-
Journal of Neurosurgery. Pediatrics Jan 2023Postoperative infections in pediatric spinal surgery commonly occur and necessitate reoperation(s). However, pediatric-specific infection prophylaxis guidelines are not... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Postoperative infections in pediatric spinal surgery commonly occur and necessitate reoperation(s). However, pediatric-specific infection prophylaxis guidelines are not available. This network meta-analysis compares perioperative prophylaxis methods including Betadine irrigation, saline irrigation, intrawound vancomycin powder, combination therapy (Betadine, vancomycin, gentamicin, and cefuroxime), Betadine irrigation plus vancomycin powder, and no intervention to determine the most efficacious prevention method.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed by searching the PubMed, EBSCO, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for peer-reviewed articles published prior to February 2022 comparing two or more infection prophylaxis methods in patients younger than 22 years of age. Data were extracted for treatment modalities, patient demographics, and patient outcomes such as total number of infections, surgical site infections, deep infections, intraoperative blood loss, operative time, follow-up time, and postoperative complications. Quality and risk of bias was assessed using National Institutes of Health tools. A network meta-analysis was performed with reduction of infections as the primary outcome.
RESULTS
Overall, 10 studies consisting of 5164 procedures were included. There was no significant difference between prophylactic treatment options in reduction of infection. However, three treatment options showed significant reduction in total infection compared with no prophylactic treatment: Betadine plus vancomycin (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.09-0.54), vancomycin (OR 3.26, 95% CI 1.96-5.44), and a combination therapy (Betadine, vancomycin, gentamicin, and cefuroxime) (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07-0.75). P-Score hierarchical ranking estimated Betadine plus vancomycin to be the superior treatment to prevent total infections, deep infections, and surgical site infections (P-score 0.7876, 0.7175, and 0.7291, respectively). No prophylaxis treatment-related complications were reported.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this network meta-analysis show the strongest support for Betadine plus vancomycin as a method to reduce infections following pediatric spinal surgery. There was heterogeneity among studies and inconsistent outcome reporting; however, three effective treatment options are identified.
Topics: Humans; Child; Vancomycin; Surgical Wound Infection; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Povidone-Iodine; Cefuroxime; Powders; Network Meta-Analysis; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Gentamicins
PubMed: 36308474
DOI: 10.3171/2022.9.PEDS22316 -
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma... Jul 2023Complications associated with the application of the Reamer-irrigator-Aspirator (RIA) system are described in the literature. However, to date a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Complications associated with the application of the Reamer-irrigator-Aspirator (RIA) system are described in the literature. However, to date a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess prevalence of complications associated with the use of the RIA system have not been conducted.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021269982). MEDLINE, the Web of Science Core Collection, and Embase were searched from the inception to 10 August 2021. The primary objective was to assess complications and blood loss associated with the use of the RIA system.
RESULTS
Forty-seven studies involving 1834 procedures performed with the RIA system were finally included. A total of 105 complications were reported, with a pooled estimated overall prevalence of 1.7% with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.40 to 3.60, with cortex perforation being the largest reported complication with a total of 34 incidences. A significant subgroup difference was observed (p = 0.02). In subgroup 1 (bone graft harvesting), complication prevalence was 1.4% (95% CI 0.2-3.4); in subgroup 2 (clearance intramedullary canal) it was 0.7% (95% CI 0.00-6.30) and in subgroup 3 (reaming with RIA system prior to nail fixation) 11.9% (95% CI 1.80-26.40). No statistically significant difference for tibia and femur as RIA system application site was observed (CI 0.69-4.19). In studies reporting blood loss, a mean volume of 803.29 ml, a mean drop of hemoglobin of 3.74 g/dl and a necessity of blood transfusion in 9.72% of the patients were observed.
CONCLUSIONS
The systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate a low overall prevalence rate of complications associated with the RIA system. However, especially the risk of cortical perforation and the frequently reported relevant intraoperative blood loss are complications that should be anticipated in perioperative management and ultimately considered when using the RIA system.
Topics: Humans; Therapeutic Irrigation; Tissue and Organ Harvesting; Femur; Tibia; Blood Loss, Surgical; Bone Transplantation
PubMed: 36114869
DOI: 10.1007/s00402-022-04621-z -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022Although various solutions have been recommended for cleansing wounds, normal saline is favoured as it is an isotonic solution and is not thought to interfere with the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Although various solutions have been recommended for cleansing wounds, normal saline is favoured as it is an isotonic solution and is not thought to interfere with the normal healing process. Tap water is commonly used in community settings for cleansing wounds because it is easily accessible, efficient and cost-effective; however, there is an unresolved debate about its use.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of water for wound cleansing.
SEARCH METHODS
For this fifth update, in May 2021 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed wound cleansing using different types of water (e.g. tap water, distilled, boiled) compared with no cleansing or with other solutions (e.g. normal saline). For this update, we excluded quasi-RCTs, thereby removing some studies which had been included in the previous version of the review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently carried out trial selection, data extraction and GRADE assessment of the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 trials in this update including a total of 2504 participants ranging in age from two to 95 years. Participants in the trials experienced open fractures, surgical wounds, traumatic wounds, anal fissures and chronic wounds. The trials were conducted in six different countries with the majority conducted in India and the USA. Three trials involving 148 participants compared cleansing with tap water with no cleansing. Eight trials involving 2204 participants assessed cleansing with tap water compared with cleansing with normal saline. Two trials involving 152 participants assessed cleansing with distilled water compared with cleansing with normal saline. One trial involving 51 participants also assessed cleansing with cooled boiled water compared with cleansing with normal saline, and cleansing with distilled water compared with cleansing with cooled boiled water. Wound infection: no trials reported on wound infection for the comparison cleansing with tap water versus no cleansing. For all wounds, eight trials found the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.19); very low-certainty evidence. Two trials comparing the use of distilled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures found that the effect on the number of fractures that were infected is uncertain (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.09); very low-certainty evidence. One trial compared the use of cooled boiled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures and found that the effect on the number of fractures infected is uncertain (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.87); very low-certainty evidence. This trial also compared the use of distilled water with cooled boiled water and found that the effect on the number of fractures infected is uncertain (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.47); very low-certainty evidence. Wound healing: results from three trials comparing the use of tap water with no wound cleansing demonstrated there may be little or no difference in the number of wounds that did not heal between the groups (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.14); low-certainty evidence. The effect of tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain; two trials were pooled (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.07) but the certainty of the evidence is very low. Results from one study comparing the use of distilled water with normal saline for cleansing open fractures found that there may be little or no difference in the number of fractures that healed (RR could not be estimated, all wounds healed); the certainty of the evidence is low. Reduction in wound size: the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline on wound size reduction is uncertain (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.68); the certainty of the evidence is very low. Rate of wound healing: the effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline on wound healing rate is uncertain (mean difference (MD) -3.06, 95% CI -6.70 to 0.58); the certainty of the evidence is very low.
COSTS
two trials reported cost analyses but the cost-effectiveness of tap water compared with the use of normal saline is uncertain; the certainty of the evidence is very low. Pain: results from one study comparing the use of tap water with no cleansing for acute and chronic wounds showed that there may be little or no difference in pain scores. The certainty of the evidence is low. Patient satisfaction: results from one study comparing the use of tap water with no cleansing for acute and chronic wounds showed that there may be little or no difference in patient satisfaction. The certainty of evidence is low. The effect of cleansing with tap water compared with normal saline is uncertain as the certainty of the evidence is very low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
All the evidence identified in the review was low or very low certainty. Cleansing with tap water may make little or no difference to wound healing compared with no cleansing; there are no data relating to the impact on wound infection. The effects of cleansing with tap water, cooled boiled water or distilled water compared with cleansing with saline are uncertain, as is the effect of distilled water compared with cooled boiled water. Data for other outcomes are limited across all the comparisons considered and are either uncertain or suggest that there may be little or no difference in the outcome.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Child; Child, Preschool; Drinking Water; Fractures, Open; Humans; Middle Aged; Pain; Saline Solution; Sodium Chloride; Therapeutic Irrigation; Wound Infection; Young Adult
PubMed: 36103365
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003861.pub4 -
Oxidative Medicine and Cellular... 2022Peri-implant mucositis (PiM) is characterized as a reversible inflammatory change of the peri-implant soft tissues without alveolar bone loss or continuing marginal bone... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Peri-implant mucositis (PiM) is characterized as a reversible inflammatory change of the peri-implant soft tissues without alveolar bone loss or continuing marginal bone loss. Without proper control of PiM, the reversible inflammation may advance to peri-implantitis (PI). Mechanical debridement (MD) by the implant surface is the most common and conventional nonsurgical approach to treat PiM but with limitations in complete resolution of diseases. For more than a decade, chlorhexidine (CHX) and active compounds has been investigated in the treatment of PiM. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of CHX treatment in combination with MD versus MD alone or MD+placebo in patients with PiM on their oral health problems.
METHODS
A search using electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Direct databases, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and a manual search up to May 2022 were performed independently by 2 reviewers and included eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MD+CHX versus MD alone or MD+placebo. The assessment of quality for all the selected RCTs was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Disease resolution of PiM (absence of BOP), IPPD reduction, IBOP% reduction, and PI% reduction after treatment as primary outcomes were selected as the primary outcomes. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were for continuous outcomes, and odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI was for dichotomous outcomes using random effect models. This review is registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42020221989).
RESULTS
After independent screening, nine eligible studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed OR of disease resolution between test and control groups amounted to 1.41 (95% CI (0.43, 4.65), = 0.57, = 65%) not favoring adjunctive CHX treatment over MD alone. Through subgroup analysis, the results indicated that oral irrigation of CHX may have more benefits on the resolution of PiM. Similarly, CHX did not significantly improve IPPD reduction at both short-, medium-, and long-term follow-up. Only a short-term effect has been observed at IBOP% reduction (WMD = 13.88, 95% CI (10.94, 16.81), < 0.00001, = 9%), IPI reduction (WMD = 0.12, 95% CI (0.09, 0.14), < 0.00001, = 0%), and FMPPD reduction (WMD = 0.19 mm, 95% CI (0.03, 0.35), = 0.02, = 0%) with adjunctive CHX application.
CONCLUSION
Adjunctive CHX application may have some benefits to improve the efficacy of MD in PiM treatment by reducing IBOP%, IPI, and FMPPD in short-term. But these benefits disappeared at medium- and long-term follow-up. In order to achieve better disease resolution of PiM, adjunctive CHX irrigation with MD may be suggested and has positive potential. Well-designed large clinical trials are needed in future.
Topics: Chlorhexidine; Humans; Mucositis; Oral Health; Peri-Implantitis
PubMed: 36065438
DOI: 10.1155/2022/2312784 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022Loss of olfactory function is well recognised as a symptom of COVID-19 infection, and the pandemic has resulted in a large number of individuals with abnormalities in... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Loss of olfactory function is well recognised as a symptom of COVID-19 infection, and the pandemic has resulted in a large number of individuals with abnormalities in their sense of smell. For many, the condition is temporary and resolves within two to four weeks. However, in a significant minority the symptoms persist. At present, it is not known whether early intervention with any form of treatment (such as medication or olfactory training) can promote recovery and prevent persisting olfactory disturbance. This is an update of the 2021 review with four studies added.
OBJECTIVES
1) To evaluate the benefits and harms of any intervention versus no treatment for people with acute olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection. 2) To keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the latest search was 20 October 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people with COVID-19 related olfactory disturbance, which had been present for less than four weeks. We included any intervention compared to no treatment or placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were the presence of normal olfactory function, serious adverse effects and change in sense of smell. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of parosmia, change in sense of taste, disease-related quality of life and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included five studies with 691 participants. The studies evaluated the following interventions: intranasal corticosteroid sprays, intranasal corticosteroid drops, intranasal hypertonic saline and zinc sulphate. Intranasal corticosteroid spray compared to no intervention/placebo We included three studies with 288 participants who had olfactory dysfunction for less than four weeks following COVID-19. Presence of normal olfactory function The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroid spray on both self-rated recovery of olfactory function and recovery of olfactory function using psychophysical tests at up to four weeks follow-up (self-rated: risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.68; 1 study; 100 participants; psychophysical testing: RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.16 to 4.63; 1 study; 77 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Change in sense of smell The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of intranasal corticosteroid spray on self-rated change in the sense of smell (at less than 4 weeks: mean difference (MD) 0.5 points lower, 95% CI 1.38 lower to 0.38 higher; 1 study; 77 participants; at > 4 weeks to 3 months: MD 2.4 points higher, 95% CI 1.32 higher to 3.48 higher; 1 study; 100 participants; very low-certainty evidence, rated on a scale of 1 to 10, higher scores mean better olfactory function). Intranasal corticosteroids may make little or no difference to the change in sense of smell when assessed with psychophysical testing (MD 0.2 points, 95% CI 2.06 points lower to 2.06 points higher; 1 study; 77 participants; low-certainty evidence, 0- to 24-point scale, higher scores mean better olfactory function). Serious adverse effects The authors of one study reported no adverse effects, but their intention to collect these data was not pre-specified so we are uncertain if these were systematically sought and identified. The remaining two studies did not report on adverse effects. Intranasal corticosteroid drops compared to no intervention/placebo We included one study with 248 participants who had olfactory dysfunction for ≤ 15 days following COVID-19. Presence of normal olfactory function Intranasal corticosteroid drops may make little or no difference to self-rated recovery at > 4 weeks to 3 months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.11; 1 study; 248 participants; low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes were assessed by this study. Data on the use of hypertonic saline nasal irrigation and the use of zinc sulphate to prevent persistent olfactory dysfunction are included in the full text of the review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for preventing persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified a number of ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; COVID-19; Chronic Disease; Humans; Olfaction Disorders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinitis; Smell; Zinc Sulfate
PubMed: 36063364
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013877.pub3 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Aug 2022The greater likelihood of morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stays and poorer long-term outcomes as a result of surgical site infections secondary to spinal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The greater likelihood of morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stays and poorer long-term outcomes as a result of surgical site infections secondary to spinal surgery makes prophylactic measures an imperative focus. Therefore, the aim of this review was to evaluate the available research related to the efficacy of different intraoperative irrigation techniques used in spinal surgery for surgical site infection (SSI) prophylaxis.
METHODS
We performed a comprehensive search using Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane library pertaining to this topic. Our meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria consist of spine surgeries with intraoperative use of any wound irrigation technique, comparison groups with a different intraoperative irrigation technique or no irrigation, SSI identified with bacterial cultures or clinically in the postoperative period, reported SSI rates. Data extracted from eligible studies included, but was not limited to, SSI rates, irrigation technique and control technique. Exclusion criteria consist of articles with no human subjects, reviews, meta-analyses and case control studies and no details about SSI identification or rates. Pooled risk ratios were calculated. A meta-analysis was performed with a forest plot to determine risk estimates' heterogeneity with I index, Q-statistic, and p value under a random-effects model. Funnel plot was used to assess publication bias. All databases were last checked on January, 2022. PROBAST tool was used to assess both risk of bias and applicability concerns.
RESULTS
After reviewing 1494 titles and abstracts, 18 articles met inclusion criteria. They included three prospective randomized-controlled trials, 13 retrospective cohort studies, two prospective cohort studies. There were 54 (1.8%) cases of SSIs in the povidone-iodine irrigation group (N = 2944) compared to 159 (4.6%) in the control group (N = 3408). Using intraoperative povidone-iodine wound irrigation produced an absolute risk reduction of 2.8%. Overall risk ratio was 0.32 (95% CI 0.20-0.53, p < 0.00001). In a global analysis, study heterogeneity and synthesizing mostly retrospective data were primary limitations.
CONCLUSION
The most evidence exists for povidone-iodine and has Level 2 evidence supporting SSI reduction during spinal surgery. Other antiseptic solutions such as dilute chlorhexidine lack published evidence in this patient population which limits the ability to draw conclusions related to its use in spinal surgery.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
II - Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.
Topics: Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Surgical Wound Infection; Therapeutic Irrigation
PubMed: 36008858
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05763-2 -
Australian Endodontic Journal : the... Aug 2023This systematic review investigates whether different irrigation techniques have different effects on irrigant extrusion from mature tooth apices. Articles published... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review investigates whether different irrigation techniques have different effects on irrigant extrusion from mature tooth apices. Articles published between January 2000 and January 2022 were searched in six electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane) using appropriate keywords. Overall, 2265 articles were screened by their titles and abstracts. Fifty-six full-text articles were selected based on the inclusion criteria. Of them, 17 in vitro studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effects inverse variance method. The results showed that the negative pressure technique caused a lesser amount (p = 0.00) and frequency (p = 0.00) of extrusion than the open-ended needle irrigation. Sonic and ultrasonic activation caused less amount of extrusion than both open-ended (p = 0.00 or p = 0.01) and closed-ended needle (p = 0.00) irrigation.
Topics: Dental Pulp Cavity; Root Canal Preparation; Root Canal Irrigants; Therapeutic Irrigation; Root Canal Therapy
PubMed: 35988128
DOI: 10.1111/aej.12678 -
International Journal of Infectious... Sep 2022Identifying pathogens in patients with pulmonary infection (PI) has always been a major challenge in medicine. Compared with sputum and throat swabs, bronchoalveolar... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Diagnostic performance of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for the detection of pathogens in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid in patients with pulmonary infections: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
Identifying pathogens in patients with pulmonary infection (PI) has always been a major challenge in medicine. Compared with sputum and throat swabs, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) can better reflect the actual state of the lungs. However, there has not been a meta-analysis of the diagnostic efficacy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) in detecting pathogens in BALF from patients with PIs.
METHODS
Data sources were PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were estimated using random-effects or fixed-effect models. Subgroup analysis was performed to reveal the effect of potential explanatory factors on the diagnostic performance measures.
RESULTS
The pooled sensitivity was 78% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 67-87%; I = 92%) and the pooled specificity was 77% (95% CI: 64-94%; I = 74%) for mNGS. Subgroup analyses for the sensitivity of mNGS revealed that patients with PIs who were severely ill or immunocompromised significantly affected heterogeneity (P < 0.001). The positive detection rate of mNGS for pathogens in BALF of severely or immunocompromised pulmonary-infected patients was 92% (95% CI: 78-100%).
CONCLUSION
mNGS has high diagnostic performance for BALF pathogens in patients with PIs, especially in critically ill or immunocompromised patients.
Topics: Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid; High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing; Humans; Metagenome; Metagenomics; Pneumonia; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 35907477
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.07.054 -
Orthopedic Reviews 2022Knee septic arthritis rapidly damages the knee joint. Gächter described a classification of joint infections based on arthroscopic findings: an arthroscopic staging of...
INTRODUCTION
Knee septic arthritis rapidly damages the knee joint. Gächter described a classification of joint infections based on arthroscopic findings: an arthroscopic staging of the common disease has prognostic and therapeutic consequences. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze the application of the Gächter classification system to knee septic arthritis, evaluating prognostic and therapeutic implications of this classification.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A comprehensive electronic search of the literature was performed. The following search terms were used: (Arthroscopy* OR Arthrotom* OR Aspiration) AND Knee AND Septic AND Arthritis. The study reported the Gächter classification in septic knee arthritis and the eradication rate according to the type. The primary endpoint is the eradication rate of septic knee arthritis according to the Gächter sort. Secondary endpoints are surgical procedures according to Gächter classification and the rate of re-operations.
RESULTS
Seven studies were included. The overall eradication rate of knee septic arthritis ranged from 90% to 100%: 95%-100% Gächter I; 97%-100% Gächter II; 67%-100% Gächter III; 50%-100% Gächter IV. Surgical treatments for knee septic arthritis included arthroscopic irrigation alone, articular irrigation, and debridement in knee arthroscopy or knee arthrotomy according to Gächter stage. However, 28% required re-operations for persistent infection: secondary procedures included further irrigation and debridement with the arthroscopic or arthrotomic approach.
CONCLUSION
Gächter classification showed a crucial prognostic role in predicting the outcome of surgical treatment of septic knee arthritis. Regardless of the procedure performed, a prompt operation and an accurate debridement of the synovial membrane are the most critical factors for eradicating infection and good clinical outcomes.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level II, prognostic study.
PubMed: 35774928
DOI: 10.52965/001c.33754 -
Journal of Occupational and... Aug 2022This study aimed to evaluate the role of whole lung lavage (WLL) in the treatment of pneumoconiosis and compare changes in lung function over time in treated and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to evaluate the role of whole lung lavage (WLL) in the treatment of pneumoconiosis and compare changes in lung function over time in treated and untreated miners.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed and identified eight controlled studies with treated and comparison groups with lung function tests before WLL and a year or more later. Two hundred ninety-two patients were included in our meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Studies consistently showed a slowing of the rate of lung function decline with WLL at 1, 2, and 4 years. In some reports, details of the population under study, reliability of lung function tests, the adequacy of matching, technical aspects of the procedure, and adverse effects associated with WLL were not available.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite recognized weaknesses in the presentation of information, this procedure may show promise in altering the natural history of pneumoconiosis.
Topics: Bronchoalveolar Lavage; Humans; Lung; Pneumoconiosis; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 35732044
DOI: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000002599