scholarly journals Comparison of 27-Gauge and 25-Gauge Microincision Vitrectomy Surgery for the Treatment of Vitreoretinal Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Jinlan Ma ◽  
Qing Wang ◽  
Haoyu Niu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Vitreoretinal Disease ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Microincision Vitrectomy Surgery ◽  
Anatomical Success ◽  
Vitrectomy Surgery ◽  
Anatomical Success Rate

Background. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of 27-gauge (27-G) microincision vitrectomy surgery (MIVS) compared with 25-guage (25-G) MIVS for the treatment of vitreoretinal disease. Methods. A systematic electronic search was conducted in March 2020 in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library. Eligible criteria for including studies were controlled trials comparing 27-G vitrectomy with 25-G vitrectomy in patients with vitreoretinal disease. The main outcomes included operation time; best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in logMAR; postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP); primary anatomical success rate for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) cases and postoperative central macular thickness (CMT) for idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM) cases; intraoperative/postoperative complications. Odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) were synthesized under fixed or random effects models. Results. Eleven studies enrolling 940 eyes were identified. Among those 11 studies, six studies were on the treatment of RRD and five studies were on the treatment of ERM, so subgroup analyses were conducted. The total pooled results indicated that 27-G surgery system had obvious advantages in improving BCVA at six months after the vitrectomy (P = 0.004) and reducing intraoperative/postoperative complications (P = 0.03). However, the mean operation time was significantly longer by three minutes for 27-G compared with 25-G vitrectomy (P = 0.002). In subgroup analyses, for the treatment of ERM cases, 27-G group was associated with less complications and longer operation time. However, for the treatment of RRD cases, 27-G groups and 25-G groups were comparable in operation time, postoperative BCVA, postoperative IOP, and primary anatomical success rate. Conclusions. This meta-analysis confirmed that 27-G MIVS was an effective and safe surgical system compared with 25-G MIVS for the treatment of RRD and ERM cases, even though 27-G system needs a longer surgical time.

scholarly journals Posterolateral Fusion Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110164
Author(s):  
Elsayed Said ◽  
Mohamed E. Abdel-Wanis ◽  
Mohamed Ameen ◽  
Ali A. Sayed ◽  
Khaled H. Mosallam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Revision Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: Arthrodesis has been a valid treatment option for spinal diseases, including spondylolisthesis and lumbar spinal stenosis. Posterolateral and posterior lumbar interbody fusion are amongst the most used fusion techniques. Previous reports comparing both methods have been contradictory. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to establish substantial evidence on which fusion method would achieve better outcomes. Methods: Major databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes of interest between posterolateral fusion (PLF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). We extracted data on clinical outcome, complication rate, revision rate, fusion rate, operation time, and blood loss. We calculated the mean differences (MDs) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome and the odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for binary outcomes. P < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: We retrieved 8 studies meeting our inclusion criteria, with a total of 616 patients (308 PLF, 308 PLIF). The results of our analysis revealed that patients who underwent PLIF had significantly higher fusion rates. No statistically significant difference was identified in terms of clinical outcomes, complication rates, revision rates, operation time or blood loss. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide a comparison between PLF and PLIF based on RCTs. Although PLIF had higher fusion rates, both fusion methods achieve similar clinical outcomes with equal complication rate, revision rate, operation time and blood loss at 1-year minimum follow-up.

scholarly journals Sarcopenia Is Associated with Mortality in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Gerontology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Jane Xu ◽  
Ching S. Wan ◽  
Kiriakos Ktoris ◽  
Esmee M. Reijnierse ◽  
Andrea B. Maier
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Nursing Home Residents ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Risk Of Mortality ◽  
European Working ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Meta Analyses

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Sarcopenia can predispose individuals to falls, fractures, hospitalization, and mortality. The prevalence of sarcopenia depends on the population studied and the definition used for the diagnosis. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the association between sarcopenia and mortality and if it is dependent on the population and sarcopenia definition. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane from 1 January 2010 to 6 April 2020 for articles relating to sarcopenia and mortality. Articles were included if they met the following criteria – cohorts with a mean or median age ≥18 years and either of the following sarcopenia definitions: Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS and AWGS2019), European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP and EWGSOP2), Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH), International Working Group for Sarcopenia (IWGS), or Sarcopenia Definition and Outcomes Consortium (SDOC). Hazard ratios (HR) and odds ratios (OR) were pooled separately in meta-analyses using a random-effects model, stratified by population (community-dwelling adults, outpatients, inpatients, and nursing home residents). Subgroup analyses were performed for sarcopenia definition and follow-up period. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Out of 3,025 articles, 57 articles were included in the systematic review and 56 in the meta-analysis (42,108 participants, mean age of 49.4 ± 11.7 to 86.6 ± 1.0 years, 40.3% females). Overall, sarcopenia was associated with a significantly higher risk of mortality (HR: 2.00 [95% CI: 1.71, 2.34]; OR: 2.35 [95% CI: 1.64, 3.37]), which was independent of population, sarcopenia definition, and follow-up period in subgroup analyses. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Sarcopenia is associated with a significantly higher risk of mortality, independent of population and sarcopenia definition, which highlights the need for screening and early diagnosis in all populations.

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

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.

665 PROPHYLACTIC THORACIC DUCT OBSTRUCTION DURING ESOPHAGECTOMY: THE IMPACT ON PERIOPERATIVE RISKS AND LONG-TERM SURVIVAL. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Santos ◽  
Laura Santos ◽  
Leticia Datrino ◽  
Guilherme Tavares ◽  
Luca Tristão ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Thoracic Duct ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Thoracic Duct Ligation ◽  
Duct Ligation

Abstract   During esophagectomy for cancer, there is no consensus if prophylactic thoracic duct ligation (TDL), with or without thoracic duct resection (TDR), could influence the perioperative outcomes and long-term survival. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared patients who went through esophagectomy associated or not to ligation or resection of the thoracic duct. Methods A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library Central and Lilacs (BVS). The inclusion criteria were: (1) studies that compare thoracic duct ligation, with or without resection, and non-thoracic duct ligation; (2) involve adult patients with esophageal cancer; (3) articles that analyses the outcomes—perioperative complications, perioperative mortality, chylothorax development and overall survival; (4) only clinical trials and cohort were accepted. A 95% confidence interval (CI) was used, and random-effects model was performed. Results Fifteen articles were selected, comprising 6,249 patients. TDL did not reduce the risk for chylothorax (Risk difference [RD]: -0.01; 95%CI: −0.02, 0.00). Also, TDL did not influence the risk for complications (RD: -0.02; 95%CI: −0.11, 0.07); mortality (RD: 0.00; 95%CI: −0.00, 0.00); and reoperation rate (RD: -0.01; 95%CI: −0.02, 0.00). TDR was associated with higher risk for postoperative complications (RD: 0.1; 95%CI 0.00, 0.19); chylothorax (RD: 0.02; 95%CI 0.00, 0.03). Both TDL and TDR did not influence the overall survival rate (TDL: HR: 1.17; 95%CI: 0.86, 1.48; and TDR: HR: 1.16; 95%CI: 0.8, 1.51). Conclusion Thoracic duct obliteration with or without its resection during esophagectomy does not change long term survival. Nonetheless, TDR increased the risk for postoperative complications and chylothorax.

scholarly journals Diagnostic accuracy of the Geriatric Depression Scale-30, Geriatric Depression Scale-15, Geriatric Depression Scale-5 and Geriatric Depression Scale-4 for detecting major depression: protocol for a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. e026598 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Benedetti ◽  
Yin Wu ◽  
Brooke Levis ◽  
Machelle Wilchesky ◽  
Jill Boruff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Major Depression ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Geriatric Depression Scale ◽  
Depression Scale ◽  
Individual Participant Data ◽  
Geriatric Depression ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Individual Participant

IntroductionThe 30-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-30) and the shorter GDS-15, GDS-5 and GDS-4 are recommended as depression screening tools for elderly individuals. Existing meta-analyses on the diagnostic accuracy of the GDS have not been able to conduct subgroup analyses, have included patients already identified as depressed who would not be screened in practice and have not accounted for possible bias due to selective reporting of results from only better-performing cut-offs in primary studies. Individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA), which involves a standard systematic review, then a synthesis of individual participant data, rather than summary results, could address these limitations. The objective of our IPDMA is to generate accuracy estimates to detect major depression for all possible cut-offs of each version of the GDS among studies using different reference standards, separately and among participant subgroups based on age, sex, dementia diagnosis and care settings. In addition, we will use a modelling approach to generate individual participant probabilities for major depression based on GDS scores (rather than a dichotomous cut-off) and participant characteristics (eg, sex, age, dementia status, care setting).Methods and analysisIndividual participant data comparing GDS scores to a major depression diagnosis based on a validated structured or semistructured diagnostic interview will be sought via a systematic review. Data sources will include Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Bivariate random-effects models will be used to estimate diagnostic accuracy parameters for each cut-off of the different versions of the GDS. Prespecified subgroup analyses will be conducted. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool.Ethics and disseminationThe findings of this study will be of interest to stakeholders involved in research, clinical practice and policy.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018104329.

scholarly journals Association Between Glucocorticoids Treatment and Viral Clearance Delay in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianbo Li ◽  
Xuelian Liao ◽  
Yue Zhou ◽  
Luping Wang ◽  
Hang Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severity Of Illness ◽  
Viral Clearance ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
High Doses ◽  
Critical Ill

Abstract BackgroundEvidence of glucocorticoids on viral clearance delay of COVID-19 patients is not clear. MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched studies on Medline, Embase, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 2002 to December 2, 2020. We mainly pooled the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs), mean difference (MD) or risk ratios (RRs) of viral clearance delay and did subgroup analyses by doses and the severity of illness.ResultsOne trial and 38 observational studies, with a total of 7119 patients, were identified. Glucocorticoids treatment was associated with delayed viral clearance in COVID-19 (Adjusted HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.51 to 1.94, I2=22%, PI 1.45 to 2.01), based on moderate-quality evidence. In subgroup analyses, risk of viral clearance delay was significantly higher among COVID-19 patients being mild or moderate ill (adjusted HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.70, I2=52%; MD 2.59, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.97, I2=24%), but not in those of being severe or critical ill (adjusted HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.26; MD 0.22, 95% CI -1.85 to 2.29, I2=56%); taking high doses (adjusted HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.15; unadjusted RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.94) rather taking low doses (adjusted HR 1.39, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.08; unadjusted RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.77) or pulse (unadjusted RR 1.85, 95% CI 0.66 to 5.19).ConclusionsGlucocorticoids treatment delayed viral clearance in COVID-19 patients of being mild or moderate ill or taking a high dose, rather in those of being severe or critical ill or taking low dose or pulse.

scholarly journals Comparison of problem-based learning and traditional teaching methods in medical psychology education in China: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. e0243897
Author(s):  
Junwei Gao ◽  
Ling Yang ◽  
Jinghui Zhao ◽  
Lian Wang ◽  
Jiao Zou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Teaching Method ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Random Effect Model ◽  
Medical Psychology ◽  
Psychology Education ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Psychology Curriculum ◽  
Education In China

Background PBL approach has been widely used in many Chinese universities over the past decade. However, the effects of PBL approach on medical psychology education in China are inconsistent. The purpose of this study was to ascertain whether the PBL approach was superior to the lecture-based teaching method in the context of the medical psychology curriculum in China. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to confirm the effectiveness of PBL in Chinese medical psychology. Corresponding databases were searched for available studies, where data were extracted to calculated Hedges’ g and its 95% confidence interval in total and subgroup analyses. Subgroup analyses were also carried out. Results Nine studies with 551 cases and 496 controls were identified. The total examination scores of students in the PBL approach group were significantly higher compared with students in the traditional lecture-based teaching group under the random effect model (Hedges’ g = 1.510, 95%CI 0.792–2.227, p<0.001). Subgroup analyses based on major and school system exhibited similar results. Conclusions Our study supported the notion that the PBL approach may be applicable to Chinese medical psychology education.

scholarly journals Association Between Glucocorticoids Treatment and Viral Clearance Delay in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianbo Li ◽  
Xuelian Liao ◽  
Yue Zhou ◽  
Luping Wang ◽  
Hang Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severity Of Illness ◽  
Viral Clearance ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
High Doses ◽  
Critical Ill

Abstract Background Evidence of glucocorticoids on viral clearance delay of COVID-19 patients is not clear. Methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched studies on Medline, Embase, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 2002 to December 2, 2020. We mainly pooled the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs), mean difference (MD) or risk ratios (RRs) of viral clearance delay and did subgroup analyses by doses and the severity of illness.Results One trial and 38 observational studies, with a total of 7119 patients, were identified. Glucocorticoids treatment was associated with delayed viral clearance in COVID-19 (Adjusted HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.51 to 1.94, I2=22%, PI 1.45 to 2.01), based on moderate-quality evidence. In subgroup analyses, risk of viral clearance delay was significantly higher among COVID-19 patients being mild or moderate ill (adjusted HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.70, I2=52%; MD 2.59, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.97, I2=24%), but not in those of being severe or critical ill (adjusted HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.26; MD 0.22, 95% CI -1.85 to 2.29, I2=56%); taking high doses (adjusted HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.15; unadjusted RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.94) rather taking low doses (adjusted HR 1.39, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.08; unadjusted RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.77) or pulse (unadjusted RR 1.85, 95% CI 0.66 to 5.19).Conclusions Glucocorticoids treatment delayed viral clearance in COVID-19 patients of being mild or moderate ill or taking a high dose, rather in those of being severe or critical ill or taking low dose or pulse.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document