-
Annals of Emergency Medicine Oct 2015The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer as a rule-out test for acute aortic dissection. Previous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STUDY OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer as a rule-out test for acute aortic dissection. Previous meta-analyses have had methodological problems with conflicting conclusions, and new diagnostic accuracy studies have been published since.
METHODS
All prospective cross-sectional analytic studies of D-dimer as a diagnostic test for acute aortic dissection were included where diagnosis was confirmed by an accepted reference standard. Studies were identified with MEDLINE, EMBASE, Medion, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and bibliographies of relevant articles and previous systematic reviews. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion, assessed study quality, and extracted data.
RESULTS
Abstracts from 800 articles were reviewed, yielding 30 potentially relevant studies that were reviewed in full text. Five studies met all eligibility criteria. Data from 4 studies (1,557 participants) that used a D-dimer cutoff of 0.50 μg/mL were pooled to estimate sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios. Overall, sensitivity and negative likelihood ratio were 98.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 96.3% to 99.1%) and 0.05 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.09), respectively. These measurements had little statistical heterogeneity. Specificity (41.9%; 95% CI 39.0% to 44.9%) and positive likelihood ratio (2.11; 95% CI 1.46 to 3.05) showed significant statistical heterogeneity. When applied to a low-risk population as defined by the American Heart Association (prevalence 6%), the posttest probability for acute aortic dissection was 0.3%.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis suggests that a negative D-dimer result may be useful to help rule out acute aortic dissection in low-risk patients.
Topics: Aortic Dissection; Aortic Aneurysm; Biomarkers; Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products; Humans
PubMed: 25805111
DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.02.013 -
European Archives of... Jun 2018The retrograde approach (RP) to nerve identification is a method seldom used in parotid surgery. A systematic review comparing this method to the standard anterograde... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
The retrograde approach (RP) to nerve identification is a method seldom used in parotid surgery. A systematic review comparing this method to the standard anterograde approach (AP) with respect to facial nerve palsy (FNP) does not currently exist.
METHODS
In a meta-analysis according to the PRISMA statement, eight publications, including one randomized controlled trial, were selected. The primary aim was to compare the temporary and permanent FNP resulting from the two dissection methods. Facial nerve function was graded according to the House-Brackmann Scale. The secondary goal was a comparison of the cut-suture times (CST), the volume of healthy tissue (VHT) dissected, the rates of postoperative hematoma (PH), and postoperative infection (PI).
RESULTS
Temporary FNP was noted in 18.2% in the RP group as well as in 34.4% in the AP group. Permanent FNP occurred in 0.9% RPs and 2.4% APs. According to the mixed-effect logistic regression model, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the pooled odds ratio (OR) for either temporary [OR 2.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97-7.21] or permanent FNP (OR 4.31, 95% CI 0.44-42.28). The CST was significantly shorter in the RP group (p = 0.005), with a significantly smaller VHT dissected (p < 0.0001). There were no differences regarding PH and PI.
CONCLUSION
The RP is a safe procedure with no significant difference in FNP rates when compared to the AP and, considering the shorter CST and the lesser VHT resected in the RP, it is superior to the AP. Surgeons engaged in parotidectomy should be familiar with both methods of dissection.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Bell Palsy; Child; Facial Paralysis; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Neck Dissection; Parotid Gland; Parotid Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Young Adult
PubMed: 29679155
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-018-4982-8 -
Cureus Feb 2020Isolated renal artery dissection (IRAD) is a rare and often unrecognized clinical entity, with a paucity of data on its epidemiology and management. We extracted 129... (Review)
Review
Isolated renal artery dissection (IRAD) is a rare and often unrecognized clinical entity, with a paucity of data on its epidemiology and management. We extracted 129 cases of IRAD from the medical literature between 1972 and 2016. IRAD as a result of an extended dissection from the aorta and splanchnic or mesenteric arteries was excluded. The mean age of presentation was 42.7±12.9 years, with a male predominance (79%). Abdominal pain (75.9%) was the most common presenting symptom. Etiology was more likely to be spontaneous (76%) than traumatic (12%), iatrogenic (9%), or drug-induced (1.5%). The most common risk factors were hypertension (28.7%), fibromuscular dysplasia (8.5%), and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (5.4%). Unilateral renal artery dissection (right 45.5%, left 40.5%) was more frequent than bilateral (14%). More than half (56.6%) of the cohort were managed medically (blood pressure control and /or anticoagulation). Of those who underwent intervention, endovascular stenting or embolization (35%) was utilized more frequently than nephrectomy or bypass (21%). Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) have the highest diagnostic sensitivity (91% and 93%, respectively) as compared to ultrasonography (27%). A high degree of clinical suspicion is required to diagnose IRAD. CT and MRI have a higher diagnostic sensitivity. As compared to invasive management, conservative management has comparable outcomes.
PubMed: 32076589
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.6960 -
Coblation versus cold dissection in paediatric tonsillectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Journal of Laryngology and Otology Mar 2020Cold dissection is the most commonly used tonsillectomy technique, with low post-operative haemorrhage rates. Coblation is an alternative technique that may cause less... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Cold dissection is the most commonly used tonsillectomy technique, with low post-operative haemorrhage rates. Coblation is an alternative technique that may cause less pain, but could have higher post-operative haemorrhage rates.
OBJECTIVE
This study evaluated the peri-operative outcomes in paediatric tonsillectomy patients by comparing coblation and cold dissection techniques.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted of all comparative studies of paediatric coblation and cold dissection tonsillectomy, up to December 2018. Any studies with adults were excluded. Outcomes such as pain, operative time, and intra-operative, primary and secondary haemorrhages were recorded.
RESULTS
Seven studies contributed to the summative outcome. Coblation tonsillectomy appeared to result in less pain, less intra-operative blood loss (p < 0.01) and a shorter operative time (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the two groups for post-operative haemorrhage (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
The coblation tonsillectomy technique may offer better peri-operative outcomes when compared to cold dissection, and should therefore be offered in paediatric cases, before cold dissection tonsillectomy.
Topics: Adolescent; Blood Loss, Surgical; Child; Child, Preschool; Cryotherapy; Dissection; Electrocoagulation; Female; Humans; Male; Operative Time; Pain, Postoperative; Tonsillectomy
PubMed: 32114992
DOI: 10.1017/S0022215120000377 -
Hernia : the Journal of Hernias and... Jun 2023To compare the outcomes of balloon dissection and telescopic dissection in patients undergoing laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Balloon dissection versus telescopic dissection during laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the outcomes of balloon dissection and telescopic dissection in patients undergoing laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair.
METHODS
A systematic review in accordance with PRISMA statement standards was conducted. A search of electronic information sources was conducted to identify all studies comparing the outcomes of balloon dissection and telescopic dissection in patients undergoing laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair. Random effects modelling was applied to calculate pooled outcome data.
RESULTS
A total of 936 patients from eight studies were included. The included population in both groups were comparable in terms of baseline characteristics. There was no difference between the two techniques in terms of operation time (MD: - 4.14 min, P = 0.05), conversion to another technique (RD: - 0.02, P = 0.29), recurrence (RD: - 0.00, P = 0.84), haematoma (OR: 1.34, P = 0.61), seroma (OR: 0.63, P = 0.56), surgical site infection (RD: 0.00, P = 1.00), urinary retention (OR: 0.92, P = 0.86), postoperative pain score on day 1 (MD: - 0.16, P = 0.69) and day 7 (MD: - 0.16, P = 0.61). Trial sequential analysis of randomised trials suggested that evidence for operative time and conversion to other technique is subject to type 1 and type 2 error.
CONCLUSIONS
Balloon dissection and telescopic dissection during TEP inguinal hernia repair are comparable in terms of operative and postoperative outcomes. The available evidence for operative time and conversion to other technique is subject to type 1 and type 2 error. In presence of comparative clinical outcomes, the cost-effectiveness analysis in future studies may play an important role in determining the dissection technique of choice.
Topics: Humans; Hernia, Inguinal; Herniorrhaphy; Laparoscopy; Pain, Postoperative; Surgical Wound Infection; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37188929
DOI: 10.1007/s10029-023-02793-0 -
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 -
Scientific Reports May 2021Previous studies have drawn causal associations between fluoroquinolone use and collagen pathologies including tendon rupture and retinopathy. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Previous studies have drawn causal associations between fluoroquinolone use and collagen pathologies including tendon rupture and retinopathy. This meta-analysisattempted to assess the association between fluoroquinolone use and the risk of aortic dissection or aortic aneurysm. A systematic search was performed on Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library. 9 studies were included in final analysis. Primary random-effects meta-analysis of 7 studies, excluding 2 pharmacovigilance studies demonstrated statistically increased odds of aortic dissection (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.71-3.32) aortic aneurysm (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.59-2.48), and aortic aneurysm or dissection (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.13-1.89; I = 72%) with current use of fluoroquinolones compared to their nonuser counterparts. Based on the "number needed-to-harm" analysis, 7246 (95% CI: 4329 to 14,085) patients would need to be treated with fluoroquinolones for a duration of at least three days in order for one additional patient to be harmed, assuming a population baseline incidence of aortic dissection and aneurysm rupture to be 10 per 100,000 patient-years. With strong statistical association, these findings suggest a causal relationship, warranting future research to elucidate the pathophysiological and mechanistic plausibility of this association. These findings however, should not cease prescription of fluoroquinolones, especially when clinically indicated.
Topics: Aortic Dissection; Aortic Aneurysm; Fluoroquinolones; Humans; Incidence; Pharmacovigilance; Risk
PubMed: 34040146
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-90692-8 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jan 2016Recently, several authors introduced various methods and published feasibility studies on novel robotic-assisted neck dissection techniques for head and neck cancer... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Recently, several authors introduced various methods and published feasibility studies on novel robotic-assisted neck dissection techniques for head and neck cancer patients. Cosmesis and general appearance have become important concerns of cancer patients today. Especially in the head and neck area, a conspicuous scar can reduce patient satisfaction after surgery. With conventional neck dissection techniques, a long scar in the neck is unavoidable. Therefore, the development of robotic assisted neck dissection provides the patients with a scarless neck in these situations. However, there are some limitations of the application of these techniques in their current stage of development.
METHODS
This study was performed using a systematic literature review.
RESULTS
The reviewed clinical studies show that robotic-assisted neck dissection yields similar functional and early oncologic outcomes to that of conventional neck dissection, as well as excellent cosmetic satisfaction of patients. Despite these benefits, some disadvantages can be observed, in terms of longer operation times as well as higher procedure costs.
CONCLUSION
Besides the similar oncologic and functional outcomes compared with the open procedure so far, more prospective, controlled, multicenter studies are required to establish robotic-assisted neck dissection as an alternative standard and to justify its added costs beyond the cosmetic advantages.
Topics: Esthetics; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Neck Dissection; Operative Time; Patient Satisfaction; Prospective Studies; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Thyroid Neoplasms; Thyroidectomy
PubMed: 26602968
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.11.022 -
Head & Neck Sep 2015Management of clinically negative lymph nodes (cN0) in primary lip squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) has always been a controversial topic. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Management of clinically negative lymph nodes (cN0) in primary lip squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) has always been a controversial topic.
METHODS
A systematic review of English-language electronic databases using Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, SCI, and specific journals on the subject matter was done. Only the studies mentioning primary nonmetastatic lip SCC with cN0 neck treated by surgery only and having at least 2 years of follow-up data were selected. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analysis was followed.
RESULTS
The pooled estimate of occult metastasis in neck dissected specimen was 0.17 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10-0.28) and that of delayed nodal metastasis in patients without neck dissection was 0.08 (95% CI, 0.01-0.18).
CONCLUSION
The results do not prove sufficient to justify elective treatment of the neck in primary cN0 lip SCC and close observation would be a viable option in such cases. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 37: 1392-1400, 2015.
Topics: Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Disease-Free Survival; Elective Surgical Procedures; Female; Humans; Lip Neoplasms; Male; Neck Dissection; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Neoplasm Staging; Prognosis; Risk Assessment; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24839013
DOI: 10.1002/hed.23772 -
Academic Emergency Medicine : Official... Apr 2018Acute aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition due to a tear in the aortic wall. It is difficult to diagnose and if missed carries a significant mortality. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Acute aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition due to a tear in the aortic wall. It is difficult to diagnose and if missed carries a significant mortality.
METHODS
We conducted a librarian-assisted systematic review of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane database from 1968 to July 2016. Titles and abstracts were reviewed and data were extracted by two independent reviewers (agreement measured by kappa). Studies were combined if low clinical and statistical heterogeneity (I < 30%). Study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Bivariate random effects meta analyses using Revman 5 and SAS 9.3 were performed.
RESULTS
We identified 792 records: 60 were selected for full text review, nine studies with 2,400 participants were included (QUADAS-2 low risk of bias, κ = 0.89 [for full-text review]). Prevalence of aortic dissection ranged from 21.9% to 76.1% (mean ± SD = 39.1% ± 17.1%). The clinical findings increasing probability of aortic dissection were 1) neurologic deficit (n = 3, specificity = 95%, positive likelihood ratio [LR+] = 4.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.3-5.7, I = 0%) and 2) hypotension (n = 4, specificity = 95%, LR+ = 2.9 95% CI = 1.8-4.6, I = 42%), and decreasing probability were the absence of a widened mediastinum (n = 4, sensitivity = 76%-95%, negative likelihood ratio [LR-] = 0.14-0.60, I = 93%) and an American Heart Association aortic dissection detection (AHA ADD) risk score < 1 (n = 1, sensitivity = 91%, LR- = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.15-0.33).
CONCLUSIONS
Suspicion for acute aortic dissection should be raised with hypotension, pulse, or neurologic deficit. Conversely, a low AHA ADD score decreases suspicion. Clinical gestalt informed by high- and low-risk features together with an absence of an alternative diagnosis should drive investigation for acute aortic dissection.
Topics: Aortic Dissection; Cognition Disorders; Emergency Service, Hospital; Humans; Hypotension; Male; Physical Examination; Risk Factors; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 29265487
DOI: 10.1111/acem.13360