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.     

Glutamate infusion associated with reduced rises of p-Copeptin after coronary surgery: Substudy of GLUTAMICS II

Background

Glutamate plays a key role for post-ischaemic recovery of myocardial metabolism. According to post hoc analyses of the two GLUTAMICS trials, patients without diabetes benefit from glutamate with less myocardial dysfunction after coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). Copeptin reflects activation of the Arginine Vasopressin system and is a reliable marker of heart failure but available studies in cardiac surgery are limited. We investigated whether glutamate infusion is associated with reduced postoperative rises of plasma Copeptin (p-Copeptin) after CABG.

Methods

A prespecified randomised double-blind substudy of GLUTAMICS II. Patients had left ventricular ejection fraction ≤0.30 or EuroSCORE II ≥3.0 and underwent CABG ± valve procedure. Intravenous infusion of 0.125 M L-glutamic acid or saline at 1.65 mL/kg/h was commenced 10–20 min before the release of the aortic cross-clamp and then continued for another 150 min P-Copeptin was measured preoperatively and postoperatively on day one (POD1) and day three. The primary endpoint was an increase in p-Copeptin from the preoperative level to POD1. Postoperative stroke ≤24 h and mortality ≤30 days were safety outcomes.

Results

We included 181 patients of whom 48% had diabetes. The incidence of postoperative mortality ≤30 days (0% vs. 2.1%; p = .50) and stroke ≤24 h (0% vs. 3.2%; p = .25) did not differ between the glutamate group and controls. P-Copeptin increased postoperatively with the highest values recorded on POD1 without significant inter-group differences. Among patients without diabetes, p-Copeptin did not differ preoperatively but postoperative rise from preoperative level to POD1 was significantly reduced in the glutamate group (73 ± 66 vs. 115 ± 102 pmol/L; p = .02). P-Copeptin was significantly lower in the Glutamate group on POD1 (p = .02) and POD 3 (p = .02).

Conclusions

Glutamate did not reduce rises of p-Copeptin significantly after moderate to high-risk CABG. However, glutamate was associated with reduced rises of p-Copeptin among patients without diabetes. These results agree with previous observations suggesting that glutamate mitigates myocardial dysfunction after CABG in patients without diabetes. Given the exploratory nature of these findings, they need to be confirmed in future studies.     

Atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveNew-onset postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) after cardiac surgery is common, with rates up to 60%. POAF has been associated with early and late stroke, but its association with other cardiovascular outcomes is less known. The objective was to perform a meta-analysis of the studies reporting the association of POAF with perioperative and long-term outcomes in patients with cardiac surgery.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis of studies that presented outcomes for cardiac surgery on the basis of the presence or absence of POAF. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were assessed; 57 studies (246,340 patients) were selected. Perioperative mortality was the primary outcome. Inverse variance method and random model were performed. Leave-one-out analysis, subgroup analyses, and metaregression were conducted.ResultsPOAF was associated with perioperative mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.58-2.33), perioperative stroke (OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.90-2.49), perioperative myocardial infarction (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06-1.54), perioperative acute renal failure (OR, 2.74; 95% CI, 2.42-3.11), hospital (standardized mean difference, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.53-1.07) and intensive care unit stay (standardized mean difference, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.24-0.86), long-term mortality (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.54; 95% CI, 1.40-1.69), long-term stroke (IRR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.21-1.46), and longstanding persistent atrial fibrillation (IRR, 4.73; 95% CI, 3.36-6.66).ConclusionsThe results suggest that POAF after cardiac surgery is associated with an increased occurrence of most short- and long-term cardiovascular adverse events. However, the causality of this association remains to be established.     

The fate of aortic valve after rheumatic mitral valve surgery

ObjectiveDeterioration of the native aortic valve function by a late progression of rheumatic disease is not infrequent in patients who underwent rheumatic mitral valve surgery; however, this phenomenon has not been clearly quantified.MethodsA total of 1155 consecutive patients (age 52.0 ± 12.9 years; 807 female) who underwent rheumatic mitral valve surgery without concomitant aortic valve surgery from 1997 to 2015 were enrolled. The primary end point was the composite of progression to severe aortic valve dysfunction or a requirement of subsequent aortic valve replacements during follow-up. To determine the risk factors of the primary outcome, we performed the generalized linear mixed model.ResultsThe baseline severities of aortic valve were none to trivial in 880 patients (76.2%), mild in 256 patients (22.2%), and moderate in 19 patients (1.6%). The latest 1062 echocardiographic assessments (91.9%; median, 81.2 postoperative months; interquartile range, 37.3-132.1 months) demonstrated 26 cases (0.33%/patient-year) meeting the primary end point during follow-up. Cumulative incidence of the primary end point at 10 years was 0.4% ± 0.3% and 7.4% ± 2.5% depending on the presence of mild or greater aortic valve dysfunction at baseline (P < .01). In multivariable analyses, aortic valve peak pressure gradient (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.20), aortic regurgitation degree (mild over none: odds ratio, 3.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-9.23), and time (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval 1.19-1.41) were significantly associated with the occurrence of the primary end point.ConclusionsProgression of severe aortic valve dysfunction and the need for aortic valve replacement are uncommon in patients undergoing rheumatic mitral valve surgery. However, such events were relatively common among those with mild or greater aortic valve dysfunction at the time of mitral valve surgery.     

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.