Comparison of Continuous Infusion of Epinephrine and Phenylephrine on Hemodynamics During Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

PurposePhenylephrine is a commonly used vasopressor for the treatment of spinal-induced hypotension in obstetric patients, but it is associated with reflex bradycardia and a corresponding decrease in cardiac output. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of continuous epinephrine versus phenylephrine infusion in the prevention of postspinal maternal hypotension.MethodsEighty-two women undergoing cesarean delivery were randomly divided into the epinephrine group (group E) and the phenylephrine group (group P). The patients received a continuous infusion of phenylephrine 1 μg kg⁻¹ min⁻¹ or epinephrine 0.1 μg kg⁻¹ min⁻¹ synchronously with intrathecal administration. Hemodynamic parameters were recorded, and umbilical cord blood gases were analyzed after delivery. The incidence of maternal hypotension, bradycardia, nausea, and vomiting was recorded.FindingsBlood pressure, heart rate, and cardiac output after spinal anesthesia induction were greater in group E than in group P (P < 0.05). In addition, there was a significant difference in the incidence of bradycardia (5% vs 22.5%, P = 0.02) and mean (SD) umbilical artery pH (7.31 [0.07] vs 7.28 [0.06], P = 0.04) between the groups.ImplicationsWith the dose of 0.1 μg kg⁻¹ min⁻¹, infusion of epinephrine is more effective at maintaining blood pressure close to baseline during spinal anesthesia with a lower decrease in maternal heart rate and cardiac output compared with phenylephrine. Epinephrine may be superior to phenylephrine in terms of the incidence of bradycardia and umbilical artery pH. chictr.org.cn identifier: ChiCTR-IIC-17010960.     

Monovision Versus Multifocality for Presbyopia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Introduction

Refractive surgery in presbyopia tends to achieve spectacle independence with minimal optical disturbances. We compared monovision to multifocality procedures regarding these outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of published (till November 21, 2016) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any monovision to any multifocality method or comparing different monovision/multifocality methods to each other that enabled direct or indirect comparisons between particular monovision and particular multifocality procedures in presbyopic patients undergoing cataract-related or unrelated surgery in respect to spectacle independence, unaided binocular visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity (CS), and adverse events.

Results

Three trials comparing monovision (monofocal lenses, LASIK) to multifocal intraocular lenses (MFIOLs; Isert refractive or Tecnis diffractive) and 6 comparing other MFIOLs to Tecnis were included (1–12 months duration). Spectacle independence. All reporting trials were of sufficient quality. Directly, pseudophakic monovision was inferior to Isert (1 trial, N = 75, RR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.28–0.80) and Tecnis (1 trial, N = 211, RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.25–0.52) in cataract patients, and LASIK was comparable to Tecnis (1 trial, N = 100, RR = 0.93, 0.78–1.10) in refractive surgery. In network meta-regression (6 trials, 14 arms) pseudophakic monovision in cataract patients was inferior to Tecnis. Indirect data suggest also that it is inferior (ReZoom refractive, TwinSet diffractive) or tends to be inferior (Array refractive) to other MFIOLs. LASIK was comparable to Tecnis in refractive surgery. Indirect data suggest also that it tends to superiority vs. ReZoom or Array refractive MFIOLs. Adverse events. No pooling was possible (heterogeneity of assessment and reporting). One quality direct RCT indicated less glare/dazzle with pseudophakic monovision vs. Tecnis in cataract patients. Unaided VA and CS data were burdened with heterogeneity (assessment, reporting) and insufficient quality.

Conclusions

Randomized comparisons of monovision to multifocality are scarce. Existing estimates regarding spectacle independence (imprecision, indirectness) and particularly regarding unaided VA and CS (assessment/reporting heterogeneity, bias, imprecision, indirectness) are burdened with uncertainty. Dysphotopsia is less common with monovision, but estimate uncertainty is high (bias, imprecision).

     

Acupuncture for Tension-Type Headache: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized,Controlled Trials

We investigated the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for the treatment of tension-type headache by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched from inception through August 2007. No search or language restrictions were applied. Eight randomized, controlled trials met our inclusion criteria. Pooled data from 5 studies were used for the meta-analysis. Our primary outcome was headache days per month. We assessed data from 2 time points: During treatment and at long-term follow-up (20–25 weeks). The weighted mean difference (WMD) between acupuncture and sham groups was used to determine effect size, and a validated scale was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. During treatment, the acupuncture group averaged 8.95 headache days per month compared with 10.5 in the sham group (WMD, −2.93 [95% CI, −7.49 to 1.64]; 5 trials). At long-term follow-up, the acupuncture group reported an average of 8.21 headache days per month compared with 9.54 in the sham group (WMD, −1.83[95% CI, −3.01 to −0.64]; 4 trials). The most common adverse events reported were bruising, headache exacerbation, and dizziness.PerspectiveThis meta-analysis suggests that acupuncture compared with sham for tension-type headache has limited efficacy for the reduction of headache frequency. There exists a lack of standardization of acupuncture point selection and treatment course among randomized, controlled trials. More research is needed to investigate the treatment of specific tension-type headache subtypes.     

美托咪啶用于全身麻醉的随机对照试验的Meta分析

目的评价美托咪啶用于全身麻醉患者的临床效果和安全性。方法电子检索PubMed、EBSCO、Springer、Ovid、外文生物医学期刊全文数据库和CBMdisc、CNKI，文献检索起止时间均从建库至2008年4月，同时检索纳入文献的参考文献，纳人探讨美托咪啶用于全身麻醉患者的临床效果与安全性的随机对照试验，并逐个进行质量评价和资料提取。统计学分析采用RevMan4．2．10软件。结果共纳入25个随机对照试验（共1241例）。Meta分析结果显示：与生理盐水相比，美托咪啶能降低围手术期患者的心率和血压，减少术后恶心呕吐[RR=0．57，95％CI（0．38，0．84）]、躁动[RR=0．29，95％CI（0．17，0．51）]、寒战[RR=0．45，95％CI（0．29，0．68）]，但增加患者心动过缓[RR：2．16,95％CI（1．58，2．95）]和低血压[RR=2．97，95％CI（1．42，6．18）]的发生率。加用美托咪啶能减少硫喷妥钠、异氟醚、芬太尼的用量，而在减少肌松药的用量方面与生理盐水相比，两者差异无统计学意义。美托咪啶在早期苏醒指标上与生理盐水组无差异，由于术后并发症较少，美托咪啶组患者能更快地出苏醒室[WMD=15．17，95％CI（3．87，26．46）]。结论现有有限资料表明，在维持围手术期血流动力学平衡上，美托咪啶优于生理盐水。此外，美托咪啶还能减少术后恶心呕吐、躁动、寒战的发生；减少静脉和吸入麻醉药的用量，但不减少肌松药的用量；在苏醒时间上，美托咪啶与生理盐水组无差异，在出苏醒室时间上，美托咪啶更有优势。     

Ultrasound-Guided Versus Landmark-Guided Local Corticosteroid Injection for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

To review the literature and assess the comparative effectiveness of ultrasound-guided versus landmark-guided local corticosteroid injections in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).

Interferon Alfa Versus Interferon Alfa Plus Cytarabine Combination Therapy for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

This article compares the effect of interferon alfa plus cytarabine (IFN-alfa + Ara-C) versus IFN-alfa alone on the chronic phase of chronic myelogenous leukemia.

Methods

Electronic searches were performed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Database, China Journal Full-text Database, and Chinese Scientific Journals Database. The languages were limited to Chinese and English. Randomized controlled trials were selected by 2 investigators. Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.0 software.

Results

A total of 3139 patients in 4 studies met the inclusion criteria. In those patients, complete hematologic response and cytogenetic responses showed significant improvements in favor of IFN-alfa + Ara-C, with complete hematologic response relative risk (RR) of 1.15 (95% CI, 1.09–1.21), complete cytogenetic response RR of 1.87 (95% CI, 1.47–2.38), partial cytogenetic response RR of 1.48 (95% CI, 1.25–1.75), and major cytogenetic response RR of 1.61 (95% CI, 1.42–1.83), respectively. The overall 3-year survival rate in the IFN-alfa + Ara-C group was 86% compared with 79% in the IFN-alfa group (RR = 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03–1.14). In the other 2 studies, 5-year overall survival was 69% compared with 63%, respectively (RR = 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01–1.15). However, IFN-alfa and Ara-C involved higher risk of hematologic toxicity, gastrointestinal adverse events, and severe mucositis compared with IFN-alfa monotherapy (RR = 2.63 [95% CI, 1.94–3.56); RR = 3.38 [95% CI, 2.28–5.00], and RR = 8.84 [95% CI, 3.82–20.46], respectively). Weight loss and skin rash were also observed more frequently in the combination treatment group (RR = 2.00 [95% CI, 1.47–2.73) and RR = 3.75 [95% CI, 2.13–6.59], respectively).

Conclusions

In patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia in the chronic phase, the combination of IFN-alfa + Ara-C demonstrated improved complete hematologic response, superior cytogenetic responses, and higher rates of 3- and 5-year survival than IFN-alfa alone. However, combination therapy is more likely to cause serious adverse effects. Well-designed studies will be required to determine the outcomes and adverse effects of the 2 drugs as treatment for patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia who cannot afford molecularly targeted drugs.     

右旋美托咪啶用于椎管内麻醉随机对照试验的Meta分析

目的系统评价右旋美托咪啶用于椎管内麻醉的有效性和安全性。方法计算机检索PubMed、EBSCO、Springer、Ovid、CNKI和万方数据库,并辅以手工和机检查找相关文献的参考文献,查找右旋美托咪啶用于椎管内麻醉的随机对照试验(RCT),文献检索起止时间均从建库至2011年2月。在按纳入与排除标准进行资料提取和文献质量评价后,采用RevMan 5.0软件进行Meta分析。结果纳入13个RCT,共计672例患者。Meta分析结果显示:与生理盐水相比,右旋美托咪啶能明显缩短椎管内麻醉感觉达到T10的平均时间[WMD=–2.39,95%CI(–4.40,–0.39)]和运动阻滞达到Bromage 3的平均时间[WMD=–5.30,95%CI(–7.18,–3.43)],并延长感觉阻滞消退两个节段的平均时间[WMD=51.14,95%CI(44.96,57.32)]和运动阻滞消退至Bromage 0的平均时间[WMD=68.46,95%CI(38.56,98.35)],同时明显增加心动过缓发生率[RR=3.03,95%CI(1.64,5.59)],减少寒战发生[RR=0.47,95%CI(0.28,0.80)];但在低血压以及术后恶心呕吐的发生率方面两者差异无统计学意义。结论现有研究表明,右旋美托咪啶可明显缩短椎管内麻醉的阻滞起效时间并延长其作用时间,同时可以降低寒战发生率,但也会明显增加心动过缓的发生率。     

Ondansetron for Shivering after Spinal Anesthesia in Cesarean Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PurposeEvaluate the efficacy of ondansetron in preventing shivering after spinal anesthesia in cesarean delivery.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysisMethodsFollowing the PRISMA statement, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, Google scholar and other grey literature databases were searched for eligible studies.FindingsThe overall incidence of shivering after spinal anesthesia in cesarean delivery is 32%, with 24% in patients who received ondansetron compared to 40% in the placebo group. A total of 19 trials consisting of 1399 patients were evaluated. Compared to placebo, ondansetron is effective in reducing the incidence of shivering (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.78; P = 0.003). The quality of evidence is low due to substantial heterogeneity, imprecision and suspected publication bias. Patients who received ondansetron are less likely to require rescue treatment for shivering (RR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.76; P = 0.009). Also, ondansetron is associated with a lower incidence of hypotension necessitating vasopressor treatment, and nausea and vomiting with no effects on the incidence of bradycardia.ConclusionOndansetron is effective in mitigating shivering after spinal anesthesia in cesarean delivery.     

Dapoxetine for Premature Ejaculation: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PurposeDapoxetine is the first oral agent approved for the treatment of premature ejaculation (PE). However, some countries have not approved its use. The goal of this meta-analysis was to provide more information about the efficacy and safety of dapoxetine in patients with PE.MethodsWe performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing dapoxetine with a placebo in patients with PE. Relevant eligible RCTs were identified through comprehensive searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and PubMed. Efficacy (intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT), patient global impression of change, perceived control over ejaculation, and satisfaction with sexual intercourse) and safety (treatment-emergent adverse events and discontinuation rates) were studied by using Review Manager version 5.1.0.FindingsSix RCTs involving 5934 patients met the inclusion criteria. The main outcome (IELT) in the dapoxetine group was improved significantly compared with IELT in the placebo group (mean difference, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.30 to 1.88]; P < 0.00001). The 60-mg dose of dapoxetine was more beneficial than the 30-mg dose for IELT (mean difference, −0.47 [95 % CI, −0.73 to –0.20]; P = 0.0005). Although the occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events in the dapoxetine group was nearly twice that in the placebo group (50.5% vs 27.9%), reports of severe adverse events were rare.ImplicationsData from the meta-analysis revealed that treatment with dapoxetine was significantly efficacious in patients with PE. Although adverse events such as nausea, dizziness, diarrhea, insomnia, and headache were common, dapoxetine’s overall safety profile was acceptable.     

Effectiveness of Exercise Programs in Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

To assess the effectiveness of exercise programs on disease activity and function in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) by a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

羟乙基淀粉预防剖宫产腰麻与硬膜外联合麻醉后低血压效果观察

目的观察羟乙基淀粉对预防剖宫产腰麻与硬膜外联合麻醉（CSEA）后低血压的效果。方法选择2008年6～12月择期行剖宫产手术者30例,随机分为羟乙基淀粉组和乳酸林格液组,麻醉前半小时分别输入羟乙基淀粉和乳酸林格液500ml预扩容,记录麻醉前和麻醉后血压、心率及新生儿Apgar评分情况。结果羟乙基淀粉组麻醉后血压较麻醉前下降不明显,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）;乳酸林格液组麻醉后血压下降,与麻醉前比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01）;羟乙基淀粉组麻醉后血压均较乳酸林格液组高,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。两组心率麻醉前与麻醉后比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。两组新生儿Apgar评分差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论羟乙基淀粉能减少CSEA下剖宫产低血压的发生,且不良反应少。     

Denosumab Versus Zoledronic Acid in the Prevention of Skeletal-related Events in Vulnerable Cancer Patients: A Meta-analysis of Randomized,Controlled Trials

PurposeBone metastases from solid tumors and multiple myeloma (MM) represent an important source of morbidity. The present meta-analysis was performed with the purpose of comparing the efficacy and tolerability of denosumab versus zoledronic acid (ZA) in the prevention of skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients with bone metastases secondary to solid tumors or bone lesions in multiple myeloma.MethodsWe searched PubMed, PubMed Central, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for relevant studies published until April 23, 2020. We included randomized, controlled trials that investigated the efficacy and tolerability of denosumab 120 mg SC versus ZA 4 mg IV, given every 4 weeks, in patients with bone lesions in multiple myeloma or bone metastases secondary to advanced solid tumors. Two reviewers independently identified studies, assessed the risk for bias, and extracted the data. Times to event outcomes were analyzed using hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs. We analyzed tolerability outcomes using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs, with a fixed-effects model.FindingsFour randomized, controlled trials (7379 patients) were identified as suitable for analysis. The pooled data indicated that denosumab was more favorable than ZA in delaying the time to first on-study SRE (HR = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.80–0.93; P = 0.0001) as well as the time to first and subsequent on-study SREs (HR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76–0.90; P < 0.0001); however, the results on overall survival and disease progression were similar between the 2 drugs. Additionally, denosumab was associated with lower risks for bone pain (risk ratio [RR] = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80–0.97; P = 0.01), osteonecrosis of the jaw (RR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61–0.93; P = 0.007), and acute-phase reactions (RR = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.40–0.56; P < 0.00001).ImplicationsCompared with ZA, denosumab demonstrated efficacy in significantly delaying on-study SREs. Furthermore, it showed a better tolerability profile, despite being associated with potential yet manageable adverse events. This study was registered with PROSPERO (identifier: CRD42019126390).     

Outcomes With Individual Versus Group Physical Therapy for Treating Urinary Incontinence and Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

To evaluate the existing evidence comparing the outcomes of rehabilitation conducted in a group setting and individual therapy for patients receiving rehabilitation.

Data Sources

Electronic databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PEDro, and OT Seeker were searched from the earliest date possible to July 2013. Additional references were identified by manual scanning of reference lists.

Study Selection

Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of group therapy compared with individual therapy for patients receiving rehabilitation were included for review. Two reviewers independently applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify included articles. Initial search identified 1527 potential articles, of which 16 trials with 2337 participants were included in the final review.

Data Extraction

Data extraction was completed for all included trials by one reviewer, using a customized data extraction form. Data were checked for accuracy by a second reviewer. Trials were independently assessed by 2 reviewers for methodological quality using the PEDro scale.

Data Synthesis

Trials meeting inclusion criteria had been conducted in back pain (n=6 studies), urinary incontinence (n=5), learning disability (n=2), hearing loss (n=1), joint replacement (n=1), and aphasia (n=1). Meta-analysis of physical therapy trials in back pain and urinary incontinence reporting sufficient homogeneous data showed no significant difference in outcomes for group versus individual therapy. These results were also supported by qualitative analysis of the remaining studies in these populations, but there is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions regarding other clinical areas.

Conclusions

Evidence shows that providing rehabilitation in a group format results in equivalent clinical outcomes to provision of similar therapy in an individual format in the treatment of back pain and urinary incontinence. There is currently insufficient evidence to draw similar conclusions in other populations or fields of rehabilitation.     

Autonomic Effects of Spinal Manipulative Therapy: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to systematically review the effects of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) on autonomic nervous system (ANS)-mediated outcomes, in both symptomatic and healthy populations, and to assess the quality of evidence for the most prevalent outcomes with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane Library, PEDro, Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched from their inception to March 2014. Randomized controlled trials involving SMT, such as mobilization and manipulation, that reported at least 1 outcome related to the ANS, with placebo, control groups, or other SMT techniques as comparators, with either healthy or symptomatic samples were included. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach were used to assess risk of bias and the quality of evidence, respectively.ResultsEighteen trials were included in this systematic review. Passive accessory intervertebral mobilization produced sympathoexcitation independently of the treated region (cervical, thoracic, or lumbar spine); although sustained natural apophyseal glides did not influence the ANS, conflicting results were observed regarding manipulation techniques. The overall quality of evidence for all analyzed outcomes ranged from low to very low quality.ConclusionThere is evidence pointing toward the existence of sympathoexcitatory short-term effects following passive accessory intervertebral mobilization mobilizations, but not for sustained natural apophyseal glide mobilizations. There is conflicting evidence regarding the ability of manipulation to elicit sympathoexcitation. However, the low quality of the evidence precludes a definitive conclusion of such effects. Based on the current evidence, there is uncertainty regarding the true effect estimates of SMT on ANS-mediated outcomes.     

α2受体激动剂预防七氟烷引起小儿术后躁动的Meta分析

目的评价α2受体激动剂是否可以降低七氟烷引起的小儿术后躁动的发生率。方法通过检索Medline、荷兰医学文摘、Cochrane临床试验数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库和中国期刊网全文数据库等数据库,收集可乐定或右美托咪啶对七氟烷引起的小儿术后躁动的预防作用的随机对照试验（randomized controlled trial,RCT）,提取资料和评估方法学质量,采用Cochrane协作网RevMan 5.0软件进行Meta分析。结果最终纳入11个RCT,其中104例患儿预防性使用右美托咪啶,268例患儿使用可乐定,365例患儿使用安慰剂。Meta分析显示,可乐定组小儿术后躁动发生率的比值比（OR）为0.31,95%CI为（0.15,0.61）（P=0.000 8）;右美托咪啶组小儿术后躁动发生率的OR为0.16,95%CI为（0.08,0.31）（P〈0.000 01）。结论α2受体激动剂可以显著降低七氟烷引起的小儿术后躁动的发生率。     

Benefits of Exergame Training for Female Patients With Fibromyalgia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

ObjectiveThe objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of exergame training on female patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). Outcome measurements mainly include overall functioning, pain perception, quality of life, exercise capacity, health perception, kinesiophobia, and fatigue severity.Data SourcesFive electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) were searched from inception until June 24, 2021. In addition to searches, review the reference lists of relevant papers by hand was also conducted. Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used to evaluate the risk of bias in the included studies.Study SelectionArticles were collected with the following study inclusion criteria: (1) randomized controlled trial (RCT) design; (2) participants were female patients with FMS aged older than 18 years; (3) participants in experimental groups received exergame training using any modality; and (4) outcome measures included overall functioning, quality of life, exercise capacity, health perception, kinesiophobia, and fatigue severity.Data ExtractionThe data were independently extracted by 2 researchers. The extracted data related to the document characteristics (first author, publication year, and country) participant characteristics (number and age of participants in the experimental and control groups), and interventions (intervention content, frequency, and duration, and measurement tools).Data SynthesisNine RCTs including 466 female patients with FMS were included in the analysis. Exergame training had significant positive effects on overall functioning (standardized mean difference [SMD], ?0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], ?0.77 to 0.27; P<.0001), pain perception (SMD, ?0.49; 95% CI, ?0.97 to ?0.02; P=.04), quality of life (SMD, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.44-1.10; P<.00001), exercise capacity (SMD, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.32-0.84; P<.0001), health perception (SMD, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.38-1.01; P<.0001), and fatigue severity (SMD, ?0.97; 95% CI, ?1.55 to ?0.38; P=.001). However, exergame training did not have significant effects on kinesiophobia (SMD, ?1.13; 95% CI, ?2.88 to 0.62; P=.21).ConclusionsExergame training has beneficial effects on the overall functioning, pain perception, quality of life, exercise capacity, health perception and fatigue severity of female patients with FMS. Exergame training is a potential non-drug therapy for the treatment of patients with FMS.     

H2受体拮抗剂预防应激性溃疡出血的系统评价

目的评价H2受体拮抗剂(H2RA)对预防重危病人应激性溃疡出血(SUB)的有效性及安全性。方法按既定的检索策略,全面检索Cochrane临床对照试验数据库(2006年第4期)、MEDLINE光盘数据库(1980～2006年10月)、EMbase光盘数据库(1984～2006年10月)、中国生物医学文献数据库(1978～2006年10月)、维普中刊数据库(1989～2006年10月)和中文循证医学随机对照试验数据库。手工检索5种相关中文期刊、相关会议论文集及所有检索到试验的参考文献。纳入H2RA预防SUB的随机对照试验。由两位研究者独立地对纳入试验进行质量评价和资料提取,并交叉核对。如有分歧,通过讨论解决。结局指标包括SUB的发生率、医源性肺炎(nosocomial pneumonia,NP)发生率、病死率、药物不良反应的发生率、胃液pH值等指标评价药物预防SUB的效果和安全性。采用RevMan4.2.7软件进行Meta分析。结果共检索到18个可能符合纳入标准的临床试验,其中16个试验共包括2014例病人符合纳入标准,2个试验被排除。纳入试验的方法学质量高低不齐。提取数据后,进行Meta分析或描述性分析。①H2RA能降低SUB的发生率[RR0.39,95%CI(0.28,0.56);P<0.00001,NNT=6],H2RA(P=0.11),不能降低临床大出血的发生率[RR0.51,95%CI(0.17,1.53);P=0.11]。②H2RA与安慰剂相比较,NP发生率差别无统计学意义[RR1.02,95%CI(0.55,1.89);P=0.95]。③H2RA能降低病死率[RR0.68,95%CI(0.52,0.90);P=0.007,NNT=18]。④H2RA的安全性好。⑤药物预防SUB对胃内pH值的影响,由于所纳入的试验在pH值的测量方法、测量时间上的差异,无法提取资料进行合并分析。所有试验均未将住院时间作为观察指标。结论现有的有限证据表明,预防性使用H2RA均能降低SUB发生率、病死率但不能降低临床大出血的发生率。因所发表的临床研究方法学质量普遍不高,存在多种方法学局限性。故应谨慎看待以上结论。今后有必要进一步开展大样本、高质量的临床随机对照试验,为H2RA预防SUB提供更为可靠证据。     

硝普钠控制性降压用于脊柱手术的临床研究

目的:探讨硝普钠控制性降压在脊柱手术中的临床应用。方法:72例拟在全麻下行脊柱手术患者随机分成两组:观察组(硝普钠组,n=36)与对照组(n=36)。所有患者均静脉注射咪唑安定0.1mg.kg-1、丙泊酚2mg.kg-1、芬太尼2μg.kg-1和采用预注给药的阿曲库铵进行气管内插管,以异氟醚或氨氟醚、阿曲库铵和芬太尼维持麻醉。观察组在手术进入椎体前3～5min由输液泵输入0.01%硝普钠,控制速度使收缩压维持于60～80mmHg的范围。记录两组出血量、输血量、输液量、手术时间,术后1h血红蛋白与术前血红蛋白等。结果:两组患者基本情况、手术类型、晶体液、胶体液输入量无统计学差异;观察组术中失血量和输血量均明显少于对照组,且手术时间明显缩短;两组术后1h血红蛋白与术前比较均有所下降,但差异无显著性。结论:脊柱手术中采用硝普钠控制性降压效果安全、可靠,可明显减少术中出血量及输血量,缩短手术时间。     

Mepivacaine Versus Bupivacaine in Adult Surgical Patients: A Meta-analysis,Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PurposeEvidence supporting the choice between mepivacaine and bupivacaine is inconclusive. This meta-analysis aims to determine whether mepivacaine can reach a similar effect to bupivacaine after surgeries.DesignA meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).MethodsRCTs were identified in PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid), Medline (Ovid), and Cochrane Library using a controlled vocabulary (MeSH) and keywords. There were no date and language restrictions. We strictly included RCTs comparing mepivacaine with bupivacaine. The primary outcome was motor function recovery time. Secondary outcomes included postoperative analgesic requirement, transient neurologic symptoms (TNS), pain score at 24 hours, length of stay (LOS), duration of analgesia, complications, and patient satisfaction. A trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed for motor function recovery time, postoperative analgesic requirement, and TNS.FindingsSeven RCTs with a total of 672 patients were included. Return of motor function was quicker in patients who received mepivacaine than in those who received bupivacaine (weighted mean differences [WMD] = -2.23 minutes; 95% confidence intervals [CI], -3.58 to -0.88; P = .02; I² = 97.08%; TSA adjusted CI -17.52 to -10.9). Postoperative analgesic requirement was significantly more with mepivacaine (risk ratio [RR] = 3.23; 95% CI, 1.37-7.62; P = .01; I² = 55.11%; TSA adjusted CI 5.73-63.27). Duration of analgesia (WMD = -8.83 hours; 95% CI, -11.75 to -7.90; P < .001; I² = 0%) and LOS (WMD = -3.95 hours; 95% CI, -4.83 to -3.07; P < .001; I² = 0%) in group mepivacaine was significantly shorter compared with bupivacaine. There were no differences for TNS (RR = 3.90; 95% CI, 0.94-16.22; P = .062; I² = 72.23%), postoperative pain score (standard mean differences [SMD] = 0; 95% CI, ?0.10 to 0.10; P = .972; I² = 0%), complications (RR = 1; 95% CI, 0.70-1.43; P = .998; I² = 0%), and satisfaction (RR = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85-1.11; P = .40; I² = 45%) between bupivacaine and mepivacaine.ConclusionsMepivacaine appears to yield a faster return of motor function and shorter LOS compared with bupivacaine. and may be more popular in short-stay and outpatient surgery. However, the results of TSA indicate that more high-quality trials are needed to confirm the true effects.