The Optimal Primary Treatment for Pediatric Perianal Abscess and Anal Fistula: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

BackgroundPerianal abscesses and anal fistulas are common. The principle of intention-to-treat has not been considered in previous systemic reviews. Thus, the comparison between primary and post-recurrence management was confused, and the recommendation of primary treatment is obscure. The current study aims to identify the optimal initial treatment for pediatric patients.MethodsUsing PRISMA guidelines, studies were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar without any language or study design restriction. The inclusion criteria include original articles or articles with original data, studies of management for a perianal abscess with or without anal fistula, and patient age of <18 years. Patients with local malignancy, Crohn's disease, or other underlying predisposing conditions were excluded. Studies without analyzing recurrence, case series of <5, and irrelevant articles were excluded in the screening stage. Of the 124 screened articles, 14 articles had no full texts or detailed information. Articles written in a language other than English or Mandarin were translated by Google Translation first and confirmed with native speakers. After the eligibility process, studies that compared identified primary managements were then included in the qualitative synthesis.ResultsThirty-one studies involving 2507 pediatric patients met the inclusion criteria. The study design consisted of two prospective case series of 47 patients and retrospective cohort studies. No randomized control trials were identified. Meta-analyses for recurrence after initial management were performed with a random-effects model. Conservative treatment and drainage revealed no difference (Odds ratio [OR], 1.222; 95% Confidential interval [CI]: 0.615–2.427, p = 0.567). Conservative management had a higher risk of recurrence than surgery without statistical significance (OR 0.278, 95% CI: 0.109–0.707, p = 0.007). Compared with incision/drainage, surgery can prevent recurrence remarkably (OR 4.360, 95% CI: 1.761–10.792, p = 0.001). Subgroup analysis of different approaches within conservative treatment and operation was not performed for lacking information.ConclusionStrong recommendations cannot be made due to the lack of prospective or randomized controlled studies. However, the current study based on real primary management supports initial surgical intervention for pediatric patients with perianal abscesses and anal fistula to prevent recurrence.Level of evidenceType of study: Systemic review; Evidence level: Level II.     

微创和传统开放后路腰椎椎间融合术治疗腰椎退行性疾病的远期预后

目的探讨微创后路腰椎椎间融合术(MIS-PLIF)和传统开放PLIF对腰椎退行性疾病(LDD)远期疗效及安全性的影响。方法 2011年1月-2014年12月收治LDD患者182例,其中96例采用传统开放PLIF治疗(PLIF组),86例采用MIS-PLIF治疗(MIS-PLIF组)。比较2组腰椎矢状位参数、多裂肌横截面积及萎缩率、融合率、疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分、日本骨科学会(JOA)评分、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)及术后并发症发生情况,分析多裂肌萎缩率与顽固性腰背痛的相关性。结果 2组术后各随访时间点椎间隙高度恢复值和节段性前凸角恢复值差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。2组术后1年腰椎前凸角恢复值差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);但术后5年和末次随访时,MIS-PLIF组腰椎前凸角恢复值显著高于PLIF组,差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。MIS-PLIF组术后各随访时间点多裂肌横截面积大于PLIF组,多裂肌萎缩率低于PLIF组,差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。2组术后随访6个月融合率差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。2组术后各随访时间点下肢痛VAS评分差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05);MIS-PLIF组术后各随访时间点腰痛VAS评分、JOA评分及ODI均优于PLIF组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。MIS-PLIF组顽固性腰背痛发生率显著低于PLIF组,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。合并顽固性腰背痛患者多裂肌萎缩率高于未合并顽固性腰背痛的患者,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论术后多裂肌萎缩可能是导致顽固性腰背痛的重要原因,相较于传统开放PLIF,MIS-PLIF治疗LDD能够更有效地保持腰椎生理曲度,改善肢体活动功能,降低多裂肌萎缩程度,有助于避免顽固性腰背痛的发生。     

Significant reduction of postoperative pain and opioid analgesics requirement with an Enhanced Recovery After Thoracic Surgery protocol

ObjectiveTo evaluate differences in postoperative pain control and opioids requirement in thoracic surgical patients following implementation of an Enhanced Recovery after Thoracic Surgery protocol with a comprehensive postoperative pain management strategy.Material and MethodsA retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing pulmonary resections by robotic thoracoscopy or thoracotomy from January 1, 2017, to January 31, 2019, was conducted. Multimodal pain management strategy (opioid-sparing analgesics, infiltration of liposomal bupivacaine to intercostal spaces and surgical sites, and elimination of thoracic epidural analgesia use in thoracotomy patients) was implemented as part of Enhanced Recovery after Thoracic Surgery on February 1, 2018. Outcome metrics including patient-reported pain levels, in-hospital and postdischarge opioids use, postoperative complications, and length of stay were compared before and after protocol implementation.ResultsIn total, 310 robotic thoracoscopy and 62 thoracotomy patients met the inclusion criteria. This pain management strategy was associated with significant reduction of postoperative pain in both groups with an overall reduction of postoperative opioids requirement. Median in-hospital opioids use (morphine milligram equivalent per day) was reduced from 30 to 18.36 (P = .009) for the robotic thoracoscopy group and slightly increased from 15.48 to 21.0 (P = .27) in the thoracotomy group. More importantly, median postdischarge opioids prescribed (total morphine milligram equivalent) was significantly reduced from 480.0 to 150.0 (P < .001) and 887.5 to 150.0 (P < .001) for the thoracoscopy and thoracotomy groups, respectively. Similar short-term perioperative outcomes were observed in both groups before and following protocol implementation.ConclusionsImplementation of Enhanced Recovery after Thoracic Surgery allows safe elimination of epidural use, better pain control, and less postoperative opioids use, especially a drastic reduction of postdischarge opioid need, without adversely affecting outcomes.     

脊髓损伤患者及其配偶二元应对体验的质性研究

目的 探讨脊髓损伤患者及其配偶二元应对体验,为开展针对性的干预对策提供参考依据。 方法 采用目的抽样法,选取2020年4月—2021年3月入住安徽省某三级甲等综合医院脊柱外科的脊髓损伤患者12例及其配偶12名进行半结构化访谈,采用Colaizzi 7步分析法进行资料归纳并提炼主题。 结果 基于二元应对系统交互模型归纳出积极应对（共同面对、一致的疾病信念、转变沟通态度）、消极应对（适应困难、过度的保护行为、回避或冲突）、困难与挑战（亲密感丧失、寻求外部支持、构建新常态）共3个主题和9个亚主题。结论 脊髓损伤患者及其配偶积极应对与消极应对并存。医护人员需重视对患者及其配偶积极二元应对的引导,重点开展以夫妻为中心的应对干预,使其能更好地面对疾病,改善临床结局。