脑膜中动脉栓塞术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿:Meta分析

目的 系统评价脑膜中动脉(MMA)栓塞术治疗慢性硬膜下血肿(CSDH)的有效性及安全性。方法 检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、中国知网、万方医学网及维普数据库自建库至2021年11月栓塞MMA或以传统手术治疗CSDH相关临床队列研究,依据纳入及排除标准筛选文献,采用Stata 16.0软件进行分析。结果 最终纳入8篇文献、共1 482例CSDH患者,根据治疗方法分为栓塞组(n=318)及传统手术组(n=1 164)。栓塞组中,70例接受单纯MMA栓塞;其中248例接受栓塞联合手术治疗,包括67例术前栓塞、32例术后辅助栓塞、118例术后复发补救栓塞和31例未提及栓塞时机。Meta分析结果显示,栓塞组治疗失败率[RR＝－1.28,95%CI(－2.09,－0.47),P<0.05]、再次手术干预率[RR＝－1.59,95%CI(－2.27,－0.91),P<0.05]均低于传统手术组,而治疗相关并发症发生率组间差异无统计学意义[RR＝－0.40,95%CI(－0.93,0.13),P=0.13]。结论 MMA栓塞术治疗CSDH安全、有效。     

抗血栓治疗对大结肠息肉患者内镜下黏膜切除术后迟发性出血的影响

背景与目的 抗血栓治疗被认为是结肠息肉切除术后出血的危险因素。然而,抗血栓治疗对大结肠息肉患者术后迟发性出血的影响尚未完全明确。因此,本研究探讨抗血栓治疗及其相关因素对大结肠息肉患者行内镜下黏膜切除术（EMR）后迟发性出血的影响,以期提高医生对该类患者围手术期管理的认识。方法 回顾性收集2019年1月—2022年12月因大结肠息肉（>10~20 mm）行EMR的157例患者资料,根据EMR期间是否接受抗血栓治疗、使用抗血栓药物类型、术前是否停用抗血栓药物,分别将患者分为抗血栓组（n=51）与非抗血栓组（n=106）、抗凝组（n=33）与抗血小板组（n=36）、停药组（n=35）与未停药组（n=41）。比较各组间术后迟发性（24 h至30 d内）出血发生率及出血时间点的差异,并通过Kaplan-Meier曲线分析各组间术后30 d累积出血发生率。结果 抗血栓组与非抗血栓组迟发性出血发生率差异有统计学意义（19.61% vs. 5.66%,χ²=7.32,P=0.01）;抗血栓组的出血时间点明显早于非抗血栓组（t=2.17,P=0.047）;抗血栓组术后30 d累积出血发生率明显高于非抗血栓组（χ²=6.18,P=0.01）。抗凝组与抗血小板组迟发性出血发生率差异无统计学意义（24.24% vs. 27.78%,χ²=0.11,P=0.74）,两组在出血时间点、术后30 d累积出血发生率方面差异均无统计学意义（t=0.25,P=0.80;χ²=0.13,P=0.72）。停药组与未停药组迟发性出血发生率差异有统计学意义（14.29% vs. 29.27%,χ²=3.97,P=0.046）,未停药组在出血时间点方面明显早于停药组（t=3.03,P=0.01）;停药组术后30 d累积出血发生率明显低于未停药组（χ²=4.36,P=0.04）。结论 抗血栓治疗可能导致大结肠息肉EMR后迟发性出血发生率升高,但术后迟发性出血发生率与抗血栓药物类型无明显关系。术前适当停药可能是降低患者术后出血的有效策略。     

对比床旁急诊肺超声与联合心肺及附加超声诊断急性呼吸困难病因的准确性

目的 对比床旁急诊肺超声（BLUE）与联合心肺及附加超声（CLAUS）方案诊断急性呼吸困难病因的准确性。方法 回顾性分析1 016例急性呼吸困难患者,根据病因分为心源性肺水肿组（n=268）、肺炎组（n=574）、气胸组（n=33）、肺栓塞组（n=67）及CAD（慢性阻塞性肺疾病/哮喘/膈肌功能障碍）组（n=74）;比较各组CLAUS所见,以及BLUE与CLAUS方案诊断急性呼吸困难病因的准确性。结果CLAUS显示,心源性肺水肿组肺超声表现多呈B-B及B-C模式,肺炎组多为A-B、A-C、B-A、B-B、B-C及C-C模式,气胸组、肺栓塞组及CAD组均以A-A模式最多。5组肺超声表现、前胸壁胸膜特征、有无左/右心功能不全及有无下腔静脉内径异常差异均有统计学意义（P均＜0.05）。BLUE与CLAUS方案诊断急性呼吸困难病因的准确率分别为86.91%（883/1 016）及94.49%（960/1 016）,后者高于前者（χ²=34.587,P＜0.05）。结论 CLAUS方案可有效诊断急性呼吸困难病因,其准确率高于BLUE方案。     

高血压合并脑小血管病患者情感淡漠危险因素及其与认知功能的相关性

目的 观察高血压合并脑小血管病（CSVD）患者情感淡漠危险因素及其与认知功能的相关性。方法 前瞻性纳入141例高血压合并CSVD患者,根据神经精神问卷-淡漠量表（NPI-Apathy）将其分为淡漠组（n=43）与非淡漠组（n=98）。比较组间一般资料、影像学标志物评分及影像学总负荷评分;以多因素logistic回归分析观察高血压合并CSVD患者情感淡漠的独立危险因素,以Spearman相关分析观察其情感淡漠与认知功能的相关性。结果 淡漠组患者年龄、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇（HDL-C）、侧脑室旁脑白质高信号（WMH）Fazekas评分、深部/幕下脑微出血及总负荷评分均高于非淡漠组（P均＜0.05）;其简易精神状态检查（MMSE）及蒙特利尔认知评估（MoCA）评分均低于非淡漠组（P均＜0.05）。HDL-C及侧脑室旁WMH Fazekas评分均为高血压合并CSVD患者情感淡漠的独立危险因素（P均＜0.05）,且其NPI-Apathy评分与MMSE评分及MoCA评分均呈中度负相关（r=－0.543、－0.484,P均＜0.001）。结论 HDL-C及侧脑室旁WMH Fazekas评分均为高血压合并CSVD患者情感淡漠的独立危险因素;情感淡漠越严重,认知功能越低。     

脊神经后支阻滞在老年人腰椎后路椎间融合术多模式镇痛方案中的应用

目的 探讨联合罗哌卡因脊神经后支阻滞多模式镇痛方案在老年人后路腰椎椎间融合术(PLIF)围手术期镇痛中的应用。方法 行PLIF的老年患者(年龄 ≥ 65岁)60例,随机分为对照组(A组,n=20)、常规多模式镇痛组(B组,n=20)和脊神经后支阻滞多模式镇痛组(C组,n=20),记录3组患者术前6 h及术后6、12、24、48、72 h及1周时疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分,术后1、3、7 d及出院时的运动阻滞(Bromage)评分;统计不良反应发生率和额外使用镇痛药物的例数。结果 术前6 h,VAS评分B、C组低于A组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后6、12、24 h,C组低于A、B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后48 h,各组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);术后72 h及1周,B、C组低于A组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后1 d,Bromage评分C组低于A、B组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后3、7 d及出院时,各组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。B、C组不良反应发生率低于A组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);额外使用镇痛药物例数C组 < B组 < A组,各组间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 联合应用罗哌卡因脊神经后支阻滞的多模式镇痛方案能有效缓解老年人PLIF围手术期疼痛,且不影响运动功能。     

基于临床、超声及基因特征列线图预测甲状腺乳头状癌侵袭性

目的 观察基于临床、超声及基因特征的列线图预测甲状腺乳头状癌(PTC)侵袭性的价值。方法 回顾性分析207例PTC患者,根据术后病理所示病灶侵及甲状腺被膜和/或发生患侧颈部淋巴结转移与否分为侵袭组(n=130)及非侵袭组(n=77);对比2组临床、超声及基因特征,筛选PTC侵袭性的危险因素,并以之建立列线图模型,观察其预测PTC侵袭性风险的价值。结果 2组患者年龄,结节最大径、与被膜直线距离、微钙化、数目和分布,以及BRAF V600E基因检测差异均有统计学意义(P均＜0.05)。结节最大径＞1 cm[OR=2.540,95%CI(1.341,4.810),P=0.004]、微钙化[OR=2.276,95%CI(1.203,4.308),P=0.011]、双侧叶多灶[OR=3.414,95%CI(1.578,7.385),P=0.002]及突变型BRAF V600E[OR=2.663,95%CI(1.147,6.182),P=0.023]为PTC侵袭性的独立危险因素。列线图模型预测PTC侵袭性的曲线下面积为0.747[95%CI(0.679,0.815)]。结论 以基于结节最大径、微钙化、数目和分布及BRAF V600E基因检测的列线图预测PTC侵袭性具有一定价值。     

微波消融与手术切除治疗孤立性T1N0M0期甲状腺乳头状癌

目的 观察微波消融(MWA)与手术切除(SR)治疗孤立性T1N0M0期甲状腺乳头状癌(PTC)的价值。方法 纳入接受MWA(MWA组,n=364)或SR(SR组,n=364)治疗的728例孤立性T1N0M0期PTC患者,比较组间治疗相关及术后随访资料,对比MWA与SR疗效。结果 MWA组与SR组手术时间分别为23(14,38)min及72(33,180)min,术中失血量为2(1,5)ml及10(8,30)ml,术后住院时间为1(1,3)天及2(1,6)天,差异均有统计学意义(P均＜0.01)。MWA组16例疾病进展,包括局部复发1例、新发PTC 12例及颈部淋巴结转移3例;SR组15例疾病进展,包括新发PTC 11例及颈部淋巴结转移4例;组间疾病进展差异均无统计学意义(P均＞0.05)。并发症发生率组间差异无统计学意义(χ²=-3.36,P＞0.99)。至随访期末,MWA组T1期PTC肿瘤缩小率为89.45%~100%,肿瘤消失率为70.60%(257/364);T1a期肿瘤消失率显著高于T1b期PTC(P＜0.05)。结论 MWA治疗孤立性T1N0M0期PTC的安全性及有效性与SR相当。     

颈动脉斑块常规超声及超声造影预测颈动脉狭窄患者缺血性脑卒中

目的 观察常规超声及超声造影(CEUS)评估颈动脉斑块、预测颈动脉狭窄患者缺血性脑卒中的价值。方法 回顾性分析115例经超声证实的颈动脉斑块致狭窄(狭窄率≥50%)患者,根据近6个月内有无缺血性脑卒中将其分为症状组(n=53)及无症状组(n=62)。以单因素分析及多因素logistic回归分析筛选颈动脉狭窄患者发生缺血性脑卒中的颈动脉斑块超声特征,建立回归模型,绘制受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线,评估其预测患缺血性脑卒中的效能。结果 单因素分析显示,组间颈动脉狭窄率、斑块表面形态及斑块内新生血管分级差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。多因素logistic回归分析显示,斑块表面形态及斑块内新生血管分级为颈动脉狭窄患者发生缺血性脑卒中的独立预测因素,建立回归模型Y=－4.914+2.272X₁+2.354X₂(X₁为斑块表面形态,X₂为斑块内新生血管分级),其预测缺血性脑卒中的曲线下面积为0.886。结论 常规超声联合CEUS评估颈动脉狭窄患者颈动脉斑块有助于预测缺血性脑卒中。     

首发抑郁症伴自杀意念患者中缝核功能连接的改变

目的 观察首发抑郁症伴自杀意念（SI）患者中缝核功能连接（FC）改变。方法 前瞻性纳入98例首发抑郁症患者,根据伴SI与否将其分为伴SI组（n=56）与不伴SI组（n=42）;另以47名健康志愿者为对照组。以静息态功能MRI观察背侧中缝核（DRN）、中缝中央核（MRN）与全脑间的FC;比较3组及两两组间FC,分析伴SI组差异脑区FC与临床资料的相关性。结果 相比对照组,伴与不伴SI组DRN与左侧小脑及左侧壳核的FC均降低（P均<0.05）,MRN与右侧颞下回的FC均升高而与左侧额下回、右侧枕上回、左侧顶下小叶及左侧壳核的FC均降低（P均<0.05）;其中,伴SI组DRN与左侧壳核的FC高于不伴SI组（P<0.05）;相比不伴SI组及对照组,伴SI组MRN与右侧中央后回的FC升高（P均<0.05）。伴SI组MRN与左侧壳核的FC与24项汉密尔顿抑郁量表（HAMD-24）体质量得分呈正相关（r_s=0.297,P=0.026）。结论 首发抑郁症伴SI患者中缝核与皮层和皮层下区的FC存在异常改变,且其MRN与左侧壳核的FC与HAMD-24体质量得分呈正相关。     

对比TACE联合射频消融与联合微波消融治疗原发性肝细胞癌效果:Meta分析

目的 系统评价TACE联合射频消融(RFA)与联合微波消融(MWA)治疗原发性肝细胞癌(pHCC)效果。方法 检索PubMed、Web of Science、Cochrane Library、万方医学网及中国知网数据库2000年1月—2022年12月关于比较TACE联合RFA或MWA治疗pHCC效果的文献,根据纳入及排除标准加以筛选。对计量资料以标准均数差(SMD)、计数资料以比值比(OR)为效应指标,采用STATA 16.0软件分析TACE联合RFA或MWA治疗pHCC效果。结果 共纳入15项文献、1 244例HCC。Meta分析结果显示,TACE联合RFA或pMWA治疗HCC有效率[OR=1.01,95%CI(0.71,1.45),P=0.96]及疾病控制率[OR=0.91,95%CI(0.43,1.94),P=0.81]差异无统计学意义;治疗后甲胎蛋白(AFP)[SMD=0.12,95%CI(－0.23,0.47),P=0.50]、谷丙转氨酶(GPT)[SMD＝－0.49,95%CI(－1.53,0.57),P=0.37]差异均无统计学意义,谷草转氨酶(GOT)差异有统计学意义[SMD＝－0.84,95%CI(－1.38,－0.30),P=0.002];治疗后1年[OR=0.93,95%CI(0.63,1.37),P=0.71]、2年[OR=0.92,95%CI(0.66,1.28),P=0.62]及3年[OR=0.67,95%CI(0.36,1.24),P=0.20]患者生存率差异均无统计学意义。结论 TACE联合RFA或MWA治疗pHCC效果相当,前者所致肝功能损伤更轻。     

Toothbrush swallowing

We encountered four cases of toothbrush swallowing and reviewed the literature on this subject. A total of 31 toothbrushes within the gastrointestinal tract have been reported. None have passed spontaneously. Several have caused significant complications related to pressure necrosis, including gastritis, mucosal tears, and perforation. The recommended treatment is endoscopic retrieval and postoperative monitoring for 24 hours in case of esophageal or gastric injury.     

Physiology of swallowing

The mechanism behind normal swallowing is complex and multifactorial. Due to the close proximity of the pathways of swallowing and respiration, precise coordination between these functions is vital in order to avoid entry of material into the airway and to ensure optimal health and nutrition in general. Swallowing can be divided into three stages: oral, pharyngeal and oesophageal, and although initiation of the swallow is often under voluntary control, swallowing is also triggered frequently throughout the day as a reflex action due to the presence of saliva in the oropharynx. Dysphagia is a symptom frequently encountered by clinicians and its causes are vast and varied. A thorough understanding of the physiology of swallowing remains necessary to conduct a full assessment and instigate appropriate treatment for these patients in whom dysphagia is often debilitating and may significantly affect their quality of life. We present an account of the physiology of swallowing, using clinical examples to illustrate certain aspects.     

Disorders of swallowing

Disorders of swallowing are very common and, when looked for, occur regularly in most branches of surgery. Dysphagia is often not the patient’s presenting complaint and can be easily missed. The consequences of missed or delayed diagnosis of dysphagia can be insidious but profound and, in some cases, fatal. The investigation and treatment of these patients is normally highly multidisciplinary, potentially involving gastroenterology, general surgery, otolaryngology, acute medicine, stroke medicine, paediatrics, speech and language therapy (SLT) and dietitians. While this article is aimed at surgeons and will thus concentrate mostly on those conditions seen by surgeons, it must be remembered that the most common cause of dysphagia is a neurological disturbance and is managed by physicians and SLT. That said, the incidence of these conditions rises with age, as does the incidence of many surgically treatable conditions. It is therefore common to assess a patient with a known neurological condition for the presence of a second pathology affecting their swallow. A basic knowledge of non-surgical conditions is therefore useful.     

Disorders of swallowing

Disorders of swallowing are very common and, when looked for, occur regularly in most branches of surgery. Dysphagia is often not the patient's presenting complaint and can be easily missed. The consequences of missed or delayed diagnosis of dysphagia can be insidious but profound and, in some cases, fatal. The investigation and treatment of these patients is normally highly multidisciplinary, potentially involving gastroenterology, general surgery, otolaryngology, acute medicine, stroke medicine, paediatrics, speech and language therapy (SLT) and dietitians. While this article is aimed at surgeons and will thus concentrate mostly on those conditions seen by surgeons, it must be remembered that the most common cause of dysphagia is a neurological disturbance and is managed by physicians and SLT. That said, the incidence of these conditions rises with age, as does the incidence of many surgically treatable conditions. It is therefore common to assess a patient with a known neurological condition for the presence of a second pathology affecting their swallow. A basic knowledge of non-surgical conditions is therefore useful.     

Physiology of swallowing

The mechanism behind normal swallowing is complex and multifactorial. Due to the close proximity of the pathways of swallowing and respiration, precise coordination between these functions is vital in order to avoid entry of material into the airway and to ensure optimal health and nutrition in general. Swallowing can be divided into three stages: oral, pharyngeal and oesophageal and although initiation of the swallow is often under voluntary control, swallowing is also triggered frequently throughout the day as a reflex action due to the presence of saliva in the oropharynx. Dysphagia is a symptom frequently encountered by clinicians and its causes are vast and varied. A thorough understanding of the physiology of swallowing remains necessary to conduct a full assessment and instigate appropriate treatment for these patients in whom dysphagia is often debilitating and may significantly affect their quality of life. We present an account of the physiology of swallowing, using clinical examples to illustrate certain aspects.     

Cervical spine motion during swallowing

Purpose

There have been several studies regarding the relationship between deglutition and the cervical spine; however, the movement of the cervical spine during deglutition has not been specifically studied. The purpose of the present study was to clarify how the cervical spine moves during normal deglutition.

Methods

We conducted videofluorography in 39 healthy individuals (23 men; 16 women; mean age, 34.3 years) with no evidence of cervical spine disease and analyzed images of the oral and pharyngeal phases of swallowing using an image analysis technique. Analyzed sections included the occiput (C0) and the first to seventh cervical vertebrae (C1–C7). The degrees of change in angle and position were quantified in the oral and pharyngeal phases.

Results

In the pharyngeal phase, C1, C2, and C3 were flexed (the angle change in C2 was the most significant with a mean flexion angle of 1.42°), while C5 and C6 were extended (the angle change in C5 was the most significant with a mean extension angle of 0.74°) in reference to the oral phase. Angle changes in C0, C4, and C7 were not statistically significant. C3, C4, C5, and C6 moved posteriorly (the movement in C4 was the most significant, mean = 1.04 mm). C1, C2, and C3 moved superiorly (the movement in C2 was the largest, mean = 0.55 mm), and C5 and C6 moved inferiorly. Movements in C0 and C7 were not statistically significant.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that the cervical spine moves to reduce physiological lordosis during deglutition.