-
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Oct 2022Compare outcomes of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) and percutaneous trans-hepatic drainage of gallbladder (PTGBD) as an initial intervention for AC and to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Outcome of early cholecystectomy compared to percutaneous drainage of gallbladder and delayed cholecystectomy for patients with acute cholecystitis: systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Compare outcomes of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) and percutaneous trans-hepatic drainage of gallbladder (PTGBD) as an initial intervention for AC and to compare operative outcomes of ELC and delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC).
METHODS
English-language studies published until December 2020 were searched. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies compared EC and PTGBD with delayed cholecystectomy for patients presented with acute cholecystitis were considered. Main outcomes were mortality, conversion to open, complications and length of hospital stay.
RESULTS
Out of 1347 records, 14 studies were included. 205,361 (94.7%) patients had EC and 11,565 (5.3%) patients had PTGBD as an initial intervention for AC. Mortality was higher in PTGBD; HR, 95% CI: [3.68 (2.13, 6.38)]. In contrast, complication rate was significantly higher in EC group (47%) vs PTGBD group (8.7%) in patients admitted to ICU; P-value = 0.011. Patients who had ELC were at higher risk of post-operative complications compared to DLC; RR [95% CI]: 2.88 [1.78, 4.65]. Risk of bile duct injury was six folds more in ELC; RR [95% CI]: 6.07 [1.67, 21.99].
CONCLUSION
ELC may be a preferred treatment option over PTGBD in AC. However, patient and disease specific factors should be considered to avoid unfavourable outcomes with ELC.
Topics: Humans; Gallbladder; Time Factors; Cholecystitis, Acute; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Drainage; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35597717
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2022.04.010 -
Neurourology and Urodynamics Feb 2020To systematically compare the impact of catheter-based bladder drainage methods on the rate of urinary tract infections (UTIs) amongst patients with neurogenic bladder.
AIMS
To systematically compare the impact of catheter-based bladder drainage methods on the rate of urinary tract infections (UTIs) amongst patients with neurogenic bladder.
METHODS
A search of Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, and Grey literature to February 2019 was performed using methods prepublished on PROSPERO. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines. Eligible studies were published in English and compared UTI incidence between neurogenic bladder patients utilizing bladder drainage methods of the indwelling urethral catheter (IUC), suprapubic catheter (SPC) or intermittent self-catheterization (ISC). The odds ratio of UTI was the sole outcome of interest.
RESULTS
Eight nonrandomized observational cohort studies were identified, totaling 2321 patients who utilized either IUC, SPC, or ISC. Studies enrolled patients with neurogenic bladder due to spinal cord injury (seven studies) or from any cause (one study). UTI rates were compared between patients utilizing IUC vs SPC (four studies), IUC vs ISC (six studies), and SPC vs ISC (four studies). Compared with IUC, five of six studies suggested ISC use was associated with lower rates of UTI. Studies comparing IUC vs SPC and SPC vs ISC gave mixed results. Meta-analysis was not appropriate due to study methodology heterogeneity.
CONCLUSIONS
Low-level evidence suggests amongst patients with neurogenic bladder requiring catheter-based drainage, the use of ISC is associated with lower rates of UTI than IUC. Comparisons of IUC vs SPC and SPC vs ISC gave mixed results. Future randomized trials are required to confirm these findings.
Topics: Catheters, Indwelling; Cohort Studies; Cystostomy; Drainage; Humans; Incidence; Odds Ratio; Research Design; Self Care; Spinal Cord Injuries; Urethra; Urinary Bladder, Neurogenic; Urinary Catheterization; Urinary Catheters; Urinary Tract Infections
PubMed: 31845396
DOI: 10.1002/nau.24253 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2017Empyema refers to pus in the pleural space, commonly due to adjacent pneumonia, chest wall injury, or a complication of thoracic surgery. A range of therapeutic options... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Empyema refers to pus in the pleural space, commonly due to adjacent pneumonia, chest wall injury, or a complication of thoracic surgery. A range of therapeutic options are available for its management, ranging from percutaneous aspiration and intercostal drainage to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) or thoracotomy drainage. Intrapleural fibrinolytics may also be administered following intercostal drain insertion to facilitate pleural drainage. There is currently a lack of consensus regarding optimal treatment.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of surgical versus non-surgical treatments for complicated parapneumonic effusion or pleural empyema.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2016, Issue 9), MEDLINE (Ebscohost) (1946 to July week 3 2013, July 2015 to October 2016) and MEDLINE (Ovid) (1 May 2013 to July week 1 2015), Embase (2010 to October 2016), CINAHL (1981 to October 2016) and LILACS (1982 to October 2016) on 20 October 2016. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing studies (December 2016).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials that compared a surgical with a non-surgical method of management for all age groups with pleural empyema.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data, and checked the data for accuracy. We contacted trial authors for additional information. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight randomised controlled trials with a total of 391 participants. Six trials focused on children and two on adults. Trials compared tube thoracostomy drainage (non-surgical), with or without intrapleural fibrinolytics, to either VATS or thoracotomy (surgical) for the management of pleural empyema. Assessment of risk of bias for the included studies was generally unclear for selection and blinding but low for attrition and reporting bias. Data analyses compared thoracotomy versus tube thoracostomy and VATS versus tube thoracostomy. We pooled data for meta-analysis where appropriate. We performed a subgroup analysis for children along with a sensitivity analysis for studies that used fibrinolysis in non-surgical treatment arms.The comparison of open thoracotomy versus thoracostomy drainage included only one study in children, which reported no deaths in either treatment arm. However, the trial showed a statistically significant reduction in mean hospital stay of 5.90 days for those treated with primary thoracotomy. It also showed a statistically significant reduction in procedural complications for those treated with thoracotomy compared to thoracostomy drainage. We downgraded the quality of the evidence for length of hospital stay and procedural complications outcomes to moderate due to the small sample size.The comparison of VATS versus thoracostomy drainage included seven studies, which we pooled in a meta-analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality or procedural complications between groups. This was true for both adults and children with or without fibrinolysis. However, mortality data were limited: one study reported one death in each treatment arm, and seven studies reported no deaths. There was a statistically significant reduction in mean length of hospital stay for those treated with VATS. The subgroup analysis showed the same result in adults, but there was insufficient evidence to estimate an effect for children. We could not perform a separate analysis for fibrinolysis for this outcome because all included studies used fibrinolysis in the non-surgical arms. We downgraded the quality of the evidence to low for mortality (due to wide confidence intervals and indirectness), and moderate for other outcomes in this comparison due to either high heterogeneity or wide confidence intervals.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Our findings suggest there is no statistically significant difference in mortality between primary surgical and non-surgical management of pleural empyema for all age groups. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery may reduce length of hospital stay compared to thoracostomy drainage alone.There was insufficient evidence to assess the impact of fibrinolytic therapy.A number of common outcomes were reported in the included studies that were not directly examined in our primary and secondary outcomes. These included duration of chest tube drainage, duration of fever, analgesia requirement, and total cost of treatment. Future studies focusing on patient-centred outcomes, such as patient functional scores, and other clinically relevant outcomes, such as radiographic improvement, treatment failure rates, and amount of fluid drainage, are needed to inform clinical decisions.
Topics: Adult; Child; Drainage; Empyema, Pleural; Humans; Length of Stay; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selection Bias; Thoracic Surgery, Video-Assisted; Thoracostomy; Thrombolytic Therapy
PubMed: 28304084
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010651.pub2 -
Heart & Lung : the Journal of Critical... 2022Active cycle breathing technique (ACBT), which includes cycle of breathing control, thoracic expansion exercises and forced expiratory technique (FET), appears to have... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Active cycle breathing technique (ACBT), which includes cycle of breathing control, thoracic expansion exercises and forced expiratory technique (FET), appears to have beneficial effects in patients with a variety of respiratory diseases. This systematic review provides an update on the new related studies, expanding the evidence base through the last 12 years and specifically evaluating the effectiveness of ACBT on pulmonary function-related outcome variables in patients with chronic respiratory diseases.
METHODS
MEDLINE/Pubmed, PEDro, and Cochrane Library for Randomized Controlled Trials were searched between September 2008 and December 2021, in continuance of a previous systematic review, to identify randomized clinical trials and/or crossover studies comparing ACBT to other respiratory treatment techniques in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, cystic fibrosis, or bronchiectasis.
RESULTS
Eleven studies were included and the quality of most of them was moderate to good. The outcomes most frequently assessed were forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV), sputum wet weight, forced vital capacity (FVC), and peak expiratory flow rate. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and dyspnea. Various comparators were identified and most of them assessed the ACBT as an effective method in comparison with other respiratory treatment modalities. Most studies revealed that ACBT/FET had at least an equally beneficial short-term effect on sputum wet weight, FEV and FVC compared to other treatment methods.
CONCLUSION
The results of this updating review reinforced the data of a previous systematic review regarding the beneficial impact of ACBT for the short-term improvement in respiratory tract secretions clearance and pulmonary function. ACBT is effective in increasing the expectorated sputum volume, in reducing viscoelasticity of the secretion and in relieving symptoms such as dyspnea.
Topics: Bronchiectasis; Drainage, Postural; Humans; Quality of Life; Respiratory Therapy; Sputum
PubMed: 35235877
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2022.02.006 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Aug 2019Post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is comparatively complex application. Researchers has been investigated prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis...
BACKGROUND
Post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is comparatively complex application. Researchers has been investigated prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), since it has been considered to be the most common complication of ERCP. Although ERCP can lead various complications, it can also be avoided.AIMSTo study the published evidence and systematically review the literature on the prevention and treatment for PEP.
METHODS
A systematic literature review on the prevention of PEP was conducted using the electronic databases of ISI Web of Science, PubMed and Cochrane Library for relevant articles. The electronic search for the review was performed by using the search terms "Post endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis" AND "prevention" through different criteria. The search was restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed between January 2009 and February 2019. Duplicate studies were detected by using EndNote and deleted by the author. PRISMA checklist and flow diagram were adopted for evaluation and reporting. The reference lists of the selected papers were also scanned to find other relevant studies.
RESULTS
726 studies meeting the search criteria and 4 relevant articles found in the edited books about ERCP were identified. Duplicates and irrelevant studies were excluded by screening titles and abstracts and assessing full texts. 54 studies were evaluated for full text review. Prevention methods were categorized into three groups as (1) assessment of patient related factors; (2) pharmacoprevention; and (3) procedural techniques for prevention. Most of studies in the literature showed that young age, female gender, absence of chronic pancreatitis, suspected Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, recurrent pancreatitis and history of previous PEP played a crucial role in posing high risks for PEP. 37 studies designed to assess the impact of 24 different pharmacologic agents to reduce the development of PEP delivered through various administration methods were reviewed. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are widely used to reduce risks for PEP. Rectal administration of indomethacin immediately prior to or after ERCP in all patients is recommended by European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines to prevent the development of PEP. The majority of the studies reviewed revealed that rectally administered indomethacin had efficacy to prevent PEP. Results of the other studies on the other pharmacological interventions had both controversial and promising results. Thirteen studies conducted to evaluate the efficacy of 4 distinct procedural techniques to prevent the development of PEP were reviewed. Pancreatic Stent Placement has been frequently used in this sense and has potent and promising benefits in the prevention of PEP. Studies on the other procedural techniques have had inconsistent results.
CONCLUSION
Prevention of PEP involves multifactorial aspects, including assessment of patients with high risk factors for alternative therapeutic and diagnostic techniques, administration of pharmacological agents and procedural techniques with highly precise results in the literature.
Topics: Administration, Rectal; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Biliary Tract Diseases; Catheterization; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Drainage; Humans; Pancreas; Pancreatitis; Phosphodiesterase 5 Inhibitors; Postoperative Complications; Preoperative Care; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Somatostatin; Sphincter of Oddi; Stents
PubMed: 31413535
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i29.4019 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2015More than one in five patients who undergo treatment for breast cancer will develop breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). BCRL can occur as a result of breast cancer... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
More than one in five patients who undergo treatment for breast cancer will develop breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). BCRL can occur as a result of breast cancer surgery and/or radiation therapy. BCRL can negatively impact comfort, function, and quality of life (QoL). Manual lymphatic drainage (MLD), a type of hands-on therapy, is frequently used for BCRL and often as part of complex decongestive therapy (CDT). CDT is a fourfold conservative treatment which includes MLD, compression therapy (consisting of compression bandages, compression sleeves, or other types of compression garments), skin care, and lymph-reducing exercises (LREs). Phase 1 of CDT is to reduce swelling; Phase 2 is to maintain the reduced swelling.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of MLD in treating BCRL.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, WHO ICTRP (World Health Organization's International Clinical Trial Registry Platform), and Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register from root to 24 May 2013. No language restrictions were applied.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of women with BCRL. The intervention was MLD. The primary outcomes were (1) volumetric changes, (2) adverse events. Secondary outcomes were (1) function, (2) subjective sensations, (3) QoL, (4) cost of care.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We collected data on three volumetric outcomes. (1) LE (lymphedema) volume was defined as the amount of excess fluid left in the arm after treatment, calculated as volume in mL of affected arm post-treatment minus unaffected arm post-treatment. (2) Volume reduction was defined as the amount of fluid reduction in mL from before to after treatment calculated as the pretreatment LE volume of the affected arm minus the post-treatment LE volume of the affected arm. (3) Per cent reduction was defined as the proportion of fluid reduced relative to the baseline excess volume, calculated as volume reduction divided by baseline LE volume multiplied by 100. We entered trial data into Review Manger 5.2 (RevMan), pooled data using a fixed-effect model, and analyzed continuous data as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also explored subgroups to determine whether mild BCRL compared to moderate or severe BCRL, and BCRL less than a year compared to more than a year was associated with a better response to MLD.
MAIN RESULTS
Six trials were included. Based on similar designs, trials clustered in three categories.(1) MLD + standard physiotherapy versus standard physiotherapy (one trial) showed significant improvements in both groups from baseline but no significant between-groups differences for per cent reduction.(2) MLD + compression bandaging versus compression bandaging (two trials) showed significant per cent reductions of 30% to 38.6% for compression bandaging alone, and an additional 7.11% reduction for MLD (MD 7.11%, 95% CI 1.75% to 12.47%; two RCTs; 83 participants). Volume reduction was borderline significant (P = 0.06). LE volume was not significant. Subgroup analyses was significant showing that participants with mild-to-moderate BCRL were better responders to MLD than were moderate-to-severe participants.(3) MLD + compression therapy versus nonMLD treatment + compression therapy (three trials) were too varied to pool. One of the trials compared compression sleeve plus MLD to compression sleeve plus pneumatic pump. Volume reduction was statistically significant favoring MLD (MD 47.00 mL, 95% CI 15.25 mL to 78.75 mL; 1 RCT; 24 participants), per cent reduction was borderline significant (P=0.07), and LE volume was not significant. A second trial compared compression sleeve plus MLD to compression sleeve plus self-administered simple lymphatic drainage (SLD), and was significant for MLD for LE volume (MD -230.00 mL, 95% CI -450.84 mL to -9.16 mL; 1 RCT; 31 participants) but not for volume reduction or per cent reduction. A third trial of MLD + compression bandaging versus SLD + compression bandaging was not significant (P = 0.10) for per cent reduction, the only outcome measured (MD 11.80%, 95% CI -2.47% to 26.07%, 28 participants).MLD was well tolerated and safe in all trials.Two trials measured function as range of motion with conflicting results. One trial reported significant within-groups gains for both groups, but no between-groups differences. The other trial reported there were no significant within-groups gains and did not report between-groups results. One trial measured strength and reported no significant changes in either group.Two trials measured QoL, but results were not usable because one trial did not report any results, and the other trial did not report between-groups results.Four trials measured sensations such as pain and heaviness. Overall, the sensations were significantly reduced in both groups over baseline, but with no between-groups differences. No trials reported cost of care.Trials were small ranging from 24 to 45 participants. Most trials appeared to randomize participants adequately. However, in four trials the person measuring the swelling knew what treatment the participants were receiving, and this could have biased results.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
MLD is safe and may offer additional benefit to compression bandaging for swelling reduction. Compared to individuals with moderate-to-severe BCRL, those with mild-to-moderate BCRL may be the ones who benefit from adding MLD to an intensive course of treatment with compression bandaging. This finding, however, needs to be confirmed by randomized data.In trials where MLD and sleeve were compared with a nonMLD treatment and sleeve, volumetric outcomes were inconsistent within the same trial. Research is needed to identify the most clinically meaningful volumetric measurement, to incorporate newer technologies in LE assessment, and to assess other clinically relevant outcomes such as fibrotic tissue formation.Findings were contradictory for function (range of motion), and inconclusive for quality of life.For symptoms such as pain and heaviness, 60% to 80% of participants reported feeling better regardless of which treatment they received.One-year follow-up suggests that once swelling had been reduced, participants were likely to keep their swelling down if they continued to use a custom-made sleeve.
Topics: Bandages; Breast Neoplasms; Drainage; Female; Humans; Lymphedema; Massage; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25994425
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003475.pub2 -
Surgical Endoscopy Dec 2023The optimal diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis remains controversial. This systematic review details the evidence and current best practices for the evaluation and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The optimal diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis remains controversial. This systematic review details the evidence and current best practices for the evaluation and management of uncomplicated and complicated appendicitis in adults and children.
METHODS
Eight questions regarding the diagnosis and management of appendicitis were formulated. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane and clinicaltrials.gov/NLM were queried for articles published from 2010 to 2022 with key words related to at least one question. Randomized and non-randomized studies were included. Two reviewers screened each publication for eligibility and then extracted data from eligible studies. Random effects meta-analyses were performed on all quantitative data. The quality of randomized and non-randomized studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 or Newcastle Ottawa Scale, respectively.
RESULTS
2792 studies were screened and 261 were included. Most had a high risk of bias. Computerized tomography scan yielded the highest sensitivity (> 80%) and specificity (> 93%) in the adult population, although high variability existed. In adults with uncomplicated appendicitis, non-operative management resulted in higher odds of readmission (OR 6.10) and need for operation (OR 20.09), but less time to return to work/school (SMD - 1.78). In pediatric patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, non-operative management also resulted in higher odds of need for operation (OR 38.31). In adult patients with complicated appendicitis, there were higher odds of need for operation following antibiotic treatment only (OR 29.00), while pediatric patients had higher odds of abscess formation (OR 2.23). In pediatric patients undergoing appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, higher risk of reoperation at any time point was observed in patients who had drains placed at the time of operation (RR 2.04).
CONCLUSIONS
This review demonstrates the diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis remains nuanced. A personalized approach and appropriate patient selection remain key to treatment success. Further research on controversies in treatment would be useful for optimal management.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Appendicitis; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Appendectomy; Treatment Outcome; Drainage
PubMed: 37914953
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10456-5 -
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Oct 2023Multiple meta-analyses have evaluated the technical and clinical success of EUS-guided biliary drainage (BD), but meta-analyses concerning adverse events (AEs) are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Multiple meta-analyses have evaluated the technical and clinical success of EUS-guided biliary drainage (BD), but meta-analyses concerning adverse events (AEs) are limited. The present meta-analysis analyzed AEs associated with various types of EUS-BD.
METHODS
A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus was conducted from 2005 to September 2022 for studies analyzing the outcome of EUS-BD. The primary outcomes were incidence of overall AEs, major AEs, procedure-related mortality, and reintervention. The event rates were pooled using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
One hundred fifty-five studies (7887 patients) were included in the final analysis. The pooled clinical success rates and incidence of AEs with EUS-BD were 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94.1-95.9) and 13.7% (95% CI, 12.3-15.0), respectively. Among early AEs, bile leak was the most common followed by cholangitis with pooled incidences of 2.2% (95% CI, 1.8-2.7) and 1.0% (95% CI, .8-1.3), respectively. The pooled incidences of major AEs and procedure-related mortality with EUS-BD were .6% (95% CI, .3-.9) and .1% (95% CI, .0-.4), respectively. The pooled incidences of delayed migration and stent occlusion were 1.7% (95% CI, 1.1-2.3) and 11.0% (95% CI, 9.3-12.8), respectively. The pooled event rate for reintervention (for stent migration or occlusion) after EUS-BD was 16.2% (95% CI, 14.0-18.3; I = 77.5%).
CONCLUSIONS
Despite a high clinical success rate, EUS-BD may be associated with AEs in one-seventh of the cases. However, major AEs and mortality incidence remain less than 1%, which is reassuring.
Topics: Humans; Cholestasis; Endosonography; Cholangitis; Drainage; Stents; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde
PubMed: 37392952
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2023.06.055 -
American Journal of Surgery May 2021Traumatic hemothorax poses diagnostic and therapeutic challenges both acutely and chronically. A working group of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma...
BACKGROUND
Traumatic hemothorax poses diagnostic and therapeutic challenges both acutely and chronically. A working group of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma convened to formulate a practice management guideline for traumatic hemothorax.
METHODS
We formulated four questions: whether tube thoracostomy vs observation be performed, should pigtail catheter versus thoracostomy tube be placed to drain hemothorax, should thrombolytic therapy be attempted versus immediate thoracoscopic assisted drainage (VATS) in retained hemothorax (rHTX), and should early VATS (≤4 days) versus late VATS (>4 days) be performed? A systematic review was undertaken from articles identified in multiple databases.
RESULTS
A total of 6391 articles were identified, 14 were selected for guideline construction. Most articles were retrospective with very low-quality evidence. We performed meta-analysis for some of the outcomes for three of the questions.
CONCLUSIONS
For traumatic hemothorax we conditionally recommend pigtail catheters, in hemodynamically stable patients. In patients with rHTX, we conditionally recommend VATS rather than attempting thrombolytic therapy and recommend that it should be performed early (≤4 days).
Topics: Chest Tubes; Drainage; Hemothorax; Humans; Thoracostomy; Thrombolytic Therapy
PubMed: 33487403
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.11.032 -
Journal of Investigative Surgery : the... Dec 2023Our objective is to compare the early outcomes associated with passive (gravity) drainage (PG) and active drainage (AD) after surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Our objective is to compare the early outcomes associated with passive (gravity) drainage (PG) and active drainage (AD) after surgery.
METHODS
Studies published until April 28, 2022 were retrieved from the PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, Web of Science databases.
RESULTS
Nine studies with 14,169 patients were identified. Two groups had the same intra-abdominal infection rate (RR: 0.55; = 0.13); In subgroup analysis of pancreaticoduodenectomy, active drainage had no significant effect on postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rate (RR: 1.21; = 0.26) and clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) (RR: 1.05; = 0.72); Active drainage was not associated with lower percutaneous drainage rate (RR: 1.00; = 0.96), incidence of sepsis (RR: 1.00; = 0.99) and overall morbidity (RR: 1.02; = 0.73). Both groups had the same POPF rate (RR: 1.20; = 0.18) and CR-POPF rate (RR: 1.20; = 0.18) after distal pancreatectomy. There was no difference between two groups on the day of drain removal after pancreaticoduodenectomy (Mean difference: -0.16; = 0.81) and liver surgery (Mean difference: 0.03; = 0.99).
CONCLUSIONS
Active drainage is not superior to passive drainage and both drainage methods can be considered.
Topics: Humans; Abdomen; Pancreas; Drainage; Pancreatectomy; Postoperative Complications; Pancreaticoduodenectomy
PubMed: 37733388
DOI: 10.1080/08941939.2023.2180115