propensity score
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

10958
(FIVE YEARS 8140)

H-INDEX

111
(FIVE YEARS 37)

2022 ◽  
Vol 67 ◽  
pp. 134-140
Author(s):  
Mitchell S. Buckley ◽  
Ivan A. Komerdelj ◽  
Paul A. D'Alessio ◽  
Pooja Rangan ◽  
Sumit K. Agarwal ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Mariaconsiglia Ferriero ◽  
Gabriele Tuderti ◽  
Gian Luca Muto ◽  
Cristian Fiori ◽  
Alfredo Maria Bove ◽  
...  

Diagnostics ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 211
Author(s):  
Antonio Facciorusso ◽  
Martha Arevalo-Mora ◽  
Maria Cristina Conti Bellocchi ◽  
Laura Bernardoni ◽  
Daryl Ramai ◽  
...  

Background: Despite weak evidence, antibiotic prophylaxis prior to endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle biopsy (EUS-TTNB) of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) is routinely used in clinical practice. We aim to compare a group of patients treated with antibiotics before EUS-TTNB of PCLs and a group who did not undergo antimicrobial prophylaxis. Methods: Out of 236 patients with pancreatic cystic lesions referred to two high-volume centers between 2016 and 2021, after propensity score matching, two groups were compared: 98 subjects who underwent EUS-TTNB under antibiotic prophylaxis and 49 subjects without prophylaxis. Results: There was no difference in terms of baseline parameters between groups. Final diagnosis was serous cystadenoma in 36.7% of patients in the group not treated with prophylaxis and in 37.7% of patients in the control group, whereas IPMN and mucinous cystadenoma were diagnosed in 3 (6.1%) and 16 (32.6%) versus 6 (6.1%) and 32 (32.6%) patients in the two groups, respectively (p = 0.23). Overall, the adverse event rate was 6.1% in the group not treated with antibiotic prophylaxis and 5.1% in the control group (p = 0.49). Only a single infectious adverse event occurred in each group (p = 0.48). The diagnostic yields were 89.7% and 90.8% in the two groups (p = 0.7), and the diagnostic accuracy rate was 81.6% in both groups (p = 1.0). Conclusions: Prophylactic antibiotics do not seem to influence the risk of infection, and their routine use should be discouraged.


BMC Cancer ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaodong Zhou ◽  
Tao Yu ◽  
Yixin Zhang ◽  
Liqiang Qian ◽  
Qing Xia

Abstract Background As segmentectomy had become commonly used for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) treatment, which had the advantages of radical operation, however, it remains controversial owing to procedural complexity and risk of increased complications compared with wedge resection. We evaluated operative and postoperative outcomes of simple segmentectomy compared to wedge resection in ground-glass opacity (GGO) diameter between 2 cm and 3 cm NSCLC. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 1600 clinical GGO diameter between 2 cm and 3 cm NSCLC patients who received simple segmentectomy and wedge resection between Jan 2011 and Jan 2015. Participants were matched 1:1 on their propensity score for two groups. Clinic-pathologic, operative, and postoperative results of two groups were compared. Results After using propensity score methods to create a matched cohort of participants with simple segmentectomy group similar to that wedge resection, there were no significant differences detected in tumor size, margin distance, histology, age, sex, preoperative comorbidities and preoperative pulmonary function. Overall complications in simple segmentectomy group were more than wedge resection group (21% vs 3%, p = 0.03). Median operative time (110.6 vs. 71.2 min; p = 0.01) and prolonged air leakage (12% vs. 3%; p = 0.02) was significantly longer in the simple segmentectomy group. There was no difference in recurrence free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) of 5-years between simple segmentectomy group and wedge resection group. Postoperative pulmonary function in simple segmentectomy group recovered more slowly than wedge resection group. Conclusion Wedge resection may have comparable efficacy as simple segmentectomy for GGO diameter between 2 cm and 3 cm NSCLC, but lead to less complications, less surgical procedure and faster recovery of pulmonary function.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document