-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Prophylactic removal of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth is the surgical removal of wisdom teeth in the absence of symptoms and with no evidence of local...
BACKGROUND
Prophylactic removal of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth is the surgical removal of wisdom teeth in the absence of symptoms and with no evidence of local disease. Impacted wisdom teeth may be associated with pathological changes, such as pericoronitis, root resorption, gum and alveolar bone disease (periodontitis), caries and the development of cysts and tumours. When surgical removal is performed in older people, the risk of postoperative complications, pain and discomfort is increased. Other reasons to justify prophylactic removal of asymptomatic disease-free impacted third molars have included preventing late lower incisor crowding, preventing damage to adjacent structures such as the second molar or the inferior alveolar nerve, in preparation for orthognathic surgery, in preparation for radiotherapy or during procedures to treat people with trauma to the affected area. Removal of asymptomatic disease-free wisdom teeth is a common procedure, and researchers must determine whether evidence supports this practice. This review is an update of an review originally published in 2005 and previously updated in 2012 and 2016.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of removal compared with retention (conservative management) of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth in adolescents and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 10 May 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2019, Issue 4), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 10 May 2019), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 10 May 2019). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov)and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. .
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with no restriction on length of follow-up, comparing removal (or absence) with retention (or presence) of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth in adolescents or adults. We also considered quasi-RCTs and prospective cohort studies for inclusion if investigators measured outcomes with follow-up of five years or longer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Eight review authors screened search results and assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion according to the review inclusion criteria. Eight review authors independently and in duplicate conducted the risk of bias assessments. When information was unclear, we contacted the study authors for additional information.
MAIN RESULTS
This review update includes the same two studies that were identified in our previous version of the review: one RCT with a parallel-group design, which was conducted in a dental hospital setting in the United Kingdom, and one prospective cohort study, which was conducted in the private sector in the USA. Primary outcome No eligible studies in this review reported the effects of removal compared with retention of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth on health-related quality of life Secondary outcomes We found only low- to very low-certainty evidence of the effects of removal compared with retention of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth for a limited number of secondary outcome measures. One prospective cohort study, reporting data from a subgroup of 416 healthy male participants, aged 24 to 84 years, compared the effects of the absence (previous removal or agenesis) against the presence of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth on periodontitis and caries associated with the distal aspect of the adjacent second molar during a follow-up period of three to over 25 years. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that the presence of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth may be associated with increased risk of periodontitis affecting the adjacent second molar in the long term. In the same study, which is at serious risk of bias, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate a difference in caries risk associated with the presence or absence of impacted wisdom teeth. One RCT with 164 randomised and 77 analysed adolescent participants compared the effect of extraction with retention of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth on dimensional changes in the dental arch after five years. Participants (55% female) had previously undergone orthodontic treatment and had 'crowded' wisdom teeth. No evidence from this study, which was at high risk of bias, was found to suggest that removal of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth has a clinically significant effect on dimensional changes in the dental arch. The included studies did not measure any of our other secondary outcomes: costs, other adverse events associated with retention of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth (pericoronitis, root resorption, cyst formation, tumour formation, inflammation/infection) and adverse effects associated with their removal (alveolar osteitis/postoperative infection, nerve injury, damage to adjacent teeth during surgery, bleeding, osteonecrosis related to medication/radiotherapy, inflammation/infection).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Insufficient evidence is available to determine whether asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth should be removed or retained. Although retention of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth may be associated with increased risk of periodontitis affecting adjacent second molars in the long term, the evidence is very low certainty. Well-designed RCTs investigating long-term and rare effects of retention and removal of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth, in a representative group of individuals, are unlikely to be feasible. In their continuing absence, high quality, long-term prospective cohort studies may provide valuable evidence in the future. Given the current lack of available evidence, patient values should be considered and clinical expertise used to guide shared decision-making with people who have asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth. If the decision is made to retain these teeth, clinical assessment at regular intervals to prevent undesirable outcomes is advisable.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Asymptomatic Diseases; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Molar, Third; Prospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tooth Extraction; Tooth, Impacted; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 32368796
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003879.pub5 -
Current Urology Reports Mar 2020To present the latest evidence related to the predictors of urinary tract infections (UTIs) and urosepsis after ureteroscopy (URS) for stone disease.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
To present the latest evidence related to the predictors of urinary tract infections (UTIs) and urosepsis after ureteroscopy (URS) for stone disease.
RECENT FINDINGS
Our review suggests that almost half of all post-URS complications are related to infectious complications although reported rates of urosepsis were low. The use of antibiotic prophylaxis, treatment of pre-operative UTI, and low procedural time seem to reduce this risk. However, the risk is higher in patients with higher Charlson comorbidity index, elderly patients, female gender, long duration of pre-procedural indwelling ureteric stents and patients with a neurogenic bladder and with high BMI. Infectious complications following ureteroscopy can be a source of morbidity and potential mortality. Although majority of these are minor, efforts must be taken to minimise them especially in high-risk patients. This includes the use of prophylactic antibiotics, limiting stent dwell and procedural time, prompt identification and treatment of UTI and urosepsis, and careful planning in patients with large stone burden and multiple comorbidities.
Topics: Age Factors; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Comorbidity; Humans; Kidney Calculi; Operative Time; Overweight; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors; Sepsis; Sex Factors; Stents; Ureteral Calculi; Ureteroscopy; Urinary Bladder, Neurogenic; Urinary Tract Infections; Urolithiasis
PubMed: 32211969
DOI: 10.1007/s11934-020-0969-2 -
International Journal of Surgery... Aug 2023A pilonidal sinus (PS) is an acquired disease resulting from recurrent infections and chronic inflammation. A PS involving the sacrococcyx is referred to as a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
A pilonidal sinus (PS) is an acquired disease resulting from recurrent infections and chronic inflammation. A PS involving the sacrococcyx is referred to as a sacrococcygeal PS (SPS). An SPS is a rare chronic infectious disease for which surgery is a good choice. The incidence of SPS has gradually increased worldwide in recent years. However, surgeons have not reached a consensus on the preferred surgical approach for SPS. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze differences in the efficacy of different surgical approaches for the treatment of SPS.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed database covering the period from 1 January 2003, to 28 February 2023. The primary outcome parameters were recurrence and infection. Finally, statistical analysis (meta-analysis) was carried out using RevMan 5.4.1 software. In addition, we systematically reviewed the latest progress in the surgical treatment of SPS over the past 20 years, especially as reported in the past 3 years.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven articles, 54 studies, and 3612 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The recurrence rate following the midline closure (MC) technique was much higher than that of other techniques. Among the techniques analyzed, the differences between MC and Limberg flap (LF), and between MC and marsupialization were statistically significant [ P =0.0002, risk ratio (RR)=6.15, 95% CI 2.40, 15.80; P =0.01, RR=12.70, 95% CI 1.70, 95.06]. The recurrence rate of open healing was higher than that of the Karydakis flap (KF) technique, and the difference was statistically significant ( P =0.02, RR=6.04, 95% CI 1.37, 26.55). Most of the results comparing MC with other techniques suggested that the former had a higher infection rate, and the difference between MC and LF was statistically significant ( P =0.0005, RR=4.14, 95% CI 1.86, 9.23). Comparison between KF and LF, modified LF and KF showed that the differences were not statistically significant in terms of recurrence and infection ( P ≥0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
There are various surgical treatment options for SPS, including incision and drainage, excision of diseased tissue with primary closure and secondary healing, and minimally invasive surgery. It is still not possible to determine which surgical technique should be considered the gold standard for treatment, as even the results of different researchers using the same operation method are conflicting. But what is certain is that the midline closure technique has a much higher incidence of postoperative recurrence and infection than other techniques. Therefore, the anorectal surgeon should formulate the most suitable individualized plan for the patient based on a comprehensive evaluation of the patient's wishes, appearance of the SPS, and the professional ability of the surgeon.
Topics: Humans; Pilonidal Sinus; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Surgical Flaps; Wound Closure Techniques; Wound Healing; Recurrence
PubMed: 37158142
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000447 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Dec 2023To assess the efficacy of artificial intelligence (AI) models in diagnosing and prognosticating acute appendicitis (AA) in adult patients compared to traditional... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
To assess the efficacy of artificial intelligence (AI) models in diagnosing and prognosticating acute appendicitis (AA) in adult patients compared to traditional methods. AA is a common cause of emergency department visits and abdominal surgeries. It is typically diagnosed through clinical assessments, laboratory tests, and imaging studies. However, traditional diagnostic methods can be time-consuming and inaccurate. Machine learning models have shown promise in improving diagnostic accuracy and predicting outcomes.
MAIN BODY
A systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines was conducted, searching PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Studies were evaluated for risk of bias using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Data points extracted included model type, input features, validation strategies, and key performance metrics.
RESULTS
In total, 29 studies were analyzed, out of which 21 focused on diagnosis, seven on prognosis, and one on both. Artificial neural networks (ANNs) were the most commonly employed algorithm for diagnosis. Both ANN and logistic regression were also widely used for categorizing types of AA. ANNs showed high performance in most cases, with accuracy rates often exceeding 80% and AUC values peaking at 0.985. The models also demonstrated promising results in predicting postoperative outcomes such as sepsis risk and ICU admission. Risk of bias was identified in a majority of studies, with selection bias and lack of internal validation being the most common issues.
CONCLUSION
AI algorithms demonstrate significant promise in diagnosing and prognosticating AA, often surpassing traditional methods and clinical scores such as the Alvarado scoring system in terms of speed and accuracy.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Artificial Intelligence; Appendicitis; Prognosis; Algorithms; Machine Learning; Acute Disease
PubMed: 38114983
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-023-00527-2 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Oct 2023Identifying risk factors for an infection after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and following targeted preventive strategies can effectively reduce this... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Identifying risk factors for an infection after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and following targeted preventive strategies can effectively reduce this potentially serious complication.
PURPOSE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the risk factors for an infection after ACLR.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to September 1, 2022, for prospective and retrospective studies investigating risk factors for any type of infection after ACLR. Odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences were calculated for potential risk factors if ≥2 studies assessed the same risk factor. A qualitative analysis of variables was performed if a meta-analysis could not be conducted.
RESULTS
A total of 17 studies with 141,991 patients were included in this review. The overall pooled infection rate was 0.86% (range, 0.24%-5.50%). There were 20 risk factors identified for analysis. Of these, 7 variables independently increased the odds of an infection after ACLR: (1) male sex (OR, 1.90 [95% CI, 1.33-2.73]), (2) diabetes (OR, 2.69 [95% CI, 1.66-4.35]), (3) hamstring tendon autograft (OR, 2.51 [95% CI, 2.03-3.10]), (4) revision ACLR (OR, 2.31 [95% CI, 1.22-4.37]), (5) professional athlete status (OR, 6.21 [95% CI, 1.03-37.38]), (6) lateral tenodesis (OR, 3.45 [95% CI, 1.63-7.28]), and (7) corticosteroid use (OR, 7.83 [95% CI, 3.68-16.63]). No significant associations were found between postoperative infections and age, body mass index, smoking, meniscal repair, or outpatient surgery.
CONCLUSION
This review revealed that an increased risk of infections after ACLR was associated with male sex, diabetes, hamstring tendon autograft, revision surgery, professional athlete status, lateral tenodesis, and steroid use. Knowledge of the risk factors associated with an infection after ACLR may facilitate the identification of high-risk cases and the implementation of preventive measures to mitigate the serious consequences of this complication.
PubMed: 37846316
DOI: 10.1177/23259671231200822 -
In Vivo (Athens, Greece) 2023Awake surgery has become a valid alternative to general anesthesia in many surgery fields. This technique played a very important role during the COVID-19 period. The... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND/AIM
Awake surgery has become a valid alternative to general anesthesia in many surgery fields. This technique played a very important role during the COVID-19 period. The growing use of this technique has many advantages. We performed a systematic review to study the potentialities of awake breast surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane library database and retrieved a total of 109 records. Forty-nine of them were excluded as unsuitable. Finally, we selected a total of 12 records concerning different types of studies for topic appropriateness. Three reviewers reviewed independently each record.
RESULTS
Five articles analyzing the sustainability of awake surgery during the COVID-19 period were selected. In addition, one article analyzing the impact on the immune system and six articles and eight case reports analyzing anesthetic techniques were also selected. The studies analyzing awake breast surgery during the COVID-19 period showed advantages in terms of sustainability and length of hospitalization. The study analyzing the immune response after awake breast surgery showed lesser lymphocyte response than the general anesthesia group. The studies analyzing anesthetic techniques in awake breast surgery showed that the nerve blocks allow good level of safety and postoperative pain control.
CONCLUSION
The awake breast surgery and fast track implementation shortened hospital stays and reduced costs, without influencing the surgical results. Furthermore, awake breast surgery reduced surgical stress compared to general anesthesia. Among the various anesthetic techniques, nerve blocks are the most advantageous in terms of safety and efficacy compared to epidural anesthesia.
Topics: Humans; Female; Wakefulness; Brain Neoplasms; COVID-19; Nerve Block; Breast Neoplasms
PubMed: 37369489
DOI: 10.21873/invivo.13225 -
The Lancet. Digital Health Jul 2022Stratifying risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after major abdominal surgery allows clinicians to modify risk through targeted interventions and enhanced...
Evaluation of prognostic risk models for postoperative pulmonary complications in adult patients undergoing major abdominal surgery: a systematic review and international external validation cohort study.
BACKGROUND
Stratifying risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after major abdominal surgery allows clinicians to modify risk through targeted interventions and enhanced monitoring. In this study, we aimed to identify and validate prognostic models against a new consensus definition of postoperative pulmonary complications.
METHODS
We did a systematic review and international external validation cohort study. The systematic review was done in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched MEDLINE and Embase on March 1, 2020, for articles published in English that reported on risk prediction models for postoperative pulmonary complications following abdominal surgery. External validation of existing models was done within a prospective international cohort study of adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing major abdominal surgery. Data were collected between Jan 1, 2019, and April 30, 2019, in the UK, Ireland, and Australia. Discriminative ability and prognostic accuracy summary statistics were compared between models for the 30-day postoperative pulmonary complication rate as defined by the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine Core Outcome Measures in Perioperative and Anaesthetic Care (StEP-COMPAC). Model performance was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC).
FINDINGS
In total, we identified 2903 records from our literature search; of which, 2514 (86·6%) unique records were screened, 121 (4·8%) of 2514 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 29 unique prognostic models were identified. Nine (31·0%) of 29 models had score development reported only, 19 (65·5%) had undergone internal validation, and only four (13·8%) had been externally validated. Data to validate six eligible models were collected in the international external validation cohort study. Data from 11 591 patients were available, with an overall postoperative pulmonary complication rate of 7·8% (n=903). None of the six models showed good discrimination (defined as AUROCC ≥0·70) for identifying postoperative pulmonary complications, with the Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia score showing the best discrimination (AUROCC 0·700 [95% CI 0·683-0·717]).
INTERPRETATION
In the pre-COVID-19 pandemic data, variability in the risk of pulmonary complications (StEP-COMPAC definition) following major abdominal surgery was poorly described by existing prognostication tools. To improve surgical safety during the COVID-19 pandemic recovery and beyond, novel risk stratification tools are required.
FUNDING
British Journal of Surgery Society.
Topics: Adult; COVID-19; Cohort Studies; Humans; Pandemics; Postoperative Complications; Prognosis; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 35750401
DOI: 10.1016/S2589-7500(22)00069-3 -
International Journal of Colorectal... Feb 2023Postoperative complications after a colonic and rectal surgery are of significant concern to the surgical community. Although there are different techniques to perform... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Postoperative complications after a colonic and rectal surgery are of significant concern to the surgical community. Although there are different techniques to perform anastomosis (i.e., handsewn, stapled, or compression), there is still no consensus on which technique provides the least number of postoperative problems. The objective of this study is to compare the different anastomotic techniques regarding the occurrence or duration of postoperative outcomes such as anastomotic dehiscence, mortality, reoperation, bleeding and stricture (as primary outcomes), and wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, duration of surgery, and hospital stay (as secondary outcomes).
METHODS
Clinical trials published between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2021, reporting anastomotic complications with any of the anastomotic technique were identified using the MEDLINE database. Only articles that clearly defined the anastomotic technique used, and report at least two of the outcomes defined were included.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis included 16 studies whose differences were related to the need of reoperation (p < 0.01) and the duration of surgery (p = 0.02), while for the anastomotic dehiscence, mortality, bleeding, stricture, wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, and hospital stay, no significant differences were found. Compression anastomosis reported the lowest reoperation rate (3.64%) and the handsewn anastomosis the highest (9.49%). Despite this, more time to perform the surgery was required in compression anastomosis (183.47 min), with the handsewn being the fastest technique (139.92 min).
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence found was not sufficient to demonstrate which technique is most suitable to perform colonic and rectal anastomosis, since the postoperative complications were similar between the handsewn, stapled, or compression techniques.
Topics: Humans; Surgical Stapling; Suture Techniques; Constriction, Pathologic; Abscess; Anastomosis, Surgical; Postoperative Complications; Abdominal Abscess; Intraabdominal Infections
PubMed: 36814011
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-023-04328-6 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Nov 2023With new variants challenging the effectiveness of preventive measures, we are beginning to recognize the reality that COVID-19 will continue to pose an endemic threat.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
With new variants challenging the effectiveness of preventive measures, we are beginning to recognize the reality that COVID-19 will continue to pose an endemic threat. The manifestations of COVID-19 in lung transplant recipients during index admission are poorly understood with very few cases reported in recent lung transplant recipients. Optimal management of immunosuppression and antiviral therapy in recent transplant recipients is challenging.
METHODS
We performed a retrospective analysis identifying lung transplant recipients at our institution who contracted COVID-19 in the immediate postoperative period (within index admission). In addition, we performed a systematic review from January 2020 to August 2023 identifying all publications on the PUBMED database regarding COVID-19 infection in lung transplant recipients during index admission.
RESULTS
We report four cases of COVID-19 pneumonia in lung transplant recipients in the immediate postoperative period and we describe the clinical course, treatment options, and immunosuppression changes to manage this unique clinical problem. All patients made a full recovery and were eventually discharged home. Within our review of the literature, the most prevalent presenting symptoms were cough, dyspnea, and fatigue. Six (75%) patients decreased or held their antimetabolite. The two most common treatments were monoclonal antibodies (38%) and remdesivir (63%).
CONCLUSION
Although previous literature demonstrates that COVID-19 can be deadly in recent lung transplant recipients, rapid treatment with anti-viral therapy/immunotherapy, deescalating immunosuppression, and treatment of respiratory decompensation with Decadron was effective in our patients.
PubMed: 38002643
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12227028 -
Revista Cientifica Odontologica... 2023Periodontitis is potentially harmful in the perioperative period due to biofilm generating a environment for bacteria to spread and colonize other anatomical areas,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Periodontitis is potentially harmful in the perioperative period due to biofilm generating a environment for bacteria to spread and colonize other anatomical areas, which can generate a potential risk of infection, delayed healing, increased morbidity, and even induce avulsion in intubated patients, and subsequent aspiration or ingestion of teeth with increased mobility.
OBJECTIVE
Associate the presence of periodontitis and postoperative complications in patients who underwent an in-hospital medical surgical procedure.
METHODS
A systematic review based on studies extracted from PubMed and Scopus was carried out on June 10, 2020, based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison and Result search strategy. As inclusion criteria, the studies had to include all the disaggregated terms of the research question, have a publication date of less than 15 years, and the target population had to have undergone elective hospital medical-surgical interventions. The exclusion criteria corresponded to not presenting an analytical or experimental observational study design, not having made a periodontal clinical diagnosis of the study subjects, and not expressing in the results the presence of postoperative medical-hospital complications. Articles were assessed for quality by supplementing the STROBE guideline and Newcastle Ottawa, for risk of bias by supplementing the STROBE guideline and the Cochrane Collaboration handbook tool.
RESULTS
A total of 131 articles were obtained, which were subjected to a selection process, resulting in 5 final analytical observational studies. A meta-analysis was performed and determined that periodontitis was a risk factor to postoperative complications after surgical procedures with an OR = 4,76; 95%CI [1,11-20,41].
CONCLUSIONS
Optimize the guidelines for assessing quality and risk of bias can make their comparison with other studies complex, however it was determined in a statistically significant way that patients with periodontitis have a higher risk of generating postoperative complications after a medical hospital surgery.
PubMed: 38312471
DOI: 10.21142/2523-2754-1104-2023-177