-
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery... Oct 2023Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee represents a severe complication after 1.5% to 2% of primary total knee replacement. Although two-stage revision was... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee represents a severe complication after 1.5% to 2% of primary total knee replacement. Although two-stage revision was considered the gold-standard treatment for PJI of the knee, in the last decades, more studies reported the outcomes of one-stage revisions. This systematic review aims to assess reinfection rate, infection-free survival after reoperation for recurrent infection, and the microorganisms involved in both primary and recurrent infection.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic review of all studies reporting the outcome of one-stage revision for PJI of the knee up to September 2022, according to PRISMA criteria and AMSTAR2 guidelines, was performed. Patient demographics, clinical, surgical, and postoperative data were recorded.
PROSPERO ID
CRD42022362767.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies with a total of 881 one-stage revisions for PJI of the knee were analyzed. A reinfection rate of 12.2% after an average follow-up of 57.6 months was reported. The most frequent causative microorganism were gram-positive bacteria (71.1%), gram-negative bacteria (7.1%), and polymicrobial infections (8%). The average postoperative knee society score was 81.5, and the average postoperative knee function score was 74.2. The infection-free survival after treatment for recurrent infection was 92.1%. The causative microorganisms at reinfections differed significantly from the primary infection (gram-positive 44.4%, gram-negative 11.1%).
CONCLUSION
Patients who underwent a one-stage revision for PJI of the knee showed a reinfection rate lower or comparable to other surgical treatments as two-stage or DAIR (debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention). Reoperation for reinfection demonstrates a lower success compared to one-stage revision. Moreover, microbiology differs between primary infection and recurrent infection. Level of evidence Level IV.
Topics: Humans; Reinfection; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Treatment Outcome; Debridement; Knee Joint; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Reoperation; Arthritis, Infectious; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36867259
DOI: 10.1007/s00590-023-03480-7 -
The Journal of Oral Implantology Jun 2023This systematic review aimed to assess the clinical efficacy of the local application of minocycline hydrochloride for treating peri-implantitis. Four databases-PubMed,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This systematic review aimed to assess the clinical efficacy of the local application of minocycline hydrochloride for treating peri-implantitis. Four databases-PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure-were searched from their inception through December 2020. English and Chinese randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared minocycline hydrochloride with control regimes, including negative control, iodine solution or glycerin, and chlorhexidine, for patients with peri-implant diseases were retrieved. Three outcomes-plaque index (PLI), probing depth (PD), and sulcus bleeding index (SBI)-were assessed using meta-analysis based on the random-effects model. Fifteen RCTs were included in the present meta-analysis, and results suggested that minocycline hydrochloride significantly affected PLI, PD, or SBI reduction regardless of the type of comparator regime. However, subgroup analyses suggested that minocycline hydrochloride was not superior to chlorhexidine in terms of reduction of PLI (1 week: MD = -0.18, 95% CI = -0.55 to 0.20, P = .36; 4 weeks: MD = -0.08, 95% CI = -0.23 to 0.07, P = .28; 8 weeks: MD = -0.01, 95% CI = -0.18 to 0.16, P = .91) and PD (1 week: MD = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.27 to 0.41, P = .68; 4 weeks: MD = -0.10, 95% CI = -0.43 to 0.24, P = .58; 8 weeks: MD = -0.30, 95% CI = -0.68 to 0.08, P = .12), and minocycline hydrochloride was also not better than chlorhexidine regarding reduction of SBI at 1 week after treatment (MD = -0.10; 95% CI = -0.21 to 0.01; P = .08). This study concludes that minocycline hydrochloride as adjuvant therapy of nonsurgical treatment enhances the clinical results when compared to control regimes. However, the difference between minocycline hydrochloride and chlorhexidine should be further investigated by designing additional high-quality studies with large sample sizes.
Topics: Humans; Minocycline; Peri-Implantitis; Dental Implants; Chlorhexidine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36796073
DOI: 10.1563/aaid-joi-D-22-00023 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Jun 2023To answer the following PICOS question: "In adult patients with peri-implantitis, what is the efficacy of surgical therapy with chemical surface decontamination of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To answer the following PICOS question: "In adult patients with peri-implantitis, what is the efficacy of surgical therapy with chemical surface decontamination of implant surfaces in comparison with surgical therapy alone or surgery with placebo decontamination, on probing pocket depth (PD) reduction and bleeding on probing (BoP)/suppuration on probing (SoP), in randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs with at least 6 months of follow-up?"
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Six databases were searched from their inception up to 20 May 2022. Data on clinical outcome variables were pooled and analysed using mean differences (MDs), risk ratios (RRs), or risk differences (RDs) as appropriate, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and prediction intervals (PIs) in the case of significant heterogeneity. Primary outcomes were determined as changes in PD and BoP/SoP. Secondary outcomes were radiographic marginal bone loss (MBL), implant loss, and disease resolution. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022325603.
RESULTS
Six RCTs-two with moderate, three with high, and one with low risk of bias (RoB)-were included. These studies test the adjunctive effect of photodynamic therapy (PDT), chlorhexidine (CHX), and administration of local antibiotics (LAbs) during surgery on the clinical outcome. In a single 12-month study, the adjunctive use of local antibiotics showed a clinically relevant reduction of PD [MD = 1.44; 95%CI (0.40 to -2.48)] and MBL [MD = 1.21; 95%CI (0.44-1.98); one trial, 32 participants]. PDT showed a small but significant reduction in BoP [MD = 7.41%; 95%CI (0.81-14.00); p = 0.028; two trials; 42 participants]. Treatment with CHX resulted in no significant changes in PD, BoP, or MBL compared to placebo (saline solution). None of the interventions affected disease resolution and implant loss. Certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcome measures assessed.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the limitations of this systematic review and the meta-analysis, adjunctive use of chemicals such as PDT, CHX, and LAbs for surface decontamination during surgery of peri-implantitis cannot be recommended as superior to standard debridement procedures (mechanical debridement with or without saline).
Topics: Adult; Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Chlorhexidine; Decontamination; Dental Implants; Peri-Implantitis; Disinfection
PubMed: 36792071
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13794 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Nov 2022The influence of sex on the failure of débridement antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) for treating prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is important for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The Impact of Sex on the Outcomes of Prosthetic Joint Infection Treatment with Debridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The influence of sex on the failure of débridement antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) for treating prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is important for decision-making, patient counseling, and equitable health care. However, very few studies in the orthopaedic literature conduct sex-specific analyses.
AIM
The primary aim was to determine whether sex influences treatment success after DAIR.
METHODS
A systematic review and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was conducted. MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched, and IPD was requested via e-mail. Patients who underwent DAIR after developing PJI within 12 months of a primary total hip or knee arthroplasty were included in the analysis. Treatment failure was defined by the Delphi International Consensus criteria. Adjusted odds ratios for treatment failure were calculated using a mixed-effects logistic regression.
RESULTS
The study collected and analyzed IPD of 1,116 patients from 21 cohorts. The odds of treatment failure were 29% lower in women (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.017; P = 0.017), after adjusting for duration of symptoms >7 days and Staphylococcus aureus infection (methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus or any infection with S aureus). None of the 64 studies included in the systematic review conducted a sex-specific analysis.
CONCLUSION
For patients who developed a PJI within 1 year postsurgery, females have lower odds of DAIR failure than males. Other factors also have varying effects on outcome for men and women. It is essential to implement sex-specific analysis in orthopaedic research.
Topics: Male; Humans; Female; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Debridement; Retrospective Studies; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Treatment Outcome; Staphylococcus aureus
PubMed: 36733983
DOI: 10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-22-00102 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery May 2023The perioperative use of tranexamic acid (TXA) has become popular among plastic surgeons for a variety of surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to perform a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The perioperative use of tranexamic acid (TXA) has become popular among plastic surgeons for a variety of surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the results reported in the literature regarding the effect of perioperative systemic TXA administration in breast surgery.
METHODS
The PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases were searched for both randomized clinical trials and observational studies. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as weighted odds ratio with corresponding 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS
A total of five studies encompassing 1139 patients undergoing mastectomy with or without immediate implant or free flap-based breast reconstruction or breast-conserving surgery with or without axillary lymph node dissection were included. Perioperative intravenous administration of TXA significantly reduced the risk for hematoma (7.3% versus 12.9%; OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.81) and seroma formation (11.5% versus 19.9%; OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.92) in comparison to the control group. In the studies measuring the postoperative drainage amount, the mean difference was 132 mL (95% CI, 220 to 44 mL). No thromboembolic event occurred in either group. The weighted surgical-site infection rate was higher in the control group (3.1% versus 1.5%). However, these data were too sparse to perform comparative meta-analysis.
CONCLUSION
Evidence of this study suggests that perioperative administration of TXA significantly reduces the risk for postoperative hematoma and seroma formation in breast surgery, whereas the risk for thromboembolic events and postoperative infection is not increased.
Topics: Humans; Female; Tranexamic Acid; Antifibrinolytic Agents; Seroma; Breast Neoplasms; Mastectomy; Thromboembolism; Hematoma; Blood Loss, Surgical
PubMed: 36729428
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010071 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Mar 2023To evaluate the effect of subgingival administration of various antimicrobials and host-modulating agents in furcation defects as an adjunct to scaling and root planing... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effect of subgingival administration of various antimicrobials and host-modulating agents in furcation defects as an adjunct to scaling and root planing (SRP) compared to SRP alone or combined with placebo.
METHODS
A systematic review was carried out using MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for articles up to October 2022 in addition to hand searches. All longitudinal studies that evaluated the effect of subgingival application of antimicrobial and host-modulating agents in furcation defects as adjuncts to SRP compared to SRP alone or SRP + placebo with at least 3 months of follow-up were eligible for inclusion.
RESULTS
A total of eight studies were included. Superior clinical treatment outcomes were shown when alendronate, rosuvastatin, boric acid, simvastatin, and tetracycline (only at 3 months) were utilized in furcation defects in conjunction with SRP alone or SRP + placebo. Significant improvement was reported in radiographic bone defect depth and defect depth reduction when SRP was supplemented with alendronate, rosuvastatin, boric acid, and simvastatin.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the limitations of this review, the adjunctive subgingival administration of medications and host-modulating agents in furcation defects may confer additional clinical and radiographic benefits than non-surgical periodontal treatment alone. Future investigations are needed to confirm their long-term effectiveness.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Local host modulators and antimicrobials may be used supplementary to enhance the clinical and radiographic treatment outcomes of conventional periodontal therapy in furcation defects.
Topics: Humans; Furcation Defects; Rosuvastatin Calcium; Alendronate; Periodontitis; Dental Scaling; Root Planing; Treatment Outcome; Simvastatin
PubMed: 36729235
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-04871-0 -
Oral Health & Preventive Dentistry Jan 2023The present study systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCT) to investigate the efficacy of Er:YAG laser (ERL) as a debridement method in surgical...
PURPOSE
The present study systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCT) to investigate the efficacy of Er:YAG laser (ERL) as a debridement method in surgical treatment of advanced peri-implantitis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An electronic database search and a manual search were performed until March 2022. Outcome measures were clinical attachment level (CAL) gain, probing depth (PD) reduction, plaque index (PI) and bleeding on probing (BOP). The addressed PICO question was: Is ERL an effective debridement tool in the surgical treatment of advanced peri-implantitis?
RESULTS
Five eligible randomised clinical trials (RCTs) were included in the qualitative analysis, one of which had unclear risk of bias. One study reported a statistically significant difference in terms of implant CAL gain and PD reduction in favour of the experimental group vs the control group, while four studies did not report any difference between the two groups.
CONCLUSION
Due to methodological heterogeneity, such as non-standard control groups and laser parameters, this systematic review demonstrated inconclusive findings in terms of the efficacy of Er:YAG laser as a debridement method in surgical treatment of advanced peri-implantitis. The results of this review should be considered preliminary and further, well-designed studies with standardised comparators with laser parameters are warranted.
Topics: Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Lasers, Solid-State; Debridement; Periodontal Debridement; Dental Implants; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36651312
DOI: 10.3290/j.ohpd.b3818041 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2023Uveitis is a term used to describe a group of intraocular inflammatory diseases. Uveitis is the fifth most common cause of vision loss in high-income countries, with the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Uveitis is a term used to describe a group of intraocular inflammatory diseases. Uveitis is the fifth most common cause of vision loss in high-income countries, with the highest incidence of disease in the working-age population. Corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment for all subtypes of non-infectious uveitis. They can be administered orally, topically with drops, by periocular (around the eye) or intravitreal (inside the eye) injection, or by surgical implantation.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy and safety of steroid implants in people with chronic non-infectious posterior uveitis, intermediate uveitis, and panuveitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase, PubMed, LILACS, and three trials registries to November 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials comparing either fluocinolone acetonide (FA) or dexamethasone (DEX) intravitreal implants with standard-of-care therapy or sham procedures, with at least six months of follow-up after treatment. We included studies that enrolled participants of all ages, who had chronic non-infectious posterior uveitis, intermediate uveitis, or panuveitis with vision that was better than hand-motion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We applied standard Cochrane methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We included data from four trials (683 participants, 907 eyes) that compared corticosteroid implants with either sham or standard-of-care therapy. Study characteristics and risk of bias Of the two trials that compared corticosteroid implants with sham procedure, one examined a 0.18 mg FA implant, and the other, a 0.7 mg DEX implant. The other two trials compared a 0.59 mg FA implant with standard-of-care therapy, which included systemic corticosteroids and immunosuppressive medications, if needed. We assessed the four trials to be at either low risk, or with some concerns of risk of bias across all domains. Findings Using sham procedure as control, combined results at the six-month primary time point suggested that corticosteroid implants may decrease the risk of uveitis recurrence by 60% (relative risk [RR] 0.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30 to 0.54; 2 trials, 282 participants; low-certainty evidence); and lead to a greater improvement in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA; mean difference [MD] 0.22 logMAR, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.31; 1 trial, 153 participants; low-certainty evidence). Evidence based on a single-study report (146 participants) suggested that steroid implants may have no effects on visual functioning quality of life, measured on the National Eye Institute 25-Item Visual Function Questionnaire (MD 2.85, 95%CI -3.64 to 9.34; 1 trial, 146 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Using standard-of care therapy as control, combined estimates at the 24-month primary time point suggested that corticosteroid implants were likely to decrease the risk of recurrence of uveitis by 54% (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 2 trials, 619 eyes). Combined estimates at 24 months also suggested that steroid implants may have little to no effects on BCVA (MD 0.05 logMAR, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.12; 2 trials, 619 eyes; low-certainty evidence). Evidence based on a single-study report (232 participants) suggested that steroid implants may have minimal clinical effects on visual functioning (MD 4.64, 95% CI 0.13 to 9.15; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); physical functioning (SF-36 physical subscale MD 2.95, 95% CI 0.55 to 5.35; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); or mental health (SF-36 mental subscale MD 3.65, 95% CI 0.52 to 6.78; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); but not on EuroQoL (MD 6.17, 95% CI 1.87 to 10.47; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); or EuroQoL-5D scale (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.08; 1 trial, 232 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse effects Compared with sham procedures, corticosteroid implants may slightly increase the risk of cataract formation (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.17 to 6.18; 1 trial, 90 eyes; low-certainty evidence), but not the risk of cataract progression (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 6.12; 1 trial, 117 eyes; low-certainty evidence); or the need for surgery (RR 2.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 10.81; 1 trial, 180 eyes; low-certainty evidence), during up to 12 months of follow-up. These implants may increase the risk of elevated intraocular pressure ([IOP] RR 2.81, 95% CI 1.42 to 5.56; 2 trials, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and the need for IOP-lowering eyedrops (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.25; 2 trials, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); but not the need for IOP-lowering surgery (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.13 to 4.17; 2 trials, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Evidence comparing the 0.59 mg FA implant with standard-of-care suggested that the implant may increase the risk of cataract progression (RR 2.71, 95% CI 2.06 to 3.56; 2 trials, 210 eyes; low-certainty evidence); and the need for surgery (RR 2.98, 95% CI 2.33 to 3.79; 2 trials, 371 eyes; low-certainty evidence); along with the risk of elevated IOP (RR 3.64, 95% CI 2.71 to 4.87; 2 trials, 605 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence); and the need for medical (RR 3.04, 95% CI 2.36 to 3.91; 2 trials, 544 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence); or surgical interventions (RR 5.43, 95% CI 3.12 to 9.45; 2 trials, 599 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence). In either comparison, these implants did not increase the risk for endophthalmitis, retinal tear, or retinal detachment (moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our confidence is limited that local corticosteroid implants are superior to sham therapy or standard-of-care therapy in reducing the risk of uveitis recurrence. We demonstrated different effectiveness on BCVA relative to comparators in people with non-infectious uveitis. Nevertheless, the evidence suggests that these implants may increase the risk of cataract progression and IOP elevation, which will require interventions over time. To better understand the efficacy and safety profiles of corticosteroid implants, we need future trials that examine implants of different doses, used for different durations. The trials should measure core standard outcomes that are universally defined, and measured at comparable follow-up time points.
Topics: Humans; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Cataract; Glaucoma; Panuveitis; Quality of Life; Steroids; Uveitis; Uveitis, Intermediate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36645716
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010469.pub3 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Jun 2023To answer the following PICOS question: "In patients with peri-implantitis, what is the efficacy of surgical therapy with adjunctive systemic or local antimicrobials, in... (Review)
Review
AIM
To answer the following PICOS question: "In patients with peri-implantitis, what is the efficacy of surgical therapy with adjunctive systemic or local antimicrobials, in comparison with surgical therapy alone, in terms of pocket probing depth reduction, as assessed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least 6 months of follow-up?"
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted. Reduction in mean probing pocket depth (PPD) was the primary outcome. Secondary clinical outcomes were changes in suppuration (%), changes in bleeding on probing (BOP) (%), marginal bone level changes (mm), disease resolution (%), and implant/prosthesis loss (%). Patient-reported outcome measures, possible adverse effects, and oral-health-related quality of life were also extracted if such data were available.
RESULTS
Four RCTs assessing the use of locally (two RCTs) and systemically (two RCTs) administered antimicrobial adjuncts to surgical treatment of peri-implantitis, with 6-36-month follow-up, were included. Because of the substantial heterogeneity of interventions between the studies, meta-analysis could not be performed. A reduction in the mean PPD was observed following all the involved surgical treatments, irrespective of the addition of antimicrobials. Except for the effect of systemic antimicrobials on marginal bone level changes and local antimicrobials on BOP, the effect of systemic and local antimicrobials was equivocal for all secondary outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the limited available evidence, the adjunctive use of the currently tested systemic or local antimicrobials during surgical therapy, in comparison with surgical therapy alone, in patients with peri-implantitis does not seem to improve the clinical efficacy. With regard the use of systemic antimicrobials, only 50% of the cases showed disease resolution after 1 year. There is a lack of studies that consider the sole use of local antimicrobials. Therefore, their true effect remains unclear.
Topics: Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Infective Agents; Treatment Outcome; Dental Implants
PubMed: 36644805
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13773 -
Journal of the College of Physicians... Jan 2023Combination treatment with iodine 125 seeds implant and systemic therapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a promising treatment practice. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Combination treatment with iodine 125 seeds implant and systemic therapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a promising treatment practice. The present study aimed to assess the relative efficacy and toxicity of combination treatment versus systemic therapy alone in patients with NSCLC. Databases including PubMed, EBSCO, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and WanFang were searched for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Risk ratios (RR) were obtained for evaluating indicators in the present meta-analysis including complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), one-year and two-year overall survival (OS) rate and complications. A total of 17 eligible RCTs incorporating 1315 patients who underwent combination treatment or systemic therapy alone were ultimately included in this meta-analysis based on our selection criteria. The results showed that CR (RR = 1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.53 - 2.33, p <0.001), PR (RR = 1.28, 95%CI: 1.12 - 1.46, p = 0.0002), ORR (RR = 1.46, 95%CI: 1.34 - 1.58, p <0.001), DCR (RR = 1.11, 95%CI: 1.04 - 1.18, p = 0.001), two-year OS (RR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.30 - 1.77, p <0.001) were higher and SD (RR = 0.53, 95%CI: 0.42 - 0.66, p <0.001) and PD (RR = 0.39, 95%CI: 0.29 - 0.55, p <0.001) were lower in the combination treatment group than in control group. Meanwhile, there was no significant difference in one-year OS (RR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.98-1.31, p = 0.10). In terms of adverse events, the combination therapy significantly increased the incidence of pneumothorax (RR = 4.91, 95% CI: 2.63 - 9.17, p <0.001); however, no significant differences were found in the incidence of myelosuppression and gastrointestinal symptoms. Combination treatment with iodine 125 seeds implant and systemic therapy can significantly improve clinical response and prolong two-year OS in NSCLC patients without increasing the incidence of myelosuppression and gastrointestinal symptoms, except pneumothorax. Key Words: Brachytherapy, Radioactive seeds, NSCLC, Systemic therapy.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Lung Neoplasms; Antineoplastic Agents; Pneumothorax
PubMed: 36597241
DOI: 10.29271/jcpsp.2023.01.84