-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2024Oral submucous fibrosis (OSF) is a chronic disease of the oral cavity that causes progressive constriction of the cheeks and mouth accompanied by severe pain and reduced... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Oral submucous fibrosis (OSF) is a chronic disease of the oral cavity that causes progressive constriction of the cheeks and mouth accompanied by severe pain and reduced mouth opening. OSF has a significant impact on eating and swallowing, affecting quality of life. There is an increased risk of oral malignancy in people with OSF. The main risk factor for OSF is areca nut chewing, and the mainstay of treatment has been behavioural interventions to support habit cessation. This review is an update of a version last published in 2008.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of interventions for the management of oral submucous fibrosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 5 September 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with a biopsy-confirmed diagnosis of OSF treated with systemic, locally delivered or topical drugs at any dosage, duration or delivery method compared against placebo or each other. We considered surgical procedures compared against other treatments or no active intervention. We also considered other interventions such as physiotherapy, ultrasound or alternative therapies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. participant-reported resumption of normal eating, chewing and speech; 2. change or improvement in maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance); 3. improvement in range of jaw movement; 4. change in severity of oral/mucosal burning pain/sensation; 5.
ADVERSE EFFECTS
Our secondary outcomes were 6. quality of life; 7. postoperative discomfort or pain as a result of the intervention; 8. participant satisfaction; 9. hospital admission; 10. direct costs of medication, hospital bed days and any associated inpatient costs for the surgical interventions. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 30 RCTs (2176 participants) in this updated review. We assessed one study at low risk of bias, five studies at unclear risk of bias and 24 studies at high risk of bias. We found diverse interventions, which we categorised according to putative mechanism of action. We present below our main findings for the comparison 'any intervention compared with placebo or no active treatment' (though most trials included habit cessation for all participants). Results for head-to-head comparisons of active interventions are presented in full in the main review. Any intervention versus placebo or no active treatment Participant-reported resumption of normal eating, chewing and speech No studies reported this outcome. Interincisal distance Antioxidants may increase mouth opening (indicated by interincisal distance (mm)) when measured at less than three months (mean difference (MD) 3.11 mm, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 5.77; 2 studies, 520 participants; low-certainty evidence), and probably increase mouth opening slightly at three to six months (MD 8.83 mm, 95% CI 8.22 to 9.45; 3 studies, 620 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Antioxidants may make no difference to interincisal distance at six-month follow-up or greater (MD -1.41 mm, 95% CI -5.74 to 2.92; 1 study, 90 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pentoxifylline may increase mouth opening slightly (MD 1.80 mm, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.58; 1 study, 106 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, it should be noted that these results are all less than 10 mm, which could be considered the minimal change that is meaningful to someone with oral submucous fibrosis. The evidence was very uncertain for all other interventions compared to placebo or no active treatment (intralesional dexamethasone injections, pentoxifylline, hydrocortisone plus hyaluronidase, physiotherapy). Burning sensation Antioxidants probably reduce burning sensation visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at less than three months (MD -30.92 mm, 95% CI -31.57 to -30.27; 1 study, 400 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), at three to six months (MD -70.82 mm, 95% CI -94.39 to -47.25; 2 studies, 500 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and at more than six months (MD -27.60 mm, 95% CI -36.21 to -18.99; 1 study, 90 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain for the other interventions that were compared to placebo and measured burning sensation (intralesional dexamethasone, vasodilators). Adverse effects Fifteen studies reported adverse effects as an outcome. Six of these studies found no adverse effects. One study evaluating abdominal dermal fat graft reported serious adverse effects resulting in prolonged hospital stay for 3/30 participants. There were mild and transient general adverse effects to systemic drugs, such as dyspepsia, abdominal pain and bloating, gastritis and nausea, in studies evaluating vasodilators and antioxidants in particular.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found moderate-certainty evidence that antioxidants administered systemically probably improve mouth opening slightly at three to six months and improve burning sensation VAS scores up to and beyond six months. We found only low/very low-certainty evidence for all other comparisons and outcomes. There was insufficient evidence to make an informed judgement about potential adverse effects associated with any of these treatments. There was insufficient evidence to support or refute the effectiveness of the other interventions tested. High-quality, adequately powered intervention trials with a low risk of bias that compare biologically plausible treatments for OSF are needed. It is important that relevant participant-reported outcomes are evaluated.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Oral Submucous Fibrosis; Pentoxifylline; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Vasodilator Agents; Abdominal Pain; Antioxidants; Dexamethasone
PubMed: 38415846
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007156.pub3 -
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery Aug 2023Approximately one third of patients with Acute Type A Aortic Dissection (ATAAD) present with pre-operative malperfusion syndromes (MPS). Of these, mesenteric... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Approximately one third of patients with Acute Type A Aortic Dissection (ATAAD) present with pre-operative malperfusion syndromes (MPS). Of these, mesenteric malperfusion represents the greatest risk to patients with respect to increased short-term mortality. In select patients, it may be feasible to offer a staged approach by treating the mesenteric malperfusion first, optimizing the patient in the intensive care setting and then, following with a central aortic repair. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize cohort studies assessing the role of pre-operative interventions for mesenteric malperfusion.
METHODS
An electronic literature search of five databases was performed to identify all relevant studies providing studies examining short-term mortality on patients who underwent either endovascular or open revascularisation of mesenteric ischemia prior to central aortic repair. The primary outcome was all-cause, short-term mortality. Secondary outcomes were comparative mortality between a delayed repair vs. aortic repair first strategy, rates of postoperative laparotomy, bowel resection, and mortality following delayed aortic repair.
RESULTS
The search strategy identified 8 studies qualifying for inclusion, with a total of 180 patients who underwent delayed aortic surgery in the setting of mesenteric MPS. The weighted short-term mortality following a mesenteric revascularisation first, delayed aortic surgery strategy was 22.5%. This strategy was also associated with a significantly lower mortality than a central repair first strategy (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.02-0.27), and a significantly lower rate of postoperative laparotomy/bowel resection (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.02-0.14). If patients survive to receive central repair, the weighted short-term mortality postoperatively is low (2.1%).
CONCLUSION
A summary of this evidence reveals a lower short-term mortality in hemodynamically stable patients with mesenteric malperfusion, along with a reduction in postoperative laparotomy/bowel resections. Of those patients who survive to receive central repair, short-term mortality remains very low in the select group of hemodynamically stable patients. Further high-quality studies with randomized or propensity matched data are required to verify these results.
Topics: Humans; Aortic Dissection; Mesenteric Ischemia; Mesentery; Syndrome; Aorta; Treatment Delay; Angioplasty
PubMed: 37596605
DOI: 10.1186/s13019-023-02341-y -
Techniques in Coloproctology Nov 2023Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has been associated with improved oncological outcomes in treatment of colon cancer. However, widespread adoption is limited partly... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Complete mesocolic excision versus standard resection for colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative safety and an evaluation of the use of a robotic approach.
PURPOSE
Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has been associated with improved oncological outcomes in treatment of colon cancer. However, widespread adoption is limited partly because of the technical complexity and perceived risks of the approach. The aim of out study was to evaluate the safety of CME compared to standard resection and to compare robotic versus laparoscopic approaches.
METHODS
Two parallel searches were undertaken in MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases 12 December 2021. The first was to evaluate IDEAL stage 3 evidence to compare complication rates as a surrogate marker of perioperative safety between CME and standard resection. The second independent search compared lymph node yield and survival outcomes between minimally invasive approaches.
RESULTS
There were four randomized control trials (n = 1422) comparing CME to standard resection, and three studies comparing laparoscopic (n = 164) to robotic (n = 161) approaches. Compared to standard resection, CME was associated with a reduction in Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher complication rates (3.56% vs. 7.24%, p = 0.002), reduced blood loss (113.1 ml vs. 137.6 ml, p < 0.0001) and greater mean lymph node harvest (25.6 vs. 20.9 nodes, p = 0.001). Between the robotic and laparoscopic groups, there were no significant differences in complication rates, blood loss, lymph node yield, 5-year disease-free survival (OR 1.05, p = 0.87) and overall survival (OR 0.83, p = 0.54).
CONCLUSIONS
Our study demonstrated improved safety with CME. There was no difference in safety or survival outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic CME. The advantage of a robotic approach may lie in the reduced learning curve and an increased penetration of minimally invasive approach to CME. Further studies are required to explore this.
PROSPERO ID
CRD42021287065.
Topics: Humans; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Lymph Node Excision; Colectomy; Colonic Neoplasms; Robotics; Mesocolon; Laparoscopy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37414915
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-023-02838-7 -
Journal of Robotic Surgery Jun 2024The role of robotics has grown exponentially. There is an active interest amongst practitioners in the transferability of the potential benefits into plastic and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The role of robotics has grown exponentially. There is an active interest amongst practitioners in the transferability of the potential benefits into plastic and reconstructive surgery; however, many plastic surgeons report lack of widespread implementation, training, or clinical exposure. We report the current evidence base, and surgical opportunities, alongside key barriers, and limitations to overcome, to develop the use of robotics within the field. This systematic review of PubMed, Medline, and Embase has been conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024524237). Preclinical, educational, and clinical articles were included, within the scope of plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2, 181, articles were screened; 176 articles met the inclusion criteria across lymph node dissection, flap and microsurgery, vaginoplasty, craniofacial reconstruction, abdominal wall reconstruction and transoral robotic surgery (TOR). A number of benefits have been reported including technical advantages such as better visualisation, improved precision and accuracy, and tremor reduction. Patient benefits include lower rate of complications and quicker recovery; however, there is a longer operative duration in some categories. Cost presents a significant barrier to implementation. Robotic surgery presents an exciting opportunity to improve patient outcomes and surgical ease of use, with feasibility for many subspecialities demonstrated in this review. However, further higher quality comparative research with careful case selection, which is adequately powered, as well as the inclusion of cost-analysis, is necessary to fully understand the true benefit for patient care, and justification for resource utilisation.
Topics: Female; Humans; Abdominal Wall; Lymph Node Excision; Microsurgery; Operative Time; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 38878229
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01987-7 -
Hernia : the Journal of Hernias and... Dec 2023To examine updated evidence on the efficacy and safety of mesh non-fixation in patients undergoing laparo-endoscopic repair of groin hernias. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To examine updated evidence on the efficacy and safety of mesh non-fixation in patients undergoing laparo-endoscopic repair of groin hernias.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials. gov, and ICTRP databases to identify randomized controlled trials. The primary outcomes were recurrence, chronic pain, and return to daily life. The certainty of evidence (CoE) was assessed by grading recommendations, assessments, developments, and evaluations. We performed a subgroup analysis based on the surgical type. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD 42022368929).
RESULTS
We included 25 trials with 3,668 patients (4,038 hernias) were included. Mesh non-fixation resulted in little to no difference in hernia recurrence (relative risk [RR]:1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.59-3.31; I = 0%; moderate CoE) and chronic pain (RR:0.48, 95% CI:0.13-1.78; I = 77%; moderate CoE), but reduced return to daily life (mean difference [MD]: - 1.79 days, 95% CI: - 2.79 to -0.80; I = 96%; low CoE). In subgroup analyses, the transabdominal preperitoneal approach (TAPP) (MD: - 2.97 days, 95% CI: - 4.87 to - 1.08; I = 97%) reduced return to daily life than total extraperitoneal inguinal approach (MD: - 0.24 days, 95% CI - 0.71 to 0.24; I = 61%) (p = 0.006).
CONCLUSIONS
Mesh nonfixation improves the return to daily life without increasing the risk of hernia recurrence or chronic pain. Surgeons and patients may discuss mesh nonfixation options to accommodate a patient's desired return to daily life. Further trials focusing on TAPP are required to confirm these findings.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Surgical Mesh; Chronic Pain; Groin; Herniorrhaphy; Hernia, Inguinal; Recurrence; Treatment Outcome; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 37955811
DOI: 10.1007/s10029-023-02919-4 -
Asian Journal of Surgery Nov 2023Mass closure with a continuous suture using large bite stitching technique has been widely accepted for midline laparotomy wound closures. However, emerging evidence... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Mass closure with a continuous suture using large bite stitching technique has been widely accepted for midline laparotomy wound closures. However, emerging evidence suggests the use of small bite technique to reduce rates of incisional ventral hernia, surgical site infection (SSI) and burst abdomen. This meta-analysis aims to compare small versus large bite stitching techniques to assess complication rates in midline laparotomy wound closures. A comprehensive multi-database search (OVID EBM Reviews, OVID Medline, EMBASE, Scopus) was conducted from database inception to 11th October 2021 according to PRISMA guidelines. We included studies comparing post-operative complication rates of small bite versus large bite stitching techniques for midline laparotomy wound closure. Extracted data was pooled for meta-analysis evaluating rates of incisional ventral hernia, SSI and burst abdomen. We included five randomized controlled trials (RCT) in the meta-analysis and three prospective cohort studies for qualitative analysis. A total of 1977 participants composed of 961 small bite and 1016 large bite technique patients were included from the five RCTs. There was a significant reduction in the rates of incisional ventral hernia and SSI with the small bite stitch technique with odds ratios (OR) of 0.39 (95% CI [0.21-0.71]) and 0.68 (95% CI [0.51-0.91]) respectively, and a trend in favour of reduced incidence of burst abdomen with OR of 0.60 (95% CI [0.15-2.48]). Small bite stitch technique in midline laparotomy wound closure may be superior over conventional mass closure using the large bite stitch technique, with statistically significant lower rates of incisional ventral hernia and SSI.
Topics: Humans; Laparotomy; Suture Techniques; Abdominal Wound Closure Techniques; Incisional Hernia; Hernia, Ventral; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 37652773
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2023.08.124 -
Clinical Imaging Nov 2023To quantitatively synthesize and report the frequency and category of incidental findings on Computed Tomography (CT) scans in pediatric trauma patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To quantitatively synthesize and report the frequency and category of incidental findings on Computed Tomography (CT) scans in pediatric trauma patients.
METHODS
A thorough literature search was carried out in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases until March 6, 2023, in adherence to the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies describing incidental findings on CT scans in trauma patients ≤21 years were included. Incidental findings were grouped into three categories: Category 1 (requiring immediate or urgent evaluation or treatment), Category 2 (likely benign but which may require outpatient follow-up), and Category 3 (benign anatomic variants or pathologic findings that do not require follow-up or intervention).
RESULTS
Seven studies were included in this study, which revealed a combined rate of 27.10 % of incidental findings with notable heterogeneity among the studies. Aggregated frequencies were 10.15 % for Category 1, 32.18 % for Category 2 and 51.44 % for Category 3. Subgroup meta-analysis on abdominal CT scans showed a higher pooled incidence of incidental findings at 47.17 %, but with lower heterogeneity than the general meta-analysis.
CONCLUSION
The study underscores the prevalence of incidental findings in pediatric trauma patients undergoing CT scans. The categorization of these findings provides useful information for clinicians in determining appropriate follow-up and management strategies.
Topics: Humans; Child; Incidental Findings; Retrospective Studies; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Abdomen; Radionuclide Imaging
PubMed: 37714071
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2023.109981 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery May 2024To evaluate the incidence of incisional hernia in patients undergoing direct access to the abdominal cavity in urological surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the incidence of incisional hernia in patients undergoing direct access to the abdominal cavity in urological surgery.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Central from 1980 to the present according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. Eighty-four studies were selected for inclusion in this analysis, and meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed.
RESULTS
The total incidence in the 84 studies was 4.8% (95% CI 3.7% - 6.2%) I 93.84%. Depending on the type of incision, it was higher in the open medial approach: 7.1% (95% CI 4.3%-11.8%) I 92.45% and lower in laparoscopic surgery: 1.9% (95% CI 1%-3.4%) I 71, 85% According to access, it was lower in retroperitoneal: 0.9% (95% CI 0.2%-4.8%) I 76.96% and off-midline: 4.7% (95% CI 3.5%-6.4%) I 91.59%. Regarding the location of the hernia, parastomal hernias were more frequent: 15.1% (95% CI 9.6% - 23%) I 77.39%. Meta-regression shows a significant effect in reducing the proportion of hernias in open lateral, laparoscopic and hand-assisted compared to medial open access.
CONCLUSION
The present review finds the access through the midline and stomas as the ones with the highest incidence of incisional hernia. The use of the lateral approach or minimally invasive techniques is preferable. More prospective studies are warranted to obtain the real incidence of incisional hernias and evaluate the role of better techniques to close the abdomen.
Topics: Humans; Incisional Hernia; Incidence; Urologic Surgical Procedures; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 38805110
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-024-03354-4 -
BMC Surgery Aug 2023There is no consensus regarding hernia sac management during laparoscopic hernia repair, and this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the postoperative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
There is no consensus regarding hernia sac management during laparoscopic hernia repair, and this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes of sac reduction (RS) and sac transection (TS) during laparoscopic mesh hernia repair.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) 2020 and AMSTAR 2 (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) guidelines. We used the RevMan 5.4 statistical package from the Cochrane collaboration for meta-analysis. A random effects model was used.
RESULTS
The literature search yielded six eligible studies including 2941 patients: 821 patients in the TS group and 2120 patients in the RS group. In the pooled analysis, the TS group was associated with a lower incidence of seroma (OR = 1.71; 95% CI [1.22, 2.39], p = 0.002) and shorter hospital stay (MD = -0.07; 95% CI [-0.12, -0.02], p = 0.008). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of morbidity (OR = 0.87; 95% CI [0.34, 2.19], p = 0.76), operative time (MD = -4.39; 95% CI [-13.62, 4.84], p = 0.35), recurrence (OR = 2.70; 95% CI [0.50, 14.50], p = 0.25), and Postoperative pain.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis showed that hernia sac transection is associated with a lower seroma rate and shorter hospital stay with similar morbidity, operative time, recurrence, and postoperative pain compared to the reduction of the hernia sac.
PROTOCOL
The protocol was registered in PROSPERO with ID CRD42023391730.
Topics: Humans; Groin; Seroma; Surgical Mesh; Pain, Postoperative; Laparoscopy; Hernia
PubMed: 37612674
DOI: 10.1186/s12893-023-02147-8 -
Hernia : the Journal of Hernias and... Dec 2023Mesh repair in incarcerated or strangulated groin hernia is controversial, especially when bowel resection is required. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis comparing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Mesh repair in incarcerated or strangulated groin hernia is controversial, especially when bowel resection is required. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis comparing mesh and non-mesh repair in patients undergoing emergency groin hernia repair.
METHODS
We performed a literature search of databases to identify studies comparing mesh and primary suture repair of patients with incarcerated or strangulated inguinal or femoral hernias who underwent emergency surgery. Postoperative outcomes were assessed by pooled analysis and meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was assessed with I statistics.
RESULTS
1095 studies were screened and 101 were thoroughly reviewed. Twenty observational studies and four randomized controlled trials comprising 12,402 patients were included. We found that mesh-based repair had reduced recurrence (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.19, 0.67; P = 0.001; I = 35%), length of hospital stay (OR - 1.02; 95% CI - 1.87, - 0.17; P = 0.02; I = 94%) and operative time (OR - 9.21; 95% CI - 16.82, - 1.61; P = 0.02; I = 95%) without increasing surgical site infection, mortality or postoperative complications such as seroma, chronic, ileus or urinary retention. In the subgroup analysis of patients that underwent bowel resection, we found that mesh repair was associated with an increased risk of surgical site infection (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.04, 2.91; P = 0.04; I = 9%).
CONCLUSIONS
Mesh repair for incarcerated and strangulated groin hernias reduces recurrence without an increase in postoperative complications and should be considered in clean cases. However, in the setting of bowel resection, mesh repair might increase the incidence of surgical site infection.
Topics: Humans; Groin; Hernia, Inguinal; Herniorrhaphy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Surgical Mesh; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 37679548
DOI: 10.1007/s10029-023-02874-0