scholarly journals The Safety of Selective Use of Splenic Flexure Mobilization in Sigmoid and Rectal Resections—Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. 392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michał Nowakowski ◽  
Piotr Małczak ◽  
Magdalena Mizera ◽  
Mateusz Rubinkiewicz ◽  
Anna Lasek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Splenic Flexure ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Splenic Flexure Mobilization

Background: According to traditional textbooks on surgery, splenic flexure mobilization is suggested as a mandatory part of open rectal resection. However, its use in minimally invasive access seems to be limited. This stage of the procedure is considered difficult in the laparoscopic approach. The aim of this study was to systematically review literature on flexure mobilization and perform meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Embase and Scopus databases to identify all eligible studies that compared patients undergoing rectal or sigmoid resection with or without splenic flexure mobilization. Inclusion criteria: (1) comparison of groups of patients with and without mobilization and (2) reports on overall morbidity, anastomotic leakage, operative time, length of specimen, number of harvested lymph nodes, or length of hospital stay. The outcomes of interest were: operative time, conversion rate, number of lymph nodes harvested, overall morbidity, mortality, leakage rate, reoperation rate, and length of stay. Results: Initial search yielded 2282 studies. In the end, we included 10 studies in the meta-analysis. Splenic flexure is associated with longer operative time (95% confidence interval (CI) 23.61–41.25; p < 0.001) and higher rate of anastomotic leakage (risk ratios (RR): 1.02; 95% CI 1.10–3.35; p = 0.02), however the length of hospital stay is shorter by 0.42 days. There were no differences in remaining outcomes. Conclusions: Not mobilizing the splenic flexure results in a significantly shorter operative time and a longer length of stay. Further research is required to establish whether flexure mobilization is required in minimally invasive surgery.

Minimally Invasive Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Versus Anterior Cervical Fusion and Arthroplasty: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110550
Author(s):  
Andrew Platt ◽  
Richard G. Fessler ◽  
Vincent C. Traynelis ◽  
John E. O’Toole
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Reoperation Rate ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy ◽  
Postoperative Length ◽  
Cervical Foraminotomy

Study Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives Patients with lateral cervical disc and foraminal pathology can be treated with anterior and posterior approaches including anterior cervical discectomy and fusion(ACDF), cervical total disc arthroplasty(TDA), and minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy(MIS-PCF). Although MIS-PCF may have some advantages over the anterior approaches, few comparative studies and meta-analyses have been done to assess superiority. Methods This study includes a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of studies directly comparing minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy to either anterior cervical discectomy and fusion or cervical total disc arthroplasty. Results In comparing patients undergoing ACDF and MIS-PCF, operative time ranged from 68 to 97.8 minutes in the ACDF group compared to 28 to 93.9 minutes in the MIS-PCF group. Mean postoperative length of stay ranged from 33.84 to 112.8 hours in the ACDF group compared to 13.68 to 83.6 hours in the MIS-PCF group. The total complication rates were 3.72% in the ACDF group and 3.73% in the MIS-PCF group. A random-effects model meta-analysis was carried out which failed to show a statistically significant difference in the complication rate between the two procedures(OR .91; 95% CI 0.13, 6.43; P = .92, I2 = 59%). The total reoperation rate was 3.5% in the ACDF group and 5.4% in the MIS-PCF group. A random-effects model meta-analysis was carried out which failed to show a statistically significant difference in the reoperation rate between the two procedures(OR .66; 95% CI 0.33, 1.33; P = .25, I2 = 0). In comparing patients undergoing TDA and MIS-PCF, operative time ranged from 90.3 to 106.7 minutes in the TDA group compared to 77.4 to 93.9 minutes in the MIS-PCF group. Mean postoperative length of stay ranged from 103.2 to 165.6 hours in the TDA group and 93.6 to 98.4 hours in the MIS-PCF group. The complication rate ranged from 23.5 to 28.6% in the TDA group and 0 to 14.3% in the MIS-PCF group. The overall reoperation rates were 2.6% in the TDA group and 10.2% in the MIS-PCF group. Conclusions There is no clear superiority between MIS-PCF and ACDF/TDA in terms of operative time, postoperative length of stay, or rate of complications/reoperations. Further studies with increased follow-up intervals >48 months, and higher sample sizes are necessary to determine the true superiority of MIS-PCF and anterior neck approaches in treatment of lateral disc and foraminal pathology.

scholarly journals 723 Neuroendoscopy versus Craniotomy in Basal Ganglia Haemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽  
Author(s):  
T K Tan ◽  
J Merola ◽  
M Zaben ◽  
W Gray ◽  
P Leach
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Basal Ganglia ◽  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Endoscopic Approach ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss

Abstract Aim Basal ganglia haemorrhage (BGH) is the most common type of intracerebral bleed with high morbidity and mortality rate. The efficacy between craniotomy and endoscopic approach in BGH is still debatable and advancement in minimally invasive technique has made endoscopic approach the preferred option. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the outcomes of craniotomy and endoscopic approach in BGH. Method Databases of PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were systematically searched from its inception until December 2020. All randomized clinical trials and observational studies comparing craniotomy versus endoscopic approach in BGH were included. Results Twelve studies enrolling 1297 patients (craniotomy:675, endoscopy:632) were included for qualitative and quantitative analysis. Endoscopic approach was associated with significantly lower postoperative mortality (OR:0.35, P &lt; 0.00001), higher haematoma evacuation rate (MD:4.95, P = 0.0002), shorter operative time (MD:-117.03, P &lt; 0.00001), lesser intraoperative blood loss (MD:-328.47, P &lt; 0.00001), higher postoperative Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) (MD:1.14, P = 0.01), higher postoperative Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) (MD:0.44, P = 0.05), shorter length of hospital stay (MD:-2.90, P &lt; 0.00001), lower complication rate (OR:0.30, P = 0.0004), lower infection rate (OR:0.29, P &lt; 0.00001) and lower modified Rankin Scale (mRS) (MD:-0.57, P = 0.004) compared to craniotomy. No significant difference was detected in reoperation, intracranial infection, re-bleeding. Conclusions The best available evidence suggest that endoscopic approach has better outcomes in mortality rate, operative time, haematoma evacuation rate, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, mRS, postoperative GCS and GOS compared with craniotomy in the management of BGH. However, there is a need for high quality randomised controlled trials with large sample size for definite conclusions.

666 EARLY EXTUBATION AFTER ESOPHAGECTOMY IS SAFE. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Serafim ◽  
Clara Santos ◽  
Marina Orlandini ◽  
Letícia Datrino ◽  
Guilherme Tavares ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Risk Difference ◽  
Pulmonary Complications ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Early Extubation ◽  
Icu Length Of Stay ◽  
Anastomotic Fistula

Abstract   Esophagectomy has high morbidity and mortality, mainly due to pulmonary complications. Consequently, ventilatory support is a cornerstone in postoperative management. However, there is still no consensus on the timing for extubation. There is a fear that untimely extubation would lead to a high risk for an urgent reintubation. On the other hand, there is a risk for pulmonary damage in prolonged intubation. Thus, the present study aimed to compare early and late extubation after esophagectomy. Methods A systematic review was carried out on PubMed, Lilacs, Cochrane Library Central, and Embase, comparing early and late extubation after esophagectomy. The primary outcome was reintubation. Secondary outcomes included mortality; complications; pulmonary complications; pneumonia; anastomotic fistula; length of hospital stay; and ICU length of stay. The inclusion criteria were: a) clinical trials and cohort studies; b) adult patients (&gt; 18 years); and c) patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy. The results were summarized by risk difference and mean difference. 95% confidence interval and random model were applied. Results Four articles were selected, comprising 490 patients. Early extubation did not increase the risk for reintubation, with a risk difference of 0.01 (95%CI -0.03; 0.04). Also, there was no difference for mortality −0.01 (95%CI -0.04; 0.03); complications −0.09 (95%CI -0.22; 0.05); pulmonary complications −0.05 (95%CI -0.13; 0.03); pneumonia −0.06 (95% CI-0.18; 0.05); anastomotic fistula −0.01 (95% CI -0.09; 0.08). In addition, there was no significant mean difference for: length of hospital stay −0.10 (95%CI -0.38; 0.1); and ICU length of stay 0.00 (95%CI -0.22; 0.22). Conclusion Early extubation after esophagectomy does not increase the risk for reintubation, mortality, complications, and lenght of stay.

Haemostatic devices in parotid surgery: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
L Allen ◽  
C MacKay ◽  
M H Rigby ◽  
J Trites ◽  
S M Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Facial Nerve ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Operative Blood Loss ◽  
Parotid Surgery

Abstract Objective The Harmonic Scalpel and Ligasure (Covidien) devices are commonly used in head and neck surgery. Parotidectomy is a complex and intricate surgery that requires careful dissection of the facial nerve. This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes in parotidectomy using these haemostatic devices with traditional scalpel and cautery. Method A systematic review of the literature was performed with subsequent meta-analysis of seven studies that compared the use of haemostatic devices to traditional scalpel and cautery in parotidectomy. Outcome measures included: temporary facial paresis, operating time, intra-operative blood loss, post-operative drain output and length of hospital stay. Results A total of 7 studies representing 675 patients were identified: 372 patients were treated with haemostatic devices, and 303 patients were treated with scalpel and cautery. Statistically significant outcomes favouring the use of haemostatic devices included operating time, intra-operative blood loss and post-operative drain output. Outcome measures that did not favour either treatment included facial nerve paresis and length of hospital stay. Conclusion Overall, haemostatic devices were found to reduce operating time, intra-operative blood loss and post-operative drain output.

Endoscopic decompression for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Roberto J. Perez-Roman ◽  
Wendy Gaztanaga ◽  
Victor M. Lu ◽  
Michael Y. Wang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lumbar Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Endoscopic Methods

OBJECTIVE Lumbar stenosis treatment has evolved with the introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques. Endoscopic methods take the concepts applied to MIS a step further, with multiple studies showing that endoscopic techniques have outcomes that are similar to those of more traditional approaches. The aim of this study was to perform an updated meta-analysis and systematic review of studies comparing the outcomes between endoscopic (uni- and biportal) and microscopic techniques for the treatment of lumbar stenosis. METHODS Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was performed using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Ovid Embase, and PubMed databases from their dates of inception to December 14, 2020. All identified articles were then systematically screened against the following inclusion criteria: 1) studies comparing endoscopic (either uniportal or biportal) with minimally invasive approaches, 2) patient age ≥ 18 years, and 3) diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis. Bias was assessed using quality assessment criteria and funnel plots. Meta-analysis using a random-effects model was used to synthesize the metadata. RESULTS From a total of 470 studies, 14 underwent full-text assessment. Of these 14 studies, 13 comparative studies were included for quantitative analysis, totaling 1406 procedures satisfying all criteria for selection. Regarding postoperative back pain, 9 studies showed that endoscopic methods resulted in significantly lower pain scores compared with MIS (mean difference [MD] −1.0, 95% CI −1.6 to −0.4, p < 0.01). The length of stay data were reported by 7 studies, with endoscopic methods associated with a significantly shorter length of stay versus the MIS technique (MD −2.1 days, 95% CI −2.7 to −1.4, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference with respect to leg visual analog scale scores, Oswestry Disability Index scores, blood loss, surgical time, and complications, and there were not any significant quality or bias concerns. CONCLUSIONS Both endoscopic and MIS techniques are safe and effective methods for treating patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis. Patients who undergo endoscopic surgery seem to report less postoperative low-back pain and significantly reduced hospital stay with a trend toward less perioperative blood loss. Future large prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm the findings in this study.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Complications Between Percutaneous Endoscopic and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 441-452
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Disease

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PE-TLIF) has been increasingly used to treat degenerative lumbar disease in recent years. However, there are still controversies about whether PE-TLIF is superior to minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical outcomes and complications of PE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF in treating degenerative lumbar disease. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A comprehensive search of online databases including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify related studies reporting the outcomes and complications of PE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF for degenerative lumbar disease. The clinical outcomes were assessed by the Visual Analog Scale and Oswestry Disability Index. In addition, the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, time to ambulation, length of hospital stay, fusion rate, and surgery-related complications were summarized. Forest plots were constructed to investigate the results. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies involving 1,475 patients were included in this meta-analysis. PE-TLIF significantly reduced operative time, intraoperative blood loss, time to ambulation, and length of hospital stay compared to MIS-TLIF. Moreover, PE-TLIF was superior to MIS-TLIF in the early postoperative relief of back pain. However, there were no significant differences in medium to long-term clinical outcomes, fusion rate, and incidence of complications between PE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF. LIMITATIONS: The current evidence is heterogeneous and most studies included in this meta-analysis are nonrandomized controlled trials. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis indicates that medium to long-term clinical outcomes and complication rates of PE-TLIF were similar to MIS-TLIF for the treatment of degenerative lumbar disease. However, PE-TLIF shows advantages in less surgical trauma, faster recovery, and early postoperative relief of back pain. KEY WORDS: Percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, degenerative lumbar disease, chronic pain, systematic review, meta-analysis

Comparison of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery and Micro-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Kidney Stones: A Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Zhenhua Gu ◽  
Yucheng Yang ◽  
Rui Ding ◽  
Meili Wang ◽  
Jianming Pu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy ◽  
Kidney Stones ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery ◽  
Alternative Approach ◽  
Significant Difference

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Advances in micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for kidney stones have made it an alternative approach to the retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) approach. Nevertheless, the superiority of micro-PCNL over RIRS is still under debate. The results are controversial. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the clinical results in patients presenting with kidney stones treated with micro-PCNL or RIRS. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A literature search was done for electronic databases to identify researches that compared micro-PCNL and RIRS till December 2019. The clinical outcome included complications, stone-free rates (SFRs), hemoglobin reduction, length of hospital stay, and operative time. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Five articles were included in our study. The pooled results revealed no statistical difference in the rate of complications (OR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.57–1.74, <i>p</i> = 0.99), length of hospital stay (MD = −0.29, 95% CI = −0.82 to 0.24, <i>p</i> = 0.28), and operative time (MD = −6.63, 95% CI = −27.34 to 14.08, <i>p</i> = 0.53) between the 2 groups. However, significant difference was present in hemoglobin reduction (MD = −0.43, 95% CI = −0.55 to 0.30, <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001) and the SFRs (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.36–0.98, <i>p</i> = 0.04) when comparing RIRS with micro-PCNL. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Compared with micro-PCNL to treat kidney stones, RIRS is associated with better stone clearance and bearing higher hemoglobin loss. As the advantages of both technologies have been shown in some fields, the continuation of well-designed clinical trials may be necessary.

scholarly journals Nonoperative treatment for nonperforated appendicitis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 261-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonia Maita ◽  
Björn Andersson ◽  
Jan F. Svensson ◽  
Tomas Wester
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Acute Appendicitis ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Nonoperative Treatment ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Search Terms ◽  
Initial Hospital

AbstractAcute appendicitis is the most common surgical emergency in children. Nonoperative treatment of nonperforated acute appendicitis in children is an alternative to appendectomy. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the outcomes of nonoperative treatment of nonperforated acute appendicitis in children in the literature. Databases were searched to identify abstracts, using predefined search terms. The abstracts were reviewed by two independent reviewers and articles were selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted by the two reviewers and analyzed. The literature search yielded 2743 abstracts. Twenty-one articles were selected for analysis. The study design was heterogenous, with only one randomized controlled study. The symptoms resolved in 92% [95% CI (88; 96)] of the nonoperatively treated patients. Meta-analysis showed that an additional 16% (95% CI 10; 22) of patients underwent appendectomy after discharge from initial hospital stay. Complications and length of hospital stay was not different among patients treated with antibiotics compared with those who underwent appendectomy. Nonoperative treatment of nonperforated acute appendicitis children is safe and efficient. There is a lack of large randomized controlled trials to compare outcomes of nonoperative treatment with appendectomy.

The Self-Retaining Barbed Suture for Parenchymal Repair in Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 744-752
Author(s):  
Hailun Zhan ◽  
Chunping Huang ◽  
Tengcheng Li ◽  
Fei Yang ◽  
Jiarong Cai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Function ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
The Self ◽  
Barbed Suture ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss

Objectives. The warm ischemia time (WIT) is key to successful laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN). The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing the self-retaining barbed suture (SRBS) with a non-SRBS for parenchymal repair during LPN. Methods. A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was performed up to March 2018. Inclusion criteria for this study were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational comparative studies assessing the SRBS and non-SRBS for parenchymal repair during LPN. Outcomes of interest included WIT, complications, overall operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and change of renal function. Results. One RCT and 7 retrospective studies were identified, which included a total of 461 cases. Compared with the non-SRBS, use of the SRBS for parenchymal repair during LPN was associated with shorter WIT ( P < .00001), shorter overall operative time ( P < .00001), lower estimated blood loss ( P = .02), and better renal function preservation ( P = .001). There was no significant difference between the SRBS and non-SRBS with regard to complications ( P = .08) and length of hospital stay ( P = .25). Conclusions. The SRBS for parenchymal repair during LPN can significantly shorten the WIT and overall operative time, decrease blood loss, and preserve renal function.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document