◽

Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽

Video Laryngoscope ◽

Intubation Time ◽

Care Experience ◽

Manikin Study ◽

Lehane Grade ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Difficulty Scale

Abstract Background We tested the hypothesis that the C-MAC® video laryngoscope (C-MAC) with an external display is more useful than the disposable i-view™ video laryngoscope (i-view) with an integrated display or a Macintosh direct laryngoscope (Macintosh) for tracheal intubation with an aerosol box. Methods In this randomized, crossover manikin study, we recruited 37 medical personnel with > 2 years of dedicated anesthesia experience from five hospitals. After the three successful intubations within 60 s using each laryngoscope without a box, the participants performed tracheal intubation thrice with each laryngoscope with at least 2-h intervals in a determined order. The primary outcome was the intubation time. The secondary outcomes were success rate, Cormack-Lehane grade, and subjective difficulty scale score. Results Thirty-seven personnel (11 women and 26 men) with 12 [5–19] (median [interquartile range]) years of anesthesia and intensive care experience were enrolled. There was no significant difference in the intubation time: 30 [26–32] s for Macintosh, 29 [26–32] s for i-view, and 29 [25–31] s for C-MAC (P = 0.247). The success rate was 95–100%, without a significant difference (P = 0.135). The i-view and C-MAC exhibited superior Cormack-Lehane grades and lower subjective difficulty scale scores than the Macintosh; however, there were no differences between the i-view and C-MAC. Conclusions Rapid and highly successful tracheal intubation was possible with both Macintosh, i-view, and C-MAC on a normal airway manikin in an aerosol box. Improved Cormack-Lehane grade and the ease of performing the procedure may support the use of video laryngoscopes. Trial registration UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000040269. Registered 30 April 2020.

Download Full-text

Surgical Treatments for Lumbar Spine Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

10.1101/2021.07.04.21259978 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Kanthika Wasinpongwanich ◽

Tanawin Nopsopon ◽

Krit Pongpirul

Keyword(s):

Lumbar Spine ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Risk Ratio ◽

Literature Search ◽

Operative Time ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Fusion Rate ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Spine Diseases

Purpose Surgical treatment is mandatory in some patients with lumbar spine diseases. To obtain spine fusion, many operative techniques were developed with different fusion rates and clinical results. This study aimed to collect randomized controlled trial (RCT) data to compare fusion rate, clinical outcomes, complications among Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF), and other techniques for lumbar spine diseases. Methods A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases was searched for studies up to 13 February 2020. The meta-analysis was done using a random-effects model. Pooled risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval of fusion rate, clinical outcomes, and complication in TLIF and other techniques for lumbar diseases. Results The literature search identified 3,682 potential studies, 15 RCTs (915 patients) were met our inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to other techniques, TLIF had slightly lower fusion rate (RR=0.84 [95% CI 0.72, 0.97], p=0.02, I2=0.0%) at 1-year follow-up while there was no difference on fusion rate at 2-year follow up (RR=1.06 [95% CI 0.96, 1.18], p=0.27, I2=69.0%). The estimated risk ratio of total adverse events (RR=0.90 [95% CI 0.59, 1.38], p=0.63, I2=0.0%) and revision rate (RR=0.78 [95%CI 0.34, 1.79], p=0.56, I2=39.0%) showed no difference. TLIF had approximately half an hour more operative time than other techniques (MD=31.88 [95% CI 5.33, 58.44], p=0.02, I2=92.0%). There was no significant difference between TLIF and other techniques in terms of the blood loss, and clinical outcomes. Conclusions Besides fusion rate at 1-year follow-up and operative time, our study demonstrated similar outcomes of TLIF with other techniques for lumbar diseases in regard to fusion rate, clinical outcomes, and complications.

Download Full-text

Comparison between Ologen implant and Mitomycin C in trabeculectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

10.21203/rs.2.10619/v1 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Xiaoyan Liu ◽

Yali Du ◽

Min Lei ◽

Leyi Zhuang ◽

Peng Lv

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Success Rate ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Collagen Matrix ◽

Current Evidence ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Mean Differences ◽

Alternative Choice

Abstract Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the biodegradable collagen matrix (Ologen) implant in trabeculectomy. Research design and methods We searched Pubmed, Cochrane library, Embase and Web of Science databases to find studies that met our pre-stated inclusion criteria. Reference lists of retrieved articles were also reviewed. The search was finished by February 2019. Study selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and data analyses were performed according to the Cochrane standards. Either a fixed or a random-effects model was used to calculate the overall combined risk estimates. The efficacy measures were the weighted mean differences (WMDs) for the intraocular pressure reduction (IOPR) and the glaucoma medications reduction, the odds ratio (OR) for the success rate and adverse events. Results Fifteen randomized controlled trials involved 682 eyes were included in the meta-analysis. There were no statistically differences between two groups in the IOPR at any time postoperatively. The MD of the IOPR was [MD= -0.45,95% Confidence Interval (CI), (-2.36,1.46), P=0.65] at one day, [MD= -0.82,95% CI, (-1.97, 0.33), P=0.16] at one week, [MD= -1.33, 95% CI,(-3.12, 0.47), P=0.15] at one month, [MD= 0.11,95% CI, (-1.87, 2.08), P=0.92] at three months, [MD= -0.60,95% CI, (-2.27, 1.06), P=0.48] at six months, [MD= -0.33,95% CI, (-1.99, 1.32), P=0.69] at one year, [MD= -0.13,95% CI, (-1.90, 1.65), P=0.89] at two years, [MD= 2.54,95% CI, (-2.83, 7.90), P=0.35] at three years, [MD= 3.04,95% CI, (-3.95, 10.03), P=0.39] at five years. There was no statistically significant difference between the Ologen groups and MMC groups concerned the complete success rate [OR=1.19, 95%CI, (0.83, 1.71), P=0.35]. With regard to the adverse events, no obvirously significance was observed. Seven studies reported the change of antiglaucoma medications. We found that the change of antiglaucoma medications is higher in MMC groups than that in Ologen groups [MD=-0.18, 95%CI, (-0.33, -0.03), P=0.02]. There is no significant difference in complications between the two groups. Conclusions From the current evidence, Ologen may be an alternative choice for trabeculectomy when considering the efficacy and safety. However, MMC might be the preferred choice concerned cost-effectiveness.

Download Full-text

Comparison of conservative treatment with appendectomy for acute uncomplicated pediatric appendicitis: a meta-analysis

Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research ◽

10.2217/cer-2019-0036 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (10) ◽

pp. 767-780

Author(s):

Le-wee Bi ◽

Bei-lei Yan ◽

Qian-yu Yang ◽

Hua-lei Cui

Keyword(s):

Statistical Analysis ◽

Treatment Group ◽

Conservative Treatment ◽

Success Rate ◽

Treatment Efficacy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Significant Difference ◽

The Cochrane Library

Aim: We aimed to compare conservative treatment with surgery for uncomplicated pediatric appendicitis to estimate effectiveness and safety. Methods: Data recorded until September 2018 were searched, and relevant academic articles from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and other libraries were selected. STATA version 13.0 (Stata Corporation, TX, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Results: We identified nine eligible papers. The study reported a significant difference in the success rate of treatment in 1 month and in 1 year, and no difference in the incidence of complications. The patients with fecaliths showed low treatment efficacy in conservative treatment group (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Standardized conservative treatment as inpatients for pediatric appendicitis is safe and feasible. Appendectomy was the better choice for patients with fecaliths.

Download Full-text

Comparison of i-Gel as a Conduit for Intubation between under Fiberoptic Guidance and Blind Endotracheal Intubation during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Randomized Simulation Study

Emergency Medicine International ◽

10.1155/2019/8913093 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 2019 ◽

pp. 1-7

Author(s):

Hyun Young Choi ◽

Wonhee Kim ◽

Yong Soo Jang ◽

Gu Hyun Kang ◽

Jae Guk Kim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Success Rate ◽

Endotracheal Intubation ◽

Macintosh Laryngoscope ◽

Secondary Outcome ◽

Intubation Time ◽

Chest Compressions ◽

Intubation Technique ◽

Endotracheal Tubes ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Post Hoc

Purpose. This study aimed to compare intubation performances among i-gel blind intubation (IGI), i-gel bronchoscopic intubation (IBRI), and intubation using Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL) applying two kinds of endotracheal tube during chest compressions. We hypothesized that IGI using wire-reinforced silicone (WRS) tube could achieve endotracheal intubation most rapidly and successfully. Methods. In 23 emergency physicians, a prospective randomized crossover manikin study was conducted to examine the three intubation techniques using two kinds of endotracheal tubes. The primary outcome was the intubation time. The secondary outcome was the cumulative success rate for each intubation technique. A significant difference was considered when identifying p<0.05 between two devices or p<0.017 in post hoc analysis of the comparison among three devices. Results. The mean intubation time using IGI was shorter (p<0.017) than that of using IBRI and MCL in both endotracheal tubes (17.6 vs. 29.3 vs. 20.2 in conventional polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tube; 14.6 vs. 27.4 vs. 19.9 in WRS tube; sec). There were no significant (p<0.05) differences between PVC and WRS tubes for each intubation technique. The intubation time to reach 100% cumulative success rate was also shorter in IGI (p<0.017) than that in IBRI and MCL in both PVC and WRS tubes. Conclusions. IGI was an equally successful and faster technique compared with IBRI or MCL regardless of the use of PVC or WRS tube. IGI might be an appropriate technique for emergent intubation by experienced intubators during chest compressions.

Download Full-text

Is there a role for neoadjuvant radiation dose escalation in esophageal cancer? A meta-analysis.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2016.34.4_suppl.102 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽

pp. 102-102

Author(s):

Laila Lobo ◽

Danny Yakoub ◽

Caroline Ripat ◽

Rishika Sharma ◽

Raphael Yechieli

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Esophageal Cancer ◽

Radiation Dose ◽

Esophageal Carcinoma ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Survival Rates ◽

Fistula Formation ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Patient Reported

102 Background: In treating esophageal cancer chemo-radiation is used in the definitive as well as neo-adjuvant setting. Optimal dosage of radiation for best outcome has been debated. The aim of this study is to evaluate clinical outcomes of lower radiation dosage compared to higher. Methods: Online search for studies comparing radiation dose from 1990 to present was performed. Primary outcome was overall-survival rates for up to 5 years. Secondary outcomes included post-treatment complications and treatment response. A cut point of 51 Gy and less was considered as lower dose and greater than 51 Gy was considered higher dose. Quality of included studies was evaluated by STROBE criteria. Relative Risk (RR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were calculated from pooled data. Results: The search strategy yielded 142 studies, 12 met our selection criteria and included 1876 patients receiving radiation for resectable esophageal carcinoma. Of these patients, 1057 received lower and 819 were treated with greater than 51 Gy. Median age was 63 and 64 years for lower and higher radiation dose respectively. Meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in survival and toxicities between the two groups. 1 year overall survival (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.84-1.13, p = 0.69), 2 year overall survival (RR = 1.29, 95% CI 0.76-2.19, p = 0.34), 3 year overall survival (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 0.83-1.68, p = 0.37), 4 year overall survival (RR = 1.37, 95% CI 0.64-2.94, p = 0.41), 5 year overall survival (RR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.72-1.69, p = 0.64), Esophagitis (RR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.39-1.50, p = 0.43), Dermatitis (RR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.12-7.94, p = 0.99), Fistula formation (RR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.32-1.60, p = 0.42), Hematologic complications (RR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.20-6.02, p = 0.91), Stricture formation (RR = 1.39, 95% CI 0.54-3.58, p = 0.5). Conclusions: Lower radiation dose appears to be as effective as higher dose in esophageal carcinoma with similar toxicity profile and survival rates. Larger prospective randomized trials, focusing on patient-reported quality-of-life are required to consolidate these results.

Download Full-text

Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar fusion: meta-analysis and systematic review

Journal of Neurosurgery Spine ◽

10.3171/2015.2.spine14973 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 24 (3) ◽

pp. 416-427 ◽

Cited By ~ 87

Author(s):

Christina L. Goldstein ◽

Kevin Macwan ◽

Kala Sundararajan ◽

Y. Raja Rampersaud

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Adverse Event ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Comparative Effectiveness ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Perioperative Outcomes ◽

Estimated Blood Loss ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Patient Reported

OBJECT The objective of this study was to determine the clinical comparative effectiveness and adverse event rates of posterior minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared with open transforaminal or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF/PLIF). METHODS A systematic review of the Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases was performed. A hand search of reference lists was conducted. Studies were reviewed by 2 independent assessors to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or comparative cohort studies including at least 10 patients undergoing MIS or open TLIF/PLIF for degenerative lumbar spinal disorders and reporting at least 1 of the following: clinical outcome measure, perioperative clinical or process measure, radiographic outcome, or adverse events. Study quality was assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) protocol. When appropriate, a meta-analysis of outcomes data was conducted. RESULTS The systematic review and reference list search identified 3301 articles, with 26 meeting study inclusion criteria. All studies, including 1 RCT, were of low or very low quality. No significant difference regarding age, sex, surgical levels, or diagnosis was identified between the 2 cohorts (856 patients in the MIS cohort, 806 patients in the open cohort). The meta-analysis revealed changes in the perioperative outcomes of mean estimated blood loss, time to ambulation, and length of stay favoring an MIS approach by 260 ml (p < 0.00001), 3.5 days (p = 0.0006), and 2.9 days (p < 0.00001), respectively. Operative time was not significantly different between the surgical techniques (p = 0.78). There was no significant difference in surgical adverse events (p = 0.97), but MIS cases were significantly less likely to experience medical adverse events (risk ratio [MIS vs open] = 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.23–0.69, p = 0.001). No difference in nonunion (p = 0.97) or reoperation rates (p = 0.97) was observed. Mean Oswestry Disability Index scores were slightly better in the patients undergoing MIS (n = 346) versus open TLIF/PLIF (n = 346) at a median follow-up time of 24 months (mean difference [MIS – open] = 3.32, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The result of this quantitative systematic review of clinical comparative effectiveness research examining MIS versus open TLIF/PLIF for degenerative lumbar pathology suggests equipoise in patient-reported clinical outcomes. Furthermore, a meta-analysis of adverse event data suggests equivalent rates of surgical complications with lower rates of medical complications in patients undergoing minimally invasive TLIF/PLIF compared with open surgery. The quality of the current comparative evidence is low to very low, with significant inherent bias.

Download Full-text

Sphincterotomy with endoscopic biliary drainage for severe acute cholangitis: a meta-analysis

Endoscopy International Open ◽

10.1055/s-0042-120412 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 05 (02) ◽

pp. E103-E109 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Tarek Sawas ◽

Noura Arwani ◽

Shadi Al Halabi ◽

John Vargo

Keyword(s):

Success Rate ◽

Biliary Drainage ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Acute Cholangitis ◽

Endoscopic Drainage ◽

Endoscopic Biliary Drainage ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Obstructive Cholangitis ◽

Effective Drainage

Abstract Aims To investigate the role of endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) with endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) in acute severe obstructive cholangitis management by performing a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Method We searched PubMed and Embase for controlled studies that compared endoscopic drainage with ES versus Non-ES in acute obstructive cholangitis. Two reviewers selected the studies and extracted the data. Disagreement was addressed by a third reviewer. Heterogeneity of the studies was analyzed by Cochran’s Q statistics. A Mantel–Haenszel risk ratio was calculated utilizing a random effects model. Results Four controlled studies met our inclusion criteria with 392 participants (201 ES, 191 Non-ES). The outcomes were drainage insertion success rate, drainage effectiveness, post drainage pancreatitis, bleeding, procedure duration, perforation, cholecystitis, and 30-day mortality. Drainage insertion success rate was identical in both groups (RR: 1.00, 95 %CI% 0.96 – 1.04). Effective drainage was not significantly different (RR: 1.11, 95 %CI 0.73 – 1.7). There was no significant difference in the incidence of pancreatitis post EBD between the ES and Non-ES groups at 3 % and 4 %, respectively (RR: 0.73, 95 %CI 0.24 – 2.27). However, there was a significant increase in post EBD bleeding with ES compared to Non-ES (RR: 8.58, 95 %CI 2.03 – 36.34). Thirty-day mortality was similar between ES and Non-ES groups at 0.7 % and 1 %, respectively (RR: 0.5, 95 %CI 0.05 – 5.28). Conclusion Our findings show that EBD without ES is an effective drainage technique and carries less risk for post procedure bleeding. Patients who are critically ill and have coagulopathy should be spared from undergoing ES in the acute phase.

Download Full-text