Surgery vs. Biopsy in the Treatment of Butterfly Glioblastoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Butterfly glioblastomas (bGBM) are grade IV gliomas that spread to bilateral hemispheres by infiltrating the corpus callosum. Data on the effect of surgery are limited to small case series. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare resection vs. biopsy in terms of survival outcomes and postoperative complications. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases through March 2021 in accordance with the PRISMA checklist. Pooled hazard ratios were calculated and meta-analyzed in a random-effects model including assessment of heterogeneity. Out of 3367 articles, seven studies were included with 293 patients. Surgical resection was significantly associated with longer overall survival (HR 0.39, 95%CI 0.2–0.55) than biopsy. Low heterogeneity was observed (I2: 0%). In further analysis, the effect persisted in extent of resection subgroups of both ≥80% and <80%. No statistically significant difference between surgery and biopsy was detected in terms of postoperative complications, although these were numerically larger for surgery. In patients with bGBM, surgical resection was associated with longer survival prospects compared with biopsy.

Download Full-text

Gunshot Wounds to the Lumbosacral Spine: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Global Spine Journal ◽

10.1177/21925682211030873 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 219256822110308

Author(s):

Andrew Platt ◽

Mostafa H. El Dafrawy ◽

Michael J. Lee ◽

Martin H. Herman ◽

Edwin Ramos

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Random Effects ◽

Surgical Intervention ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Gunshot Wounds ◽

Operative Management ◽

Operative Intervention ◽

Lumbosacral Spine ◽

Random Effects Model ◽

Significant Difference

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

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Complications Following Mastectomy and Prosthetic Reconstruction in Patients With and Without Prior Breast Augmentation

Aesthetic Surgery Journal ◽

10.1093/asj/sjab028 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Maria Chicco ◽

Ali R Ahmadi ◽

Hsu-Tang Cheng

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Postoperative Complications ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Skin Flap ◽

Prosthetic Reconstruction ◽

Hematoma Formation ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Nipple Sparing Mastectomy ◽

Nipple Sparing ◽

Early Late

Abstract Background There is limited evidence available in literature with regard to the complication profile of mastectomy and immediate prosthetic reconstruction in augmented patients. Objectives The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare postoperative complications between women with versus without prior augmentation undergoing skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate prosthetic reconstruction. Methods A systematic search was conducted in February 2020 for studies comparing women with versus without prior augmentation undergoing skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate prosthetic reconstruction with documentation of postoperative complications. Outcomes analyzed included early, late and overall complications. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained through meta-analysis. Results Our meta-analysis, which included six studies comparing 241 breasts with prior augmentation and 1441 without, demonstrated no significant difference between the two groups in rates of early (36.7% vs. 24.8%; OR=1.57, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.64; P=0.09), late (10.1% vs. 19.9%; OR=0.53, 95% CI 0.06 to 4.89; P=0.57) and overall complications (36.5% vs. 31.2%; OR=1.23, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.00; P=0.40). Subgroup analysis showed a significantly higher rate of hematoma formation in the augmented group (3.39% versus 2.15%; OR=2.68, 95% CI 1.00 to 7.16; P=0.05), but no difference in rates of seroma, infection, mastectomy skin flap necrosis and prosthesis loss. Conclusions Our meta-analysis suggests that prior augmentation does not significantly increase overall postoperative complications in women undergoing skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate prosthetic reconstruction. However, the significantly higher rate of hematoma formation in augmented patients warrants further investigation and preoperative discussion.

Download Full-text

Abstract 13315: Long-term Risk of Cardiovascular Events Following Hospitalization for Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Circulation ◽

10.1161/circ.142.suppl_3.13315 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽

Author(s):

Leah B Kosyakovsky ◽

Federico Angriman ◽

Emma Katz ◽

Neill Adhikari ◽

Lucas C Godoy ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cumulative Incidence ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Hazard Ratios ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Sepsis Survivors ◽

Risk Ratios

Introduction: Sepsis results in dysregulated inflammation, coagulation, and metabolism, which may contribute to increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association between sepsis and subsequent long-term CVD events. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception to May 2020 to identify observational studies of adult sepsis survivors (defined by diagnostic codes or consensus definitions) measuring long-term CV outcomes. The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, CV death, and stroke. Random-effects models estimated the pooled cumulative incidence and adjusted hazard ratios of CV events relative to hospital or population controls. Odds ratios were included as risk ratios assuming <10% incidence in non-septic controls, and risk ratios were taken as hazard ratios (HR) assuming no censoring. Outcomes were analyzed at maximum follow-up (primary analysis) and stratified by time (<1 year, 1-2 years, and >2 years) since sepsis. Results: Of 11,235 abstracts screened, 25 studies (22 cohort studies, 2 case-crossover studies, and 1 case-control) involving 1,949,793 sepsis survivors were included. The pooled cumulative incidence of CVD events was 9% (95% CI; 5-14%). Sepsis was associated with an increased risk (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.37-1.86) of CVD events at maximum follow-up ( Figure ); between-study heterogeneity was substantial (I 2 =97.3%). There was no significant difference when comparing studies using population and hospital controls. Significantly elevated risk was observed up to 5 years following sepsis. Conclusions: Sepsis survivors experience an approximately 50% increased risk of CVD events, which may persist for years following the index episode. These results highlight a potential unmet need for early cardiac risk stratification and optimization in sepsis survivors.

Download Full-text

Quilting Sutures in Rhytidectomy: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Aesthetic Surgery Journal ◽

10.1093/asj/sjz353 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 40 (11) ◽

pp. 1157-1164 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Anthony Ballan ◽

Samer Jabbour ◽

Youssef El Rayess ◽

Khalil Jabbour ◽

Lena El Hachem ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Relative Risk ◽

Postoperative Complications ◽

Confidence Interval ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Control Group ◽

Published Data ◽

Review Of The Literature ◽

Level Of Evidence ◽

Safety And Efficacy

Abstract Background Different technical variations exist for the utilization of quilting sutures (QS) in rhytidectomy. No systematic review or meta-analysis of the studies describing the use of QS in facelifts has been published to date to the authors’ knowledge. Objectives The objective of this study was to summarize all the published data regarding the utilization of QS in rhytidectomy, compare QS techniques, and evaluate their effect on postoperative complications. Methods On April 1, 2019, a systematic search of the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted. All the studies describing the usage of QS in facelifts were included in this review. Studies reporting hematoma rate in a QS group and a control group were included in the meta-analysis part of this study. Results The initial search of the databases yielded 93 results. Four trials were included in the systematic review and 2 were included in the meta-analysis. The total number of included patients with QS was 527. Two studies employed internal QS and the remaining studies utilized external QS. The meta-analysis found a lower rate of hematoma in the QS group (relative risk, 0.02; 95% confidence interval = 0.00-0.13; P < 0.0001). Conclusions QS can be applied either internally or externally and are very effective in reducing hematomas after facelifts. QS could be a great asset in facelifts but should be utilized with caution because additional work is needed to confirm their safety and efficacy. Level of Evidence: 2

Download Full-text

Comparison of Laminoplasty vs. Laminectomy for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Frontiers in Surgery ◽

10.3389/fsurg.2021.790593 ◽

2022 ◽

Vol 8 ◽

Author(s):

Huaguo Zhao ◽

Rong Ren ◽

Weihu Ma ◽

Song Xu ◽

Linrui Peng ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Scientific Journal ◽

Case Series ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Superficial Infection ◽

Sagittal Vertical Axis ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Curvature Index

ObjectivesLaminoplasty (LP) and laminectomy (LC) with or without fusion are recommended as treatment procedures for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). The purpose of this study is to conduct a meta-analysis to analyze the results of CSM patients undergoing LP or LC surgery.MethodsWe systematically and comprehensively searched Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, VIP database, Google Scholar, Chinese Bio-medicine Literature database, and China Scientific Journal Full-text database to July 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational case series that compared LP and LC in patients with CSM. The main endpoints were the surgical process, radiographic outcomes, clinical outcomes, and surgical complications.ResultsA total of 19 were included the inclusion criteria in this meta-analysis (n = 4,348 patients). There was no significant difference in range of motion (ROM), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA), Cobb angle, visual analog scale (VAS), cervical curvature index (CCI), Nurick score, Neck Dysfunction Index (NDI), and complications. LP was found to be superior than LC in terms of complications of C5 radiculopathy and surperficial infection.ConclusionOur results indicate that LP can achieve better results in C5 radiculopathy and superficial infection in surgical treatment of CSM compared with LC. Further high-quality research is warranted to further verify our findings.Systematic Review RegistrationPRISMA: CRD42018107070.

Download Full-text

Repurposing of drugs for Covid-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

10.1101/2020.06.07.20124677 ◽

2020 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Pinky Kotecha ◽

Alexander Light ◽

Enrico Checcucci ◽

Daniele Amparore ◽

Cristian Fiori ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Clinical Improvement ◽

Case Reports ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Series ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Significant Difference

AbstractObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the data currently available regarding the repurposing of different drugs for Covid-19 treatment. Participants with suspected or diagnosed Covid-19 will be included. The interventions being considered are drugs being repurposed, and comparators will include standard of care treatment or placebo.MethodsWe searched Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, clinical trial registration site in the UK(NIHR), Europe (clinicaltrialsregister.eu), US (ClinicalTrials.gov) and internationally (isrctn.com), and reviewed the reference lists of articles for eligible articles published up to April 22, 2020. All studies in English that evaluated the efficacy of the listed drugs were included. Cochrane RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tool were used to assess study quality. This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines. The protocol is available at PROSPERO (CRD42020180915).ResultsFrom 708 identified studies or clinical trials, 16 studies and 16 case reports met our eligibility criteria. Of these, 6 were randomized controlled trials (763 patients), 7 cohort studies (321 patients) and 3 case series (191 patients). Chloroquine (CQ) had a 100% discharge rate compared to 50% with lopinavir-ritonavir at day 14, however a trial has recommended against a high dosage due to cardiotoxic events. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has shown no significant improvement in negative seroconversion rate which is also seen in our meta-analysis (p=0.68). Adverse events with HCQ have a significant difference compared to the control group (p=0.001). Lopinavir-ritonavir has shown no improvement in time to clinical improvement which is seen in our meta-analyses (p=0.1). Remdesivir has shown no significant improvement in time to clinical improvement but this trial had insufficient power.DiscussionDue to the paucity in evidence, it is difficult to establish the efficacy of these drugs in the treatment of Covid-19 as currently there is no significant clinical effectiveness of the repurposed drugs. Further large clinical trials are required to achieve more reliable findings. A risk-benefit analysis is required on an individual basis to weigh out the potential improvement in clinical outcome and viral load reduction compared to the risks of the adverse events. (1-16)

Download Full-text

Prevalence of Headache in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 14,275 Patients

Frontiers in Neurology ◽

10.3389/fneur.2020.562634 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 11 ◽

Author(s):

Md Asiful Islam ◽

Sayeda Sadia Alam ◽

Shoumik Kundu ◽

Tareq Hossan ◽

Mohammad Amjad Kamal ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Quality Assessment ◽

Confidence Intervals ◽

Random Effects ◽

Critical Appraisal ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Clinical Manifestations ◽

Random Effects Model ◽

Pooled Prevalence ◽

Significant Difference

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) started to spread globally since December 2019 from Wuhan, China. Headache has been observed as one of the clinical manifestations in COVID-19 patients. We aimed to conduct a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the overall pooled prevalence of headache in COVID-19 patients.Methods: PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify studies published between December 2019 and March 2020. Adult (≥18 years) COVID-19 patients were considered eligible. We used random-effects model to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Quality assessment was done using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020182529).Results: We identified 2,055 studies, of which 86 studies (n = 14,275, 49.4% female) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the pooled prevalence of headache in COVID-19 patients was 10.1% [95% CI: 8.76–11.49]. There was no significant difference of headache prevalence in severe or critical vs. non-severe (RR: 1.05, p = 0.78), survived (recovered or discharged) vs. non-survived (RR: 1.36, p = 0.23), and ICU vs. non-ICU (RR: 1.06, p = 0.87) COVID-19 patients. We detected 64.0, 34.9, and 1.1% of the included studies as high, moderate, and low quality, respectively.Conclusions: From the first 4-month data of the outbreak, headache was detected in 10.1% of the adult COVID-19 patients.

Download Full-text

OPEN, LAPAROSCOPIC AND TRANSANAL TOTAL MESORECTAL EXCISION: A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW AND NETWORK META ANALYSIS

Koloproktologia ◽

10.33878/2073-7556-2019-18-4-37-85 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 18 (4) ◽

pp. 37-85

Author(s):

Yu. S. Khilkov ◽

A. A. Ponomarenko ◽

E. G. Rybakov ◽

Yu. A. Shelygin

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Postoperative Complications ◽

Resection Margin ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision ◽

Mesorectal Excision ◽

Short Term ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Grade 3

AIM: to compare the effectiveness of different methods of total mesorectumectomy (TME).MATERIALS AND METHODS: the systematic review performed in accordance with PRISMA practice and recommendations.RESULTS: Forty-one papers were included in the analysis. Fourteen studies were for transanal total mesorectumectomy (TA TME) (n=480) compared with laparoscopic (LA TME), 26 – for LA TME vs open (n=6820), 1 – for open vs TA TME. There was no significant difference between open TME, LA TME and TA TME in grade 3 quality of mesorectumectomy by Quirke. The positive circular resection margin (CRM) is less often in TA TME group, then LA TME (OR=2.58, CI 1.34-4.97, p=0.005). There was significantly lower positive CRM rate in LA TME then open TME (OR=0.73, CI 0.63-0.85, p<0.0001). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications rates between LA TME and TA TME (p=0.72). Network meta-analysis showed less postoperative complications followed LA TME than open TME (OR=0.75, CI 0.65-0.84).CONCLUSION: TA TME is comparable with laparoscopic and open TME in short term results. Rates of positive CRM, the quality of Grade 1 mesorectal excision, the conversion rate, the postoperative urinary dysfunction, may have better results in TA TME.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of Corticosteroids in Patients with SARS, MERS and COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Journal of Clinical Medicine ◽

10.3390/jcm9082392 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 9 (8) ◽

pp. 2392 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Keum Hwa Lee ◽

Sojung Yoon ◽

Gwang Hun Jeong ◽

Jong Yeob Kim ◽

Young Joo Han ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Random Effects ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Random Effect Model ◽

Control Group ◽

Random Effects Model ◽

Number Of Patients ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Coronavirus Infections

(1) Background: The use of corticosteroids in critical coronavirus infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), or Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has been controversial. However, a meta-analysis on the efficacy of steroids in treating these coronavirus infections is lacking. (2) Purpose: We assessed a methodological criticism on the quality of previous published meta-analyses and the risk of misleading conclusions with important therapeutic consequences. We also examined the evidence of the efficacy of corticosteroids in reducing mortality in SARS, MERS and COVID-19. (3) Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were used to identify studies published until 25 April 2020, that reported associations between steroid use and mortality in treating SARS/MERS/COVID-19. Two investigators screened and extracted data independently. Searches were restricted to studies on humans, and articles that did not report the exact number of patients in each group or data on mortality were excluded. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) or hazard ratios (HRs) under the fixed- and random-effect model. (4) Results: Eight articles (4051 patients) were eligible for inclusion. Among these selected studies, 3416 patients were diagnosed with SARS, 360 patients with MERS, and 275 with COVID-19; 60.3% patients were administered steroids. The meta-analyses including all studies showed no differences overall in terms of mortality (OR 1.152, 95% CI 0.631–2.101 in the random effects model, p = 0.645). However, this conclusion might be biased, because, in some studies, the patients in the steroid group had more severe symptoms than those in the control group. In contrast, when the meta-analysis was performed restricting only to studies that used appropriate adjustment (e.g., time, disease severity), there was a significant difference between the two groups (HR 0.378, 95% CI 0.221–0.646 in the random effects model, p < 0.0001). Although there was no difference in mortality when steroids were used in severe cases, there was a difference among the group with more underlying diseases (OR 3.133, 95% CI 1.670–5.877, p < 0.001). (5) Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study is the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis providing the most accurate evidence on the effect of steroids in coronavirus infections. If not contraindicated, and in the absence of side effects, the use of steroids should be considered in coronavirus infection including COVID-19.

Download Full-text

The choice of dissection or preservation of the inferior pulmonary ligament after an upper lobectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

World Journal of Surgical Oncology ◽

10.1186/s12957-019-1777-3 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Hao Lv ◽

Rui Zhou ◽

Xianghong Zhan ◽

Dongmei Di ◽

Yongxian Qian ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Postoperative Complications ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

The Other ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Drainage Time ◽

Significant Difference ◽

The Right ◽

Group D ◽

Review Manager

Abstract Background The necessity of the inferior pulmonary ligament (IPL) dissection after an upper lobectomy remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate whether this accessional procedure could reduce the postoperative complications and improve outcomes. Methods PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, CBM, and CNKI databases were searched for the relevant studies which compared the dissection with preservation of IPL during the upper lobectomy. The Review Manager 5.3 software was used for this meta-analysis. Results Three RCTs and five CCTs were included in this meta-analysis. These studies contained a total of 610 patients, in which 315 patients received a pulmonary ligament dissection (group D) after the upper lobectomy, while the other 295 patients preserved the pulmonary ligament (group P). No significant difference was demonstrated between the group D and group P in terms of drainage time after surgery (MD 0.14, 95%CI − 0.05 to 0.33, P = 0.15), rate of postoperative dead space (OR 1.33, 95%CI 0.72 to 2.46, P = 0.36), rate of postoperative complications (OR 1.20, 95%CI 0.66 to 2.19, P = 0.56). However, the pooled comparison revealed a greater change of the right main bronchial angle (MD 5.00, 95%CI 1.68 to 8.33, P = 0.003) in group D compared with group P, indicated that the dissection of IPL may lead to a greater distortion of bronchus. Conclusions This meta-analysis confirmed that the dissection of IPL do not effectively reduce the postoperative complications and improve the prognosis. Therefore, it is not necessary to dissect the IPL after an upper lobectomy.

Download Full-text