-
Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck... 2024Different factors can affect the quality of life of patients treated for head and neck cancer undergoing major surgical intervention. However, it remains unclear which...
BACKGROUND
Different factors can affect the quality of life of patients treated for head and neck cancer undergoing major surgical intervention. However, it remains unclear which specific factors and what possible interventions could have the greatest influence on quality of life postoperatively for patients undergoing surgical resection with free flap reconstruction. The objective of our systematic review was to identify which factors, at the time of surgical treatment, are associated with a worse postoperative quality of life for patients undergoing surgical resection with free flap reconstruction for head and neck cancer.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), from their inception through November 2021. We included peer reviewed studies that evaluated the impact of specific factors on quality of life for adult patients who underwent surgery with free flap reconstruction for head and neck cancer. Two reviewers independently screened citations for eligibility and extracted data. Risk of bias of each study was evaluated using the New-Castle Ottawa Scale. Vote counting and qualitative review were used to synthesize results. All relevant findings were reported.
RESULTS
We initially identified 1971 articles. We included 22 articles in our systematic review, totaling 1398 patients. There was a high level of variability for factors evaluated throughout studies and many studies presented small sample sizes. However, some factors were associated with worse long-term quality of life, including older age, radiotherapy, higher tumor stage, dysphagia, anxiety as well as depressive symptoms. Very few articles analyzed their data for specific tumor subsites and the impact of psychosocial factors was rarely evaluated throughout studies.
CONCLUSIONS
For patients with head and neck cancer requiring free flap reconstruction, some specific factors may correlate with changes in quality of life. However, these findings are based on very few and mostly underpowered studies. A better understanding of factors affecting quality of life could allow a more personalized and overall better quality of care for patients.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Free Tissue Flaps; Plastic Surgery Procedures
PubMed: 38888940
DOI: 10.1177/19160216241248666 -
Clinical Cardiology Jun 2024Long-term follow-up results of various trials comparing Zotarolimus eluting stents (ZES) with Everolimus eluting stents (EES) have been published recently. Additionally,... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Temporal Trends in the Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Zotarolimus Eluting Stents Versus Everolimus Eluting Stents: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
INTRODUCTION
Long-term follow-up results of various trials comparing Zotarolimus eluting stents (ZES) with Everolimus eluting stents (EES) have been published recently. Additionally, over the last decade, there have been new trials comparing the ZES with various commercially available EES. We aim to conduct an updated meta-analysis in light of new evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide comprehensive evidence regarding the temporal trends in the clinical outcomes.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase. RCTs comparing ZES with EES for short (<2 years), intermediate (2-3 years), and long-term follow-ups (3-5 years) were included. Relative risk was used to pool the dichotomous outcomes using the random effects model employing the inverse variance method. All statistical analysis was conducted using Revman 5.4.
RESULTS
A total of 18 studies reporting data at different follow-ups for nine trials (n = 14319) were included. At short-term follow-up (<2 years), there were no significant differences between the two types of stents (all-cause death, cardiac death, Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target vessel myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis or safety outcomes (target vessel revascularization, target lesion revascularization, target vessel failure, target lesion failure). At intermediate follow-up (2-3 years), EES was superior to ZES for reducing target lesion revascularization (RR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.05-1.58, p < 0.05). At long-term follow-up (3-5 years), there were no significant differences between the two groups for any of the pooled outcomes (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
ZES and EES have similar safety and efficacy at short, intermediate, and long-term follow-ups.
Topics: Humans; Cardiovascular Agents; Coronary Artery Disease; Drug-Eluting Stents; Everolimus; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Prosthesis Design; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Sirolimus; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38888152
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24306 -
BMC Urology Jun 2024The aim of our study was to investigate the comparative outcomes of five different energy types on surgical efficacy and postoperative recovery in patients with benign... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
PURPOSE
The aim of our study was to investigate the comparative outcomes of five different energy types on surgical efficacy and postoperative recovery in patients with benign prostate hyperplasia.
METHODS
The literature was systematically reviewed on December 1st, 2023, encompassing studies retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library databases that incorporated clinical studies of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), Thulium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP), transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of prostate (PKEP), diode laser enucleation of the prostate (DiLEP) and thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) in the treatment of prostatic hyperplasia. Two independent reviewers extracted study data and conducted quality assessments using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Network meta-analysis (NMA) was employed to indirectly analyze the outcomes of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) techniques.
RESULTS
The study included a total of 38 studies, comprising 21 non-randomized controlled trials (nRCTs) and 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), incorporating five distinct techniques: holmium laser, Thulium:YAG laser, bipolar plasma, diode laser and thulium fiber laser. In comparing treatment durations, ThuLEP and HoLEP had shorter overall hospital stays than PKEP, while the enucleation time of ThuLEP and HoLEP was shorter than that of ThuFLEP. Moreover, the enucleation tissue weight of both thulium fiber laser and holmium laser was heavier than bipolar plasma. However, the analysis did not reveal any statistically significant variation in complications among the various types of enucleation. In postoperative follow-up, the IPSS at 3 months post-operation was superior in the Thulium:YAG laser group compared to the holmium laser group. The thulium fiber laser technique demonstrated significant advantages over other enucleation methods in terms of QoL and PVR at 12 months after surgery.
CONCLUSION
Theoretical properties may vary among different energy sources; however, there are no discernible clinical differences in operation-related parameters, postoperative complications, and postoperative follow-up. Therefore, the choice of laser does not significantly impact the outcome. However, due to the limited number of included studies, future research should focus on larger sample sizes and multicenter investigations to further validate the findings of this study.
Topics: Humans; Male; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Laser Therapy; Prostatectomy; Lasers, Solid-State
PubMed: 38886739
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-024-01517-5 -
BMC Pulmonary Medicine Jun 2024Rapamycin has been extensively utilized for coating coronary artery stents to reduce the occurrence of restenosis, yet there has been limited research on the potential...
BACKGROUND
Rapamycin has been extensively utilized for coating coronary artery stents to reduce the occurrence of restenosis, yet there has been limited research on the potential harms of rapamycin-eluting stents. Herein, We report a case of eosinophilia and interstitial pneumonia caused by a cobalt-based alloy stent eluted with rapamycin.
CASE PRESENTATION
The patient was admitted due to fever, cough, and expectoration symptoms. Previously, the patient had undergone a procedure of percutaneous coronary stent implantation in our hospital's cardiology department, which led to a gradual rise in blood eosinophil count. This time, the eosinophil count was higher than the previous admission. A chest CT scan revealed multiple flocculent density increases in both lungs and bronchiectasis. The rapamycin-eluting stents may have caused eosinophilia and interstitial pneumonia, which improved after administering corticosteroids. A systematic review of relevant literature was conducted to summarize the characteristics of interstitial pneumonia caused by drug-eluting stents.
CONCLUSION
Paclitaxel, everolimus, zotarolimus, and rapamycin are the types of drugs that can lead to drug-eluting stents, and because of the rarity of their onset, clinical doctors must be precise and prompt in diagnosing suspected cases to avoid misdiagnosis and delayed treatment.
Topics: Humans; Lung Diseases, Interstitial; Drug-Eluting Stents; Sirolimus; Eosinophilia; Male; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Aged
PubMed: 38886703
DOI: 10.1186/s12890-024-03101-x -
International Journal of Cardiology Jun 2024Complete removal of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is recommended in patients with CIED infections, including both systemic and localized pocket...
BACKGROUND
Complete removal of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is recommended in patients with CIED infections, including both systemic and localized pocket infection. The aim of the study was to provide an up-to-date and comprehensive assessment of evidence relating to the effect of complete CIED extraction in patients with a CIED infection.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting short- and mid-term outcomes in patients who had a device infection or infective endocarditis (IE) and underwent complete removal of the cardiac device (generator and leads) compared to those who received conservative therapy (no removal, partial removal, local antibiotic infiltration or isolated antibiotic therapy). The primary outcome was reinfection/relapse. Secondary outcomes were short-term (30-day/in-hospital) and mid-term (mean follow-up: 43.0 months) mortality. Random effects model was performed.
RESULTS
Thirty-two studies met the criteria for inclusion in the final analysis. Patients with complete CIED extraction (n = 905) exhibited a lower rate of relapse/re-infection compared to patients (n = 195) with a conservative treatment approach (n = 195, OR 0.02, 95%CI 0.01-0.06, p < 0.0001, mean-follow-up: 16.1 months). Additionally, these patients displayed a lower short- (OR 0.40, 95%CI 0.23-0.69, p = 0.01) and mid-term (OR 0.52, 95%CI 0.34-0.78, p = 0.002) mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
The analysis indicates that patients with a CIED infection who undergo complete CIED extraction exhibit a lower rate of relapse/re-infection. Additionally, a lower short- and mid-term mortality is observed, although it is acknowledged that this outcome may be influenced by treatment allocation bias.
PubMed: 38878871
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2024.132264 -
Archives of Dermatological Research Jun 2024Steven Johnson Syndrome (SJS) and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN), grouped together under the terminology of epidermal necrolysis (EN), are a spectrum of... (Review)
Review
Steven Johnson Syndrome (SJS) and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN), grouped together under the terminology of epidermal necrolysis (EN), are a spectrum of life-threatening dermatologic conditions. A lack of standardization and validation for existing endpoints has been identified as a key barrier to the comparison of these therapies and development of evidenced-based treatment. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review of prospective studies involving systemic or topical treatments for EN, including dressing and ocular treatments. Outcomes were separated into mortality assessment, cutaneous outcomes, non-cutaneous clinical outcomes, and mucosal outcomes. The COSMIN Risk of Bias tool was used to assess the quality of studies on reliability and measurement error of outcome measurement instruments. Outcomes across studies assessing treatment in the acute phase of EN were varied. Most data came from prospective case reports and cohort studies representing the lack of available randomized clinical trial data available in EN. Our search did not reveal any EN-specific validated measures or scoring tools used to assess disease progression and outcomes. Less than half of included studies were considered "adequate" for COSMIN risk of bias in reliability and measurement error of outcome measurement instruments. With little consensus about management and treatment of EN, consistency and validation of measured outcomes is of the upmost importance for future studies to compare outcomes across treatments and identify the most effective means of combating the disease with the highest mortality managed by dermatologists.
Topics: Humans; Stevens-Johnson Syndrome; Reproducibility of Results; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Treatment Outcome; Bandages
PubMed: 38878166
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-024-03062-5 -
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory... Jun 2024Venous blood collection systems (VBCSs) are combinations of diagnostics and medical devices, usually available as integrated set. However, purchasing and using a... (Review)
Review
Venous blood collection systems (VBCSs) are combinations of diagnostics and medical devices, usually available as integrated set. However, purchasing and using a combination of devices from different sets is considered by clinical laboratories as an option to achieve specific sampling tasks or reduce costs. This systematic review aimed to retrieve available evidence regarding safety, efficacy, and economic aspects of VBCSs, focusing on differences between integrated and combined systems. The literature review was carried out in PubMed. Cited documents and resources made available by scientific organisations were also screened. Extracted evidence was clustered according to Quality/Efficacy/Performance, Safety, and Costs/Procurement domains and discussed in the current European regulatory framework. Twenty documents published between 2010 and 2021 were included. There was no evidence to suggest equivalence between combined and integrated VBCSs in terms of safety and efficacy. Scientific society's consensus documents and product standards report that combined VBCS can impact operators' and patients' safety. Analytical performances and overall efficacy of combined VBCSs are not guaranteed without whole system validation and verification. EU regulatory framework clearly allocates responsibilities for the validation and verification of an integrated VBCS, but not for combined VBCSs, lacking information about the management of product nonconformities and post-market surveillance. Laboratory validation of combined VBCS demands risk-benefit and cost-benefit analyses, a non-negligible organisational and economic burden, and investment in knowledge acquisition. Implications in terms of laboratory responsibility and legal liability should be part of a comprehensive assessment of safety, efficacy, and cost carried out during device procurement.
PubMed: 38877871
DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2024-0460 -
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery Jun 2024Pneumothorax is the most frequent complication after CT-guided percutaneous transthoracic lung biopsy (CT-PTLB). Many studies reported that injection of autologous blood... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pneumothorax is the most frequent complication after CT-guided percutaneous transthoracic lung biopsy (CT-PTLB). Many studies reported that injection of autologous blood patch (ABP) during biopsy needle withdrawal could reduce the pneumothorax and chest tube insertion rate after CT-PTLB, but the result is debatable. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to synthesize evidence regarding the efficacy of ABP procedure in patients receiving CT-PTLB.
METHODS
Eligible studies were searched in Pubmed, Embase and Web of Science databases. The inclusion criteria were studies that assessed the relationship between ABP and the pneumothorax and/or chest tube insertion rate after CT-PTLB. Subgroup analyses according to study type, emphysema status and ABP technique applied were also conducted. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated to examine the risk association.
RESULTS
A total of 10 studies including 3874 patients were qualified for analysis. Our analysis suggested that ABP reduced the pneumothorax (incidence: 20.0% vs. 27.9%, OR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.48-0.66, P < 0.001) and chest tube insertion rate (incidence: 4.0% vs. 8.0%, OR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.34-0.65, P < 0.001) after CT-PTLB. Subgroup analysis according to study type (RCT or retrospective study), emphysema status (with or without emphysema), and ABP technique applied (clotted or non-clotted ABP) were also performed and we found ABP reduced the pneumothorax and chest tube insertion rate in all subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study indicated that the use of ABP was effective technique in reducing the pneumothorax and chest tube insertion rate after CT-PTLB.
Topics: Pneumothorax; Humans; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Image-Guided Biopsy; Lung; Blood Transfusion, Autologous; Chest Tubes
PubMed: 38877547
DOI: 10.1186/s13019-024-02781-0 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Jun 2024Stent restenosis is a relatively common phenomenon among patients with coronary heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). It seems that a set of...
BACKGROUND
Stent restenosis is a relatively common phenomenon among patients with coronary heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). It seems that a set of clinical, laboratory, and even genetic factors make people susceptible to such a phenomenon and in fact, this is multi-factorial. We aimed to first determine the underlying clinical and laboratory risk factors for the occurrence of stent re-stenosis after PCI based on a systematic review study, and after that, through a bioinformatics study, to evaluate the related genes and microRNAs with the occurrence of stent re-stenosis.
MAIN TEXT
In the first step, the manuscript databases including Medline, Web of Knowledge, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Cochrane were deeply searched by the two blinded investigators for all eligible studies based on the considered keywords to introduce clinical and laboratory determinants of stent re-stenosis. In the bioinformatic phase, and following a review of the literature to identify genes and microRNAs involved in restenosis, the interaction of each gene with other genes associated with stent re-stenosis was determined by GeneMANIA network analysis and Cytoscape software. Overall, 67 articles (including 40,789 patients) on clinical and biochemical predictors for stent restenosis and 25 articles on genetic determinants of this event were eligible for the final analysis. The predictors for this event were categorized into four subgroups patient-based parameters including traditional cardiovascular risk profiles, stent-based parameters including type and diametric characteristics of the stents used, coronary lesion-based parameters including several two target lesions and coronary involvement severity and laboratory-based parameters particularly related to activation of inflammatory processes. In the bioinformatic phase, we uncovered 42 genes that have been described to be involved in such a phenomenon considering a special position for genes encoding inflammatory cytokines. Also, 12 microRNAs have been pointed to be involved in targeting genes involved in stent re-stenosis.
CONCLUSIONS
The incidence of stent re-stenosis will be the result of a complex interaction of clinical risk factors, laboratory factors mostly related to the activation of inflammatory processes, and a complex network of gene-to-gene interactions.
Topics: Humans; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Coronary Restenosis; Stents; Risk Factors; Computational Biology; Coronary Artery Disease; MicroRNAs; Risk Assessment; Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Treatment Outcome; Female; Male; Gene Regulatory Networks; Middle Aged; Aged
PubMed: 38877398
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-024-03955-3 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Jun 2024Primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair has gained renewed interest in select centers for patients with proximal or midsubstance ACL tears. Therefore, it is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair has gained renewed interest in select centers for patients with proximal or midsubstance ACL tears. Therefore, it is important to reassess contemporary clinical outcomes of ACL repair to determine whether a clinical benefit exists over the gold standard of ACL reconstruction (ACLR).
PURPOSE
To (1) perform a meta-analysis of comparative trials to determine whether differences in clinical outcomes and adverse events exist between ACL repair versus ACLR and (2) synthesize the midterm outcomes of available trials.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.
METHODS
The PubMed, OVID/Medline, and Cochrane databases were queried in August 2023 for prospective and retrospective clinical trials comparing ACL repair and ACLR. Data pertaining to tear location, surgical technique, adverse events, and clinical outcome measures were recorded. DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models were constructed to quantitatively evaluate the association between ACL repair/ACLR, adverse events, and clinical outcomes. A subanalysis of minimum 5-year outcomes was performed.
RESULTS
Twelve studies (893 patients; 464 ACLR and 429 ACL repair) were included. Random-effects models demonstrated a higher relative risk (RR) of recurrent instability/clinical failure (RR = 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.57; = .032), revision ACLR (RR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.03-2.59; = .039), and hardware removal (RR = 4.94; 95% CI, 2.10-11.61; = .0003) in patients who underwent primary ACL repair versus ACLR. The RR of reoperations and complications (knee-related) were not significantly different between groups. No significant differences were observed when comparing patient-reported outcome scores. In studies with minimum 5-year outcomes, no significant differences in adverse events or Lysholm scores were observed.
CONCLUSION
In contemporary comparative trials of ACL repair versus ACLR, the RR of clinical failure, revision surgery due to ACL rerupture, and hardware removal was greater for primary ACL repair compared with ACLR. There were no observed differences in patient-reported outcome scores, reoperations, or knee-related complications between approaches. In the limited literature reporting on minimum 5-year outcomes, significant differences in adverse events or the International Knee Documentation Committee score were not observed.
PubMed: 38867918
DOI: 10.1177/23259671241253591