The Favorable Prognostic Factors for Superior Sulcus Tumor: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

IntroductionChronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) after lung or pleural surgery is a common complication and associated with a decrease in quality of life, long-term use of pain medication and substantial economic costs. An abundant number of primary prognostic factor studies are published each year, but findings are often inconsistent, methods heterogeneous and the methodological quality questionable. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are therefore needed to summarise the evidence.Methods and analysisThe reporting of this protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist. We will include retrospective and prospective studies with a follow-up of at least 3 months reporting patient-related factors and surgery-related factors for any adult population. Randomised controlled trials will be included if they report on prognostic factors for CPSP after lung or pleural surgery. We will exclude case series, case reports, literature reviews, studies that do not report results for lung or pleural surgery separately and studies that modified the treatment or prognostic factor based on pain during the observation period. MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, Google Scholar and relevant literature reviews will be searched. Independent pairs of two reviewers will assess studies in two stages based on the PICOTS criteria. We will use the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool for the quality assessment and the CHARMS-PF checklist for the data extraction of the included studies. The analyses will all be conducted separately for each identified prognostic factor. We will analyse adjusted and unadjusted estimated measures separately. When possible, evidence will be summarised with a meta-analysis and otherwise narratively. We will quantify heterogeneity by calculating the Q and I2 statistics. The heterogeneity will be further explored with meta-regression and subgroup analyses based on clinical knowledge. The quality of the evidence obtained will be evaluated according to the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation guideline 28.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be necessary, as all data are already in the public domain. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021227888.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of Surgery for the Treatment of Gastric Cancer Liver Metastases: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Factors

Journal of Clinical Medicine ◽

10.3390/jcm10051141 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (5) ◽

pp. 1141

Author(s):

Gianpaolo Marte ◽

Andrea Tufo ◽

Francesca Steccanella ◽

Ester Marra ◽

Piera Federico ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Gastric Cancer ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Prognostic Factors ◽

Liver Metastases ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Multidisciplinary Treatment ◽

Review Of The Literature ◽

Term Survival ◽

The Impact

Background: In the last 10 years, the management of patients with gastric cancer liver metastases (GCLM) has changed from chemotherapy alone, towards a multidisciplinary treatment with liver surgery playing a leading role. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy of hepatectomy for GCLM and to analyze the impact of related prognostic factors on long-term outcomes. Methods: The databases PubMed (Medline), EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles from January 2010 to September 2020. We included prospective and retrospective studies that reported the outcomes after hepatectomy for GCLM. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of prognostic factors was performed. Results: We included 40 studies, including 1573 participants who underwent hepatic resection for GCLM. Post-operative morbidity and 30-day mortality rates were 24.7% and 1.6%, respectively. One-year, 3-years, and 5-years overall survival (OS) were 72%, 37%, and 26%, respectively. The 1-year, 3-years, and 5-years disease-free survival (DFS) were 44%, 24%, and 22%, respectively. Well-moderately differentiated tumors, pT1–2 and pN0–1 adenocarcinoma, R0 resection, the presence of solitary metastasis, unilobar metastases, metachronous metastasis, and chemotherapy were all strongly positively associated to better OS and DFS. Conclusion: In the present study, we demonstrated that hepatectomy for GCLM is feasible and provides benefits in terms of long-term survival. Identification of patient subgroups that could benefit from surgical treatment is mandatory in a multidisciplinary setting.

Download Full-text

Prognostic factors for relapse in resected gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cancer Treatment Reviews ◽

10.1016/j.ctrv.2021.102299 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 102299

Author(s):

Rachel Broadbent ◽

Roseanna Wheatley ◽

Sabrina Stajer ◽

Timothy Jacobs ◽

Angela Lamarca ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Prognostic Factors ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Neuroendocrine Neoplasms ◽

Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Download Full-text

Prognostic factors influencing survival in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for isolated colorectal peritoneal metastases: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Colorectal Disease ◽

10.1111/codi.15411 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 22 (11) ◽

pp. 1480-1480

Author(s):

Gabrielle Ramshorst

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Prognostic Factors ◽

Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy ◽

Cytoreductive Surgery ◽

Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Peritoneal Metastases ◽

Factors Influencing

Download Full-text

Pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors associated with survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ ◽

10.1136/bmj.l6373 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. l6373 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Shannon M Fernando ◽

Alexandre Tran ◽

Wei Cheng ◽

Bram Rochwerg ◽

Monica Taljaard ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cardiac Arrest ◽

Prognostic Factors ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

English Language ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Research Strategy ◽

Primary Analysis ◽

Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Abstract Objective To determine associations between important pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to 4 February 2019. Primary, unpublished data from the United Kingdom National Cardiac Arrest Audit database. Study selection criteria English language studies that investigated pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Data extraction PROGRESS (prognosis research strategy group) recommendations and the CHARMS (critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies) checklist were followed. Risk of bias was assessed by using the QUIPS tool (quality in prognosis studies). The primary analysis pooled associations only if they were adjusted for relevant confounders. The GRADE approach (grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation) was used to rate certainty in the evidence. Results The primary analysis included 23 cohort studies. Of the pre-arrest factors, male sex (odds ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 0.95, moderate certainty), age 60 or older (0.50, 0.40 to 0.62, low certainty), active malignancy (0.57, 0.45 to 0.71, high certainty), and history of chronic kidney disease (0.56, 0.40 to 0.78, high certainty) were associated with reduced odds of survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Of the intra-arrest factors, witnessed arrest (2.71, 2.17 to 3.38, high certainty), monitored arrest (2.23, 1.41 to 3.52, high certainty), arrest during daytime hours (1.41, 1.20 to 1.66, high certainty), and initial shockable rhythm (5.28, 3.78 to 7.39, high certainty) were associated with increased odds of survival. Intubation during arrest (0.54, 0.42 to 0.70, moderate certainty) and duration of resuscitation of at least 15 minutes (0.12, 0.07 to 0.19, high certainty) were associated with reduced odds of survival. Conclusion Moderate to high certainty evidence was found for associations of pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors with survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018104795

Download Full-text

Course and prognostic factors of whiplash: A systematic review and meta-analysis☆

Pain ◽

10.1016/j.pain.2008.02.019 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 138 (3) ◽

pp. 617-629 ◽

Cited By ~ 186

Author(s):

Steven J. Kamper ◽

Trudy J. Rebbeck ◽

Christopher G. Maher ◽

James H. McAuley ◽

Michele Sterling

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Prognostic Factors ◽

Meta Analysis

Download Full-text

Long-Term Survival and Prognostic Factors of Pulmonary Metastasectomy in Liver Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

World Journal of Surgery ◽

10.1007/s00268-017-4431-7 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 42 (7) ◽

pp. 2153-2163 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Chong Wang ◽

Lei Yang ◽

Zikun Liang ◽

Yaodong Liu ◽

Shuku Liu

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Prognostic Factors ◽

Liver Cancer ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Pulmonary Metastasectomy ◽

Term Survival ◽

Long Term Survival

Download Full-text

Clinical, laboratory and imaging predictors for critical illness and mortality in patients with COVID-19: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039813 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (12) ◽

pp. e039813

Author(s):

Xinxing Lai ◽

Jian Liu ◽

Tianyi Zhang ◽

Luda Feng ◽

Ping Jiang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Prognostic Factors ◽

Critical Illness ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Clinical Laboratory ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Early Management ◽

Modifiable Factors

IntroductionWith the threat of a worldwide pandemic of COVID-19, it is important to identify the prognostic factors for critical conditions among patients with non-critical COVID-19. Prognostic factors and models may assist front-line clinicians in rapid identification of high-risk patients, early management of modifiable factors, appropriate triaging and optimising the use of limited healthcare resources. We aim to systematically assess the clinical, laboratory and imaging predictors as well as prediction models for severe or critical illness and mortality in patients with COVID-19.Methods and analysisAll peer-reviewed and preprint primary articles with a longitudinal design that focused on prognostic factors or models for critical illness and mortality related to COVID-19 will be eligible for inclusion. A systematic search of 11 databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang Data, SinoMed, bioRxiv, Arxiv and MedRxiv will be conducted. Study selection will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data extraction will be performed using the modified version of the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies checklist and quality will be evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Quality In Prognosis Studies tool. The association between prognostic factors and outcomes of interest will be synthesised and a meta-analysis will be conducted with three or more studies reporting a particular factor in a consistent manner.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was not required for this systematic review. We will disseminate our findings through publication in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD 42020178798.

Download Full-text