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.     

红外光谱数据融合对栽培滇重楼产地鉴别*

目的 多样的环境因素使得不同产地栽培滇重楼的化学成分也丰富多样，不同居群栽培滇重楼的甾体皂苷类成分具有很大的差异，多源数据融合分析能更全面的表征药材化学信息，建立一个高效而准确的产地鉴别模型，为其资源合理开发利用提供依据。方法 以来自云南和四川的8个产地（保山、楚雄、大理、红河、丽江、成都、文山、玉溪）共366份栽培滇重楼根茎为实验材料，采集其傅里叶变换近红外光谱（FT-NIR）和衰减全反射-傅里叶变换中红外光谱（ATR-FTMIR）数据。采用Kennard-Stone算法将不同产地的样品分为2/3的训练集和1/3的预测集，基于4种特征变量提取方法（CARS、VIP、SPA、SO-Covsel）结合2种数据融合策略（低级数据融合和中级数据融合），建立偏最小二乘产地判别分析模型。根据模型参数交叉验证均方根误差（RMSECV）和预测均方根误差（RMSEP）评估模型的稳定性，模型训练集和预测集准确率（ACC）评估模型分类性能。结果 近红外光谱和中红外光谱均能反应不同产地栽培滇重楼的化学成分差异，在中级数据融合中，基于VIP和SPA提取的特征变量建立的模型正确率均大于94%。相较于中级数据融合，低级数据融合模型得到了最为满意的结果，其预测集分类正确率达到100%。结论 根据近红外和中红外数据建立的低级数据融合PLS-DA模型，能够用于栽培滇重楼的产地鉴别分析。     

风险管理在儿科急诊护理工作中的应用研究

目的研究风险管理在儿科急诊护理工作中的应用。方法选取2021年10月至12月间来我科室就诊的100例患儿作为研究对象,将其分为研究组、对照组两组,每组各50例患儿。运用常规护理模式护理对照组患儿,运用风险管理模式,为研究组患儿给予护理干预,分析二组发生不良护理事故的情况并统计护理满意度。结果研究期间,研究组不良护理事件发生率为2.0%,对照组不良护理事件发生率为12.0%；研究组对护理工作的满意度为98.0%,对照组对护理工作的满意度为84.0%,P<0.05,组间差异具统计学意义。结论将风险管理应用于儿科急诊护理工作,可降低不良事件发生几率,保障患儿安全,具有推广应用价值。     

European consensus on patient contact shielding

Patient contact shielding has been in use for many years in radiology departments in order to reduce the effects and risks of ionising radiation on certain organs. New technologies in projection imaging and CT scanning such as digital receptors and automatic exposure control (AEC) systems have reduced doses and improved image consistency. These changes and a greater understanding of both the benefits and the risks from the use of shielding have led to a review of shielding use in radiology. A number of professional bodies have already issued guidance in this regard. This paper represents the current consensus view of the main bodies involved in radiation safety and imaging in Europe: European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics, European Federation of Radiographer Societies, European Society of Radiology, European Society of Paediatric Radiology, EuroSafe Imaging, European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS), and European Academy of DentoMaxilloFacial Radiology (EADMFR). It is based on the expert recommendations of the Gonad and Patient Shielding (GAPS) Group formed with the purpose of developing consensus in this area. The recommendations are intended to be clear and easy to use. They are intended as guidance, and they are developed using a multidisciplinary team approach. It is recognised that regulations, custom and practice vary widely on the use of patient shielding in Europe and it is hoped that these recommendations will inform a change management program that will benefit patients and staff.