-
International Journal of Colorectal... Oct 2018We aimed to explore whether sarcopenia diagnosed with the third lumbar vertebra skeletal muscle index (L3 SMI) can be a predictor of prognosis for colorectal cancer...
PURPOSE
We aimed to explore whether sarcopenia diagnosed with the third lumbar vertebra skeletal muscle index (L3 SMI) can be a predictor of prognosis for colorectal cancer (CRC) patients.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science databases. All original comparative studies published in English that were related to sarcopenia versus non-sarcopenia in non-metastatic CRC patients based on postoperative and survival outcomes were included. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using Stata software.
RESULTS
A total of 12 studies including 5337 patients were included in our meta-analysis. In our overall analyses of postoperative outcomes, we indicated that CRC patients with sarcopenia would have longer hospital stays, higher incidence of total postoperative morbidity (OR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.07-2.70, P < 0.01), mortality (OR = 3.45, 95% CI = 1.69-7.02, P < 0.01), and infection (OR = 2.21, 95% CI = 1.50-3.25, P < 0.01) but not anastomosis leakage or intestinal obstruction when compared to non-sarcopenia patients. Regarding survival outcomes, our results showed that sarcopenia predicted a decreased overall survival (HR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.24-2.14, P < 0.01), disease-free survival, and cancer-specific survival for non-metastatic CRC patients. Moreover, our subgroup analyses showed similar tendency with our overall analyzed results.
CONCLUSIONS
Sarcopenia diagnosed with L3 SMI can be a negative predictor of postoperative and survival outcomes for non-metastatic CRC patients. Prospective studies with a uniform definition of sarcopenia are needed to update our findings.
Topics: Colectomy; Colorectal Neoplasms; Comorbidity; Humans; Neoplasm Staging; Postoperative Complications; Prognosis; Risk Factors; Sarcopenia
PubMed: 29987364
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-018-3128-1 -
Sexually Transmitted Diseases May 2018Sexually transmitted infection (STI) rates are increasing in the United States while funding for prevention and treatment programs has declined. Sample self-collection...
BACKGROUND
Sexually transmitted infection (STI) rates are increasing in the United States while funding for prevention and treatment programs has declined. Sample self-collection for STI testing in men may provide an acceptable, easy, rapid, and potentially cost-effective method for increasing diagnosis and treatment of STIs.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of articles assessing self-collection of anal, oral, or genital swab samples among adult men for detection of STIs and/or human papillomavirus-related dysplasia. We searched for English-language articles in which men 18 years or older were recruited to participate.
RESULTS
Our literature search resulted in 1053 citations, with 20 meeting inclusion criteria. Self-collection methods were highly sensitive and comparable with clinician collection for detection of multiple STI pathogens. However, self-collected samples were less likely to be of adequate quality for anorectal cytology and less sensitive for detection of anal intraepithelial neoplasia than clinician-collected samples. Self-collection was highly acceptable. Overall, studies were small and heterogeneous and used designs providing lower levels of evidence.
CONCLUSIONS
Self-collection methods are a viable option for collecting samples for STI testing in adult men based on their high feasibility, acceptability, and validity. Implementation of self-collection procedures in STI testing venues should be performed to expand opportunities for STI detection and treatment.
Topics: Adult; Anal Canal; Anus Neoplasms; Carcinoma in Situ; Humans; Male; Mass Screening; Papillomaviridae; Self Care; Sexually Transmitted Diseases; Specimen Handling; Trichomonas Infections; United States; Young Adult
PubMed: 29465701
DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000739 -
Journal of Pediatric Surgery May 2017The ideal colostomy type for patients with anorectal malformations (ARM) is undetermined. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term complications... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The ideal colostomy type for patients with anorectal malformations (ARM) is undetermined. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term complications comparing loop and divided colostomies.
METHODS
After review registration (PROSPERO: CRD42016036481), multiple databases were searched for comparative studies without language or date restrictions. Gray literature was sought. Complications investigated included stomal prolapse/hernia/retraction, wound infections, and urinary tract infections (UTIs). Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and the quality of included studies. Meta-analysis of selected complications was performed using Revman 5.3, with p<0.05 considered significant.
RESULTS
Twenty-six studies were included, and four were multi-institutional. Reporting standards were highly variable. Studies scored between 6 and 9 of possible nine stars on the NOS. Overall, 3866 neonates with ARM were incorporated, in which 2241 loop colostomies and 1994 divided colostomies were reported. Of 10 studies reporting short-term complications, the overall rate was 27%. Meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the incidence of UTIs, (OR: 2.55 [0.76, 8.58], p=0.12), while loop colostomies had a significantly higher prolapse rate (See figure). No publication bias was noted.
CONCLUSIONS
A colostomy for patients with an ARM is a source of considerable morbidity. Divided colostomies reduce the risk of subsequent prolapse and may represent the preferred approach.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
3A.
Topics: Anorectal Malformations; Colostomy; Humans; Models, Statistical; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28259380
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2017.01.044 -
PloS One 2017Anorectal malformations (ARMs) are one of the commonest anomalies in neonates. Both laparoscopically assisted anorectal pull-through (LAARP) and posterior sagittal... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Laparoscopically Assisted Anorectal Pull-Through versus Posterior Sagittal Anorectoplasty for High and Intermediate Anorectal Malformations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
OBJECTIVE
Anorectal malformations (ARMs) are one of the commonest anomalies in neonates. Both laparoscopically assisted anorectal pull-through (LAARP) and posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (PSARP) can be used for the treatment of ARMs. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare these two approaches in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched from 2000 to August 2016. Both randomized and non-randomized studies, assessing LAARP and PSARP in pediatric patients with high/intermediate ARMs, were included. The primary outcome measures were operative time, length of hospital stay and total postoperative complications. The second outcome measures were rectal prolapse, anal stenosis, wound infection/dehiscence, anorectal manometry, Kelly's clinical score, and Krickenbeck classification. The quality of the randomized and non-randomized studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) respectively. The quality of evidence was assessed by GRADEpro.
RESULTS
From 332 retrieved articles, 1, 1, and 8 of randomized control, prospective and retrospective studies, respectively, met the inclusion criteria. The randomized clinical trial was judged to be of low risk of bias, and the nine cohort studies were of moderate to high quality. 191 and 169 pediatric participants had undergone LAARP and PSARP, respectively. Shorter hospital stays, less wound infection/dehiscence, higher anal canal resting pressure, and a lower incidence of grade 2 or 3 constipation were obtained after LAARP compared with PSARP group values. Besides, the LAARP group had marginally less total postoperative complications. However, the result of operative time was inconclusive; meanwhile, there was no significant difference in rectal prolapse, anal stenosis, anorectal manometry, Kelly's clinical score and Krickenbeck classification.
CONCLUSION
For pediatric patients with high/intermediate anorectal malformations, LAARP is a better option compared with PSARP. However, the quality of evidence was very low to moderate.
Topics: Anal Canal; Anorectal Malformations; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Postoperative Complications; Rectum; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28099464
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170421 -
Progres En Urologie : Journal de... Jul 2016The issue addressed in this chapter of recommendations is: What is the clinical and para-clinical assessment to achieve in women with genital prolapse and for whom... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The issue addressed in this chapter of recommendations is: What is the clinical and para-clinical assessment to achieve in women with genital prolapse and for whom surgical treatment has been decided. What are the clinical elements of the examination that must be taken into account as a risk factor of failure or relapse after surgery, in order to anticipate and evaluate possible surgical difficulties, and to move towards a preferred surgical technique?
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This work is based on a systematic review of the literature (PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Cochrane Database of Systemactic Reviews, EMBASE) for meta-analyzes, randomized trials, registries, literature reviews, controlled studies and major not controlled studies, published on the subject. Its implementation has followed the methodology of the HAS on the recommendations for clinical practice, with a scientific argument (with the level of evidence, NP) and a recommendation grade (A, B, C, and professional agreement [AP]).
RESULTS
It suits first of all to describe prolapse, by clinical examination, helped, if needed, by a supplement of imagery if clinical examination data are insufficient or in case of discrepancy between the functional signs and clinical anomalies found, or in case of doubt in associated pathology. It suits to look relapse risk factors (high grade prolapse) and postoperative complications risk factors (risk factors for prothetic exposure, surgical approach difficulties, pelvic pain syndrome with hypersensitivity) to inform the patient and guide the therapeutic choice. Urinary functional disorders associated with prolapse (urinary incontinence, overactive bladder, dysuria, urinary tract infection, upper urinary tract impact) will be search and evaluated by interview and clinical examination and by a flowmeter with measurement of the post voiding residue, a urinalysis, and renal-bladder ultrasound. In the presence of voiding disorders, it is appropriate to do their clinical and urodynamic evaluation. In the absence of any spontaneous or hidden urinary sign, there is so far no reason to recommend systematically urodynamic assessment. Anorectal symptoms associated with prolapse (irritable bowel syndrome, obstruction of defecation, fecal incontinence) should be search and evaluated. Before prolapse surgery, it is essential not to ignore gynecologic pathology.
CONCLUSION
Before proposing a surgical cure of genital prolapse of women, it suits to achieve a clinical and paraclinical assessment to describe prolapse (anatomical structures involved, grade), to look for recurrence, difficulties approach and postoperative complications risk factors, and to appreciate the impact or the symptoms associated with prolapse (urinary, anorectal, gynecological, pelvic-perineal pain) to guide their evaluation and their treatment. © 2016 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Preoperative Care; Urodynamics
PubMed: 27595629
DOI: 10.1016/S1166-7087(16)30425-0 -
BMC Cancer Aug 2014Although anal cancer is common in HIV positive men who have sex with men, few centres offer systematic screening. Regular digital ano-rectal examination (DARE) is a type... (Review)
Review
Regional and national guideline recommendations for digital ano-rectal examination as a means for anal cancer screening in HIV positive men who have sex with men: a systematic review.
BACKGROUND
Although anal cancer is common in HIV positive men who have sex with men, few centres offer systematic screening. Regular digital ano-rectal examination (DARE) is a type of screening that has been recommended by some experts. How widely this forms part of HIV management guidelines is unclear.
METHODS
The protocol was registered prospectively (CRD42013005188; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/). We systematically reviewed 121 regional and national HIV guidelines and searched for guidelines from http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/global?page=cr-00-04#SauguidelineX, PubMed and Web of Science databases up to 5th August 2013 for recommendations of DARE as a means of anal cancer screening in HIV positive MSM. Guidelines were examined in detail if they were clinical guidelines, including both prevention and treatment protocols and were in English. Guidelines were excluded if they were restricted to limited areas (e.g. antiretroviral therapy only, children or pregnant women, strategies for prevention/testing). Information was extracted regarding recommendation of DARE as a screening method, the frequency of DARE recommended, target population for screening and the strength of evidence supporting this.
RESULTS
30 regional and national guidelines were included and examined in detail. Only 2 recommended DARE. The 'European AIDS Clinical Society Guidelines' recommends DARE every 1-3 years for HIV positive MSM whilst the 'US Guideline for prevention and treatment of opportunistic infections in HIV-infected adults and adolescents' recommends an annual DARE for the HIV + population in general. None of these guidelines specify the age of commencing screening. In each case, the highest level of evidence supporting these two recommendations was expert opinion.
CONCLUSIONS
Few HIV guidelines discuss or recommend DARE as a means of anal cancer screening. Studies of the efficacy, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of DARE are needed to assess its role in anal cancer screening.
Topics: Anus Neoplasms; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Digital Rectal Examination; Early Detection of Cancer; Europe; HIV Infections; Homosexuality, Male; Humans; Male; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Retrospective Studies; United States
PubMed: 25081485
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-14-557