Comparison of combined anterior–posterior approach versus posterior-only approach in treating adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a meta-analysis

Purpose

Choosing a surgical approach to treat adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is still controversial. To compare the effectiveness and safety of combined anterior–posterior approach to posterior-only approach, we conducted a meta-analysis.

Methods

We searched electronic database for relevant studies that compared anterior–posterior approach with posterior approach in AIS. Then data extraction and quality assessment were conducted. We used RevMan 5.1 for data analysis. A random effects model was used for heterogeneous data, while a fixed effect model was used for homogeneous data.

Results

A total of ten non-randomized controlled studies involving 872 patients were included. There was no significant difference in Cobb angle (95 % CI ?0.33 to 4.91, P = 0.09) and percent-predicted FEV1 (95 % CI ?6.79 to 4.54, P = 0.70) between the two groups. In subgroup analysis, the kyphosis angle correction was significantly higher than posterior group in severe subgroup (95 % CI 0.72–6.50, P = 0.01), while no significant difference was found in no-restriction subgroup (95 % CI ?2.75 to 5.42, P = 0.52). Patients in posterior group obtained a better percent-predicted FVC than those in anterior–posterior group (95 % CI ?13.18 to ?4.74, P < 0.0001). Significant less complication rate (95 % CI 2.75–17.49, P < 0.0001), blood loss (95 % CI 363.28–658.91, P < 0.00001), operative time (95 % CI 2.65–3.45, P < 0.00001) and length of hospital stay (95 % CI 1.98–22.94, P = 0.02) were found in posterior group.

Conclusions

Posterior-only approach can achieve similar coronal plane correction and percent-predicted FEV1 compared to combined anterior–posterior approach. The posterior approach even does better in sagittal correction in severe AIS patients. Significantly less complication rate, blood loss, operative time, length of hospital stay and better percent-predicted FVC are also achieved by posterior-only approach. Posterior-only approach seems to be effective and safe in treating AIS for experienced surgeons.

     

Comparison of clinical efficacy and safety among three surgical approaches for the treatment of spinal tuberculosis: a meta-analysis

Purpose

We aimed to provide evidence for clinical choice of surgical approach in treating spinal tuberculosis, including anterior, posterior and combined approaches (combined anterior and posterior approach).

Methods

A literature search up to June 2015 was performed on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, CNKI, Wanfang and Weipu database. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) or risk radios (RRs) and their 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

Results

Total 26 studies with 2345 spinal tuberculosis adults were analyzed. Results showed advantages of posterior approach compared with anterior approach in operation time (WMD = 20.91; 95 % CI: 9.05–32.76), blood loss (WMD = 72.32, 95 % CI: 13.87–130.78), correction of angle (WMD = ?2.47; 95 % CI: ?4.04 to ?0.90) and complications (RR = 1.78; 95 % CI: 1.21–2.60), and compared with combined approach in operation time (WMD = ?82.76; 95 % CI: ?94.38 to ?71.14), blood loss (WMD = ?263.63; 95 % CI: ?336.85 to ?190.41), hospital stay [(WMD = ?4.60; 95 % CI: ?5.10 to ?4.10) and complications (RR = 0.36; 95 % CI: 0.23–0.58]. Meanwhile, significantly larger correction of angle (WMD = ?2.25; 95 % CI: ?4.35 to ?0.14; P = 0.04) and less loss of correction (WMD = 3.97; 95 % CI: 2.22–5.72) were found when compared combined approach with anterior approach. However, combined approach had significantly longer operation time (WMD = ?41.92; 95 % CI: ?52.45 to ?31.38) and more blood loss (WMD = ?102.18; 95 % CI: ?160.45 to ?43.91) than anterior approach.

Conclusion

Posterior approach has better clinical outcomes than anterior or combined approach for spinal tuberculosis. However, individual assessment of each case should be considered in the clinical application of these surgical approaches.

     

Risk of revision and dislocation in single,dual mobility and large femoral head total hip arthroplasty: systematic review and network meta-analysis

Postoperative dislocation is a challenging complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA) that affects patient outcome worldwide. Instability is one of the main complications with rates exceeding 20% in some series. Currently, alternative acetabular components are available with dual mobility (DMTHA) bearing surfaces and larger femoral head size that may reduce the risk of dislocation, yet provide the functional benefit of standard single mobility (STHA) bearing surface THA. However, whether STHA, big femoral head (BTHA) and DMTHA should be used is still controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare postoperative dislocation and revision (aseptic loosening and infection) of BTHA, STHA and DMTHA in primary or revision THA. These clinical outcomes consist of postoperative dislocation and revision (aseptic loosening and infection). This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Relevant studies were identified from Medline and Scopus from inception to June 8, 2017, that reported postoperative dislocation and revision (aseptic loosening and infection) of either implant THA. Eleven of 677 studies (nine comparative studies and two RCTs) (N = 4084 patients) were eligible; all 11 studies were included in pooling. Intervention included dual mobility THA (N = 1068 patients), standard THA (N = 2568 patients), big head THA (N = 378 patients) and constrain THA (N = 70 patients). A network meta-analysis showed that risk of revision and dislocation of DMTHA was significantly lower with RR of 2.19 (1.36, 3.53) and 4.19 (2.04, 8.62) when compared to STHA. While there was no statistically significant risk of having revision and dislocation of DMTHA when compared to BTHA and CTHA. The SUCRA probability of DM and BTHA was in the first and second rank with 46.5 and 44.8% in the risk of revision and 46.7 and 45.1% in the risk of dislocations. In short-term outcomes (5 years or less, with follow-up of 0–5 years), the best implant of choice that has lowest risk of revision and dislocation after THA is DMTHA follow by BTHA. We recommend using dual mobility and big head as an implant for safety in THA. However, there were only two studies that reported long-term survivorship (more than 5 years, with follow-up of 5–15 years). Further research that assesses long-term survivorship is necessary to further evaluate which implants are the best for THA.     

Comparative outcomes of combined corticosteroid with low volume compared to high volume of local anesthetic in subacromial injection for impingement syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs

Subacromial impingement syndrome (SIS) is one of the most frequent pathologies of the shoulder, which may cause serious restriction of daily activities and lifestyle changes. Corticosteroid injection (CI) into the subacromial space is a palliative treatment option. Currently, there have been no studies that compare between the different volumes of CI injection. We have conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to answer our specific study questions: Are high volume (< 5 ml) better than low volume (≥ 5 ml) of CI injection with respect to pain reduction? This systematic review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. Relevant studies were identified from Medline and Scopus from inception to May 11, 2017 that reported American shoulder and elbow surgeons (ASES) function score, pain visual analog score (VAS), and postoperative complications of either group. Fifteen studies were included for the analysis of high volume (more than or equal 5 ml), and 5 studies were included for analysis of low volume (less than 5 ml). Overall, there were 1101 patients (732 in the high-volume group and 369 in the low-volume group). A pooling of mean VAS and ASES function score was (N = 557) 2.02 (95% CI 1.52, 2.53), (N = 190) 82.59 (95% CI 76.92, 88.27) in high-volume group and (N = 179) 2.60 (95% CI 1.94, 3.26), (N = 95) 84.65 (95% CI 81.64, 86.82) in low-volume group, respectively. The unstandardized mean difference of ASES and VAS of high volume was ? 0.58 (95% confidence interval (CI): ? 1.38, 0.22) and ? 2.06 (95% CI ? 8.35, 4.23) scores lower than low-volume CI in SIS patients, but without statistical significance. A total of 11 studies in the high-volume group and 4 studies in the low-volume group reported adverse effects. The total complication rate per patient was 6.2% (2.3, 10.1%) in the high-volume group and 11.7% (0.3, 12%) in the low-volume group (p = 0.091). No significant differences were noted for complications. In subacromial impingement syndrome, the corticosteroid injection had acceptable pain and functional outcomes. Higher volume had a lower ASES, VAS, and risk of having complication when compared to lower volume. However, there are no statistically significant differences between groups. Larger, randomized noninferiority or equivalent trial studies are needed to confirm these findings as the current literature is still insufficient. Level of evidence I.     

Incidence and risk factors for proximal junctional kyphosis: a meta-analysis

Purpose

To analyse the incidence and risk factors associated with proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) following spinal fusion, we collect relative statistics from the articles on PJK and perform a meta-analysis.

Methods

An extensive search of literature was performed in PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library (up to April 2015). The following risk factors were extracted: age at surgery, gender, combined anterior-posterior surgery, use of pedicle screw at top of construct, hybrid instrumentation, thoracoplasty, fusion to sacrum (S1), preoperative thoracic kyphosis angle (T5–T12) >40°, bone mineral density (BMD) and preoperative to postoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA difference) >5 cm. Data analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3 and STATA 12.0.

Results

A total of 14 unique studies including 2215 patients were included in the final analyses. The pooled analysis showed that there were significant difference in age at surgery >55 years old (OR 2.19, 95 % CI 1.36–3.53, p = 0.001), fusion to S1 (OR 2.12, 95 % CI 1.57–2.87, p < 0.001), T5–T12 >40° (OR 2.68, 95 % CI 1.73–4.13, p < 0.001), low BMD (OR 2.37, 95 % CI 1.45–3.87, p < 0.001) and SVA difference >5 cm (OR 2.53, 95 % CI 1.24–5.18, p = 0.01). However, there was no significant difference in gender (OR 0.98, 95 % CI 0.74–1.30, p = 0.87), combined anterior-posterior surgery (OR 1.55, 95 % CI 0.98–2.46, p = 0.06), use of pedicle screw at top of construct (OR 1.55, 95 % CI 0.67–3.59, p = 0.30), hybrid instrumentation (OR 1.31, 95 % CI 0.92–1.87, p = 0.13) and thoracoplasty (OR 1.55, 95 % CI 0.89–2.72, p = 0.13). The incidence of PJK following spinal fusion was 30 % (ranged from 17 to 62 %) based on the 14 studies.

Conclusions

The results of our meta-analysis suggest that age at surgery >55 years, fusion to S1, T5–T12 >40°, low BMD and SVA difference >5 cm are risk factors for PJK. However, gender, combined anterior–posterior surgery, use of pedicle screw at top of construct, hybrid instrumentation and thoracoplasty are not associated with PJK.

     

Tubeless versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an update meta-analysis

Background

To update a previously published systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

Methods

A systematic literature search of EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was performed to confirm relevant studies. The scientific literature was screened in accordance with the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. After quality assessment and data extraction from the eligible studies, a meta-analysis was conducted using Stata SE 12.0.

Results

Fourteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1148 patients were included. Combined results demonstrated that tubeless PCNL was significantly associated with shorter operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD], ?3.79 min; 95% confidence interval [CI], ?6.73 to ?0.85; P = 0.012; I² = 53.8%), shorter hospital stay (WMD, ?1.27 days; 95% CI, ?1.65 to ?0.90; P < 0.001; I² = 98.7%), faster time to return to normal activity (WMD, ?4.24 days; 95% CI, ?5.76 to ?2.71; P < 0.001; I² = 97.5%), lower postoperative pain scores (WMD, ?16.55 mm; 95% CI, ?21.60 to ?11.50; P < 0.001; I² = 95.7%), less postoperative analgesia requirements (standard mean difference, ?1.09 mg; 95% CI, ?1.35 to ?0.84; P < 0.001; I² = 46.8%), and lower urine leakage (Relative risk [RR], 0.30; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.59; P = 0.001; I² = 41.2%). There were no significant differences in postoperative hemoglobin reduction (WMD, ?0.02 g/dL; 95% CI, ?0.04 to 0.01; P = 0.172; I² = 41.5%), stone-free rate (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.05; P = 0.776; I² = 0.0%), postoperative fever rate (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.93; P = 0.867; I² = 0.0%), or blood transfusion rate (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.70; P = 0.538; I² = 0.0%). The results of subgroup analysis were consistent with the overall findings. The sensitivity analysis indicated that most results remained constant when total tubeless or partial tubeless or mini-PCNL studies were excluded respectively.

Conclusions

Tubeless PCNL is an available and safe option in carefully evaluated and selected patients. It is significantly associated with the advantages of shorter hospital stay, shorter time to return to normal activity, lower postoperative pain scores, less analgesia requirement, and reduced urine leakage.

     

Systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus open approach for pancreaticoduodenectomy

Backgrounds and objective

The technique of minimally invasive pancreatic surgeries has evolved rapidly, including minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). However, controversy on safety and feasibility remains when comparing the MIPD with the open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD); therefore, we aimed to compare MIPD and OPD with a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

Multiple electronic databases were systematically searched to identify studies (up to February 2016) comparing MIPD with OPD. Intra-operative outcomes, oncologic data, postoperative complications and postoperative recovery were evaluated.

Results

Twenty-two retrospective studies including 6120 patients (1018 MIPDs and 5102 OPDs) were included. MIPD was associated with a reduction in estimated blood loss (WMD ?312.00 ml, 95 % CI ?436.30 to ?187.70 ml, p < 0.001), transfusion rate (OR 0.41, 95 % CI 0.30–0.55, p < 0.001), wound infection (OR 0.37, 95 % CI 0.20–0.66, p < 0.001) and length of hospital stay (WMD ?3.57 days, 95 % CI ?5.17 to ?1.98 days, p < 0.001). Meanwhile, MIPD group has a higher R0 resection rate (OR 1.47, 95 % CI 1.18–1.82, p < 0.001) and more lymph nodes harvest (WMD 1.74, 95 % CI 1.03–2.45, p < 0.001). However, it had longer operation time (WMD 83.91 min, 95 % CI 36.60–131.21 min, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two procedures in morbidities (p = 0.86), postoperative pancreatic fistula (p = 0.17), delayed gastric empting (p = 0.65), vascular resection (p = 0.68), reoperation (p = 0.33) and mortality (p = 0.90).

Conclusions

MIPD can be a reasonable alternative to OPD with potential advantages. However, further large-volume, well-designed RCTs with extensive follow-ups are suggested to confirm and update the findings of our analysis.

     

Two Anatomical Pathways for Retroperitoneoscopic Pancreatectomy: Indications for the Posterior and Lateral Approaches

Background

Retroperitoneoscopic pancreatectomy (RP) is a novel surgical procedure that is safe and feasible in animal models and clinical practice. However, the optimal approach for RP has not been established.

Objective

This study aimed to introduce the posterior and lateral approaches for RP.

Methods

This prospective study included 19 patients with suspected pancreatic lesions who underwent RP. RP was performed using either a posterior or a lateral approach.

Results

The posterior, lateral, and jointed approaches were used in 13 (68.4 %), 3 (15.8 %), and 3 (15.8 %) cases, respectively. Patients underwent enucleation (N = 8), distal pancreatectomy (N = 4), and resection of cystic pancreatic lesions (N = 2) and non-pancreatic lesions (N = 5). All retroperitoneoscopic procedures were successfully accomplished with no conversion to open or laparoscopic surgery. Intraoperative complications occurred in two (12.5 %) cases, including one case with injury to the peritoneum and one case with injury to the peritoneum and splenic vein. Postoperative grade A pancreatic fistulas occurred in six cases, and were cured by delayed drainage. No disease recurrence or abnormal symptoms were observed during the mean follow-up period of 14.06 ± 9.60 months.

Conclusions

RP using the posterior or lateral approach is feasible and effective, but has different indications. The posterior approach is useful for distal pancreatectomy, as well as resection of pancreatic lesions in the posterior or superoposterior region of the distal pancreas. The lateral approach is useful for resection of pancreatic lesions in the anterior or inferior region of the body and tail. The two approaches can be used in combination or conversion.     

Transabdominal Pre-Peritoneal Versus Open Repair for Primary Unilateral Inguinal Hernia: A Meta-analysis

Background

Recent NICE guidelines recommend open surgical approaches for the treatment of primary unilateral inguinal hernias. However, many surgeons perform a laparoscopic approach based on the advantages of less post-operative pain and faster recovery. Our aim was to examine current evidence comparing transabdominal pre-peritoneal (TAPP) laparoscopic repair and open surgical repair for primary inguinal hernias.

Methods

A systematic search of six electronic databases was conducted for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TAPP and open repair for primary unilateral inguinal hernia. A random-effects model was used to combine the data.

Results

A total of 13 RCTs were identified, with 1310 patients receiving TAPP repair and 1331 patients receiving open repair. There was no significant difference between the two groups for rates of haematoma (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.49–1.71; P = 0.78), seroma (RR 1.90; 95% CI 0.87–4.14; P = 0.10), urinary retention (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.36–2.76; P = 0.99), infection (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.29–1.28; P = 0.19), and hernia recurrence (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.42–1.07; P = 0.10). TAPP repair had a significantly lower rate of paraesthesia (RR 0.20; 95% CI 0.08–0.50; P = 0.0005), shorter bed stay (2.4 ± 1.4 vs 3.1 ± 1.6 days, P = 0.0006), and shorter return to normal activities (9.5 ± 7.9 vs 17.3 ± 8.4 days, P < 0.00001).

Conclusions

Our findings demonstrated that TAPP repair did not have higher rate of morbidity or hernia recurrence and is an equivalent approach to open repair, with the advantages of faster recovery and reduced paraesthesia.

     

Meta-analysis of epidural analgesia versus peripheral nerve blockade after total knee joint replacement

Background

Postoperative pain after major knee surgery can be severe. Our aim was to compare the outcomes of epidural analgesia and peripheral nerve blockade (PNB) in patients undergoing total knee joint replacement (TKR). Moreover, we aimed to compare outcomes of adductor canal block (ACB) with those of femoral nerve block (FNB) after TKR.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search of electronic information sources, including MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). We applied a combination of free text and controlled vocabulary search adapted to thesaurus headings, search operators, and limits in each of the above databases. Pain intensity assessed on visual analogue scale (VAS), nausea and vomiting, systolic hypotension, and urinary retention was the reported outcome parameters.

Results

We identified 12 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes of epidural analgesia and PNB reporting a total of 670 patients. There was no significant difference between two groups in VAS scores at 0–12 h (MD ?0.48; 95 % CI ?1.07–0.11, P = 0.11), 12–24 h (MD 0.04; 95 % CI ?0.81–0.88, P = 0.93), and 24–48 h (MD 0.16; 95 % CI ?0.08–0.40, P = 0.19). However, epidural analgesia was associated with significantly higher risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR 1.65; 95 % CI, 1.20–2.28, P = 0.002), hypotension (RR 1.76; 95 % CI, 1.26–2.45, P = 0.0009), and urinary retention (RR 4.51; 95 % CI, 2.27–8.96, P < 0.0001) compared to PNB. Moreover, pooled analysis of data from 6 RCTs demonstrated no significant difference in VAS score between ACB and FNB at 24 h (MD ?0.00; 95 % CI, ?0.56–0.56, P = 0.99) and 48 h (MD ?0.06; 95 % CI, ?0.14–0.03, P = 0.23).

Conclusions

PNB is as effective as epidural analgesia for postoperative pain management in patients undergoing TKR. Moreover, it is associated with significantly lower postoperative complications. ACB appears to be an effective PNB with similar analgesic effect to FNB after TKR. Future RCTs may provide better evidence regarding knee range of motion, length of hospital stay, and neurological complications.

     

Incisional Hernia Rates After Laparoscopic or Open Abdominal Surgery—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Incisional hernias are one of the most common long-term complications associated with open abdominal surgery. The aim of this review and meta-analysis was to systematically assess laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery as a general surgical strategy in all available indications in terms of incisional hernia occurrence.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials comparing incisional hernia rates after laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery in all indications. Random effects meta-analyses were calculated and presented as risk differences (RD) with their corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (CI).

Results

24 trials (3490 patients) were included. Incisional hernias were significantly reduced in the laparoscopic group (RD ?0.06, 95 % CI [?0.09, ?0.03], p = 0.0002, I ² = 75). The advantage of the laparoscopic procedure persisted in the subgroup of total-laparoscopic interventions (RD ?0.14, 95 % CI [?0.22, ?0.06], p = 0.001, I ² = 87 %), whereas laparoscopically assisted procedures did not show a significant reduction of incisional hernias compared to open surgery (RD ?0.01, 95 % CI [?0.03, 0.01], p = 0.31, I ² = 35 %). Wound infections were significantly reduced in the laparoscopic group (RD ?0.06, 95 % CI [?0.09, ?0.03], p < 0.0001, I ² = 35 %); overall postoperative morbidity was comparable in both groups (RD ?0.06, 95 % CI [?0.13, 0.00], p = 0.06; I ² = 64 %). Open abdominal surgery showed a significantly longer hospital stay compared to laparoscopy (RD ?1.92, 95 % CI [?2.67, ?1.17], p < 0.00001, I ² = 87 %). At short-term follow-up, quality of life was in favor of laparoscopy.

Conclusions

Incisional hernias are less frequent using the total-laparoscopic approach instead of open abdominal surgery. Whenever possible, the less traumatic access should be chosen.

     

Anterior Approach to Major Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastasis

Purpose

The aim of this study was to examine the merits of the anterior approach, if any, in colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) resection.

Methods

Data of patients who underwent partial hepatectomy for CRLM were reviewed. Patients treated by the anterior approach were compared with patients treated by the conventional approach.

Results

Ninety-eight patients had right hepatectomy, extended right hepatectomy, or right trisectionectomy. Among them, 71 patients underwent the conventional approach (CA group) and 27 underwent the anterior approach (AA group). The two groups were comparable in demographic, pathological, and perioperative characteristics except that the AA group had higher levels of aspartate transaminase (median, 41 vs. 31 U/L; p?=?0.006) and alanine transaminase (median, 27 vs. 22 U/L; p?=?0.009), larger tumors (median, 7 vs. 4 cm; p?=?0.000), and more extensive resections (p <?0.001). The median overall survival was 40 months (range, 0.69–168.6 months) in the CA group and 33.7 months (range, 0.95–99.8 months) in the AA group (p?=?0.22), and the median disease-free survival was 9.7 months (range, 0.62–168.6 months) in the CA group and 6.2 months (range, 0.72–99.8 months) in the AA group (p?=?0.464). Univariate and multivariate analyses identified 4 independent prognostic factors for overall survival: lymph node status of primary tumor (HR 1.352, 95% CI 0.639–2.862, p =?0.034), intraoperative blood loss (HR 1.253, 95% CI 1.039–1.510, p =?0.018), multiple liver tumor nodules (HR 1.775, 95% CI 1.029–3.061, p =?0.039), and microvascular invasion (HR 2.058, 95% CI 1.053–4.024, p =?0.035).

Conclusions

The two approaches resulted in comparable survival outcomes even though the AA group had larger tumors and more extensive resections. The anterior approach allows better mobilization and easier removal of large tumors once the liver is opened up.

     

A systematic review of robotic-assisted liver resection and meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatic neoplasms

Background

Robotic-assisted liver resection (RALR) was introduced as procedures of overcoming the limitations of traditional laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). The aim of this review was to evaluate the surgical results of RALR from all published studies and the results of comparative studies of RALR versus LLR for hepatic neoplasm.

Methods

Eligible studies involved RALR that published between January 2001 and December 2014 were reviewed systematically. Comparisons between RALS and LLR were pooled and analyzed by meta-analytical techniques using random- or fixed-effects models, as appropriate.

Results

In total, 29 studies, involving 537 patients undergoing RALR, were identified. The most common RALR procedure was a wedge resection and segmentectomy (28.67 %), followed by right hepatectomy (17.88 %), left lateral sectionectomy (13.22 %), and bisegmentectomy (9.12 %). The conversion and complication rates were 5.59 and 11.36 %, respectively. The most common reasons for conversion were bleeding (46.67 %) and unclear tumor margin (33.33 %). Intracavitary fluid collections and bile leaks (40.98 %) were the most frequently occurring morbidities. Nine studies, involving 774 patients, were included in meta-analysis. RALR had a longer operative time compared with LLR [mean difference (MD) 48.49; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 22.49–74.49 min; p = 0.0003]. There were no significant differences between the two groups in blood loss [MD 31.53; 95 % CI ?14.74 to 77.79 mL; p = 0.18], hospital stay [MD 0.13; 95 % CI ?0.54 to 0.80 days; p = 0.18], postoperative overall morbidity [odds ratio (OR) 0.76; 95 % CI 0.49–1.19; p = 0.23], and surgical margin status (OR 0.61; 95 % CI 0.33–1.12; p = 0.11); cost was greater than robotic surgery (p = 0.001).

Conclusion

RALR and LLR display similar safety, feasibility, and effectiveness for hepatectomies, but further studies are needed before any final conclusion can be drawn, especially in terms of oncologic and cost-effectiveness outcomes.

     

Postoperative Visceral Tissue Edema Assessed by Computed Tomography Is a Predictor for Severe Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Background/Aims

In pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), the adverse impact of tissue edema owing to intraoperative fluid overload remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate how visceral tissue edema due to fluid overload affects severe postoperative complications after PD. It aims to clarify the usefulness of assessment by computed tomography (CT) of postoperative tissue edema.

Methods

We classified 200 patients who underwent PD as either liberal fluid management (LFM) group (n = 100) or goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) group (n = 100), based on intraoperative fluid management. We assessed postoperative tissue edema by cross section of the body trunk area using pre- and postoperative CT.

Results

Severe complication (Clavien-Dindo more than grade III) rate was significantly higher in LFM group than GDFT group (37 vs. 17%, P = 0.001). Independent risk factors of severe complications after PD included diameter of main pancreatic duct ≤ 3 mm at the cut surface (P = 0.041; OR 2.274; 95% CI 1.034–5.001), LFM (P = 0.005; OR 2.720; 95% CI 1.355–5.462), and increased rate of body trunk area ≥ 20% (P < 0.001; OR 3.448; 95% CI 1.723–5.462). In subgroup analysis of patients with no transfusion, LFM and increased rate of body trunk area ≥ 20% were independent risk factors of severe postoperative complications.

Conclusions

Visceral tissue edema evaluation is a valuable method to predict severe complications after PD.

     

Minimally invasive vs open nephrectomy in the modern era: does approach matter?

Purpose

To evaluate if the widespread adoption of a minimally invasive approach to radical nephrectomy has affected short- and long-term patient outcomes in the modern era.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent radical nephrectomy from 2001 to 2012 was conducted using the US National Cancer Institute Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program and Medicare insurance program database. Patients who underwent open surgery were compared to those who underwent minimally invasive surgery using propensity score matching.

Results

10,739 (85.9%) underwent open surgery and 1776 (14.1%) underwent minimally invasive surgery. Minimally invasive surgery increased from 18.4% from 2001–2004 to 43.5% from 2009 to 2012. After median follow-up of 57.1 months, minimally invasive radical nephrectomy conferred long-term oncologic efficacy in terms of overall (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.75–0.95) survival and cancer-specific (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.54–0.86) survival compared to open radical nephrectomy. Minimally invasive surgery was associated with lower risk of inpatient death [risk ratio (RR) 0.45 with 95% CI: (0.20–0.99), p = 0.04], deep vein thrombosis [RR: 0.35 (0.18–0.69), p = 0.002], respiratory complications [RR: 0.73 (0.60–0.89), p = 0.001], infectious complications [RR: 0.35 (0.14–0.90), p = 0.02], acute kidney injury [RR: 0.66 (0.52–0.84), p < 0.001], sepsis [RR: 0.55 (0.31–0.98), p = 0.04], prolonged length of stay (18.6 vs 30.0%, p < 0.001), and ICU admission (19.7 vs 26.3%, p < 0.001). Costs were similar between the two approaches (30-day costs $15,882 vs $15,564; p = 0.70).

Conclusion

After widespread adoption of minimally invasive approaches to radical nephrectomy across the United States, oncologic standards remain preserved with improved perioperative outcomes at no additional cost burden.

     

A validated preoperative score predicting survival and functional outcome in lung cancer patients operated with posterior decompression and stabilization for metastatic spinal cord compression

Purpose

This study aims to create and validate a score for survival and functional outcome of lung cancer patients with metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) after posterior decompressive surgery.

Methods

The entire cohort of 73 consecutive patients was randomly assigned to a test group (N = 37) and a validation group (N = 36). In the test group, we retrospectively analyzed 10 preoperative characteristics. Characteristics significantly associated with survival on multivariate analysis were included in the score. Patients in the validation group were used to confirm whether the score was reproducible. Postoperative functional outcome was analyzed both in the test and validation groups.

Results

On multivariate analysis, preoperative ambulatory status (P = 0.0017), visceral metastases (P = 0.0002), and time developing motor deficits (P = 0.0004) had significant impact on survival and were included in the scoring system. According to the prognostic scores, which ranged from 0 to 6 points, two risk groups were designed: 0–2 and 3–6 points and the median survival was 2.6 months (95 % CI, 1.0–3.8 months) and 10.7 months (95 % CI, 7.1–13.7 months), respectively (P < 0.0001). In the validation group, the corresponding median survival was 2.7 months (95 % CI, 1.6–5.5 months) and 10.8 months (5.8–13.6 months), respectively (P < 0.0001). In addition, the functional outcome was worse in patients with 0–2 points than in patients with 3–6 points both in the test (P = 0.0023) and validation groups (P = 0.0298).

Conclusion

Patients with scores of 0–2 points, who have short survival time (life expectancy less than 3 months) and poor functional outcome, appear best treated with radiotherapy or best supportive care alone. Surgery may be no longer in consideration in most of the patients in this group. Patients with score of 3–6 points should be surgical candidates, because survival prognosis (life expectancy more than 10 months) and functional outcome are favorable after surgery.

     

Decompression of tension pneumothoraces in Asian trauma patients: greater success with lateral approach and longer catheter lengths based on computed tomography chest wall measurements

Introduction

Our study aims to compare the anterior and lateral approaches for needle thoracostomy (NT) and determine the adequacy of catheter lengths used for NT in Asian trauma patients based on computed tomography chest wall measurements.

Methodology

A retrospective review of chest computed tomography scans of 583 Singaporean trauma patients during period of 2011–2015 was conducted. Four measurements of chest wall thickness (CWT) were taken at the second intercostal space, midclavicular line and fifth intercostal space, midaxillary line bilaterally. Measurements were from the superficial skin layer of the chest wall to the pleural space. Successful NT was defined radiologically as CWT?≤?5 cm.

Results

There were 593 eligible subjects. Mean age was 49.1 years (49.1?±?21.0). Majority were males (77.0%) and Chinese (70.2%). Mean CWT for the anterior approach was 4.04 cm (CI 3.19–4.68) on the left and 3.92 cm (CI 3.17–4.63) on the right. Mean CWT for the lateral approach was 3.52 cm (CI 2.52–4.36) on the left, and 3.62 cm (CI 3.65–4.48) on the right. Mean CWT was shorter in the lateral approach by 0.52 cm on the left and 0.30 cm on the right (p?=?0.001). With a 5.0 cm catheter in the anterior approach, 925 out of 1186 sites (78.8%) will have adequate NT as compared to 98.2% with a 7.0 cm catheter. Similarly, in the lateral approach 1046 out of 1186 (88.2%) will have adequate NT as compared to 98.5% with a 7.0 cm catheter. Obese subjects had significantly higher mean CWT in both approaches (p?=?0.001). There was moderate correlation between BMI and CWT in the anterior approach, r ²?=?0.529 as compared to the lateral approach, r ²?=?0.244.

Conclusion

Needle decompression using the lateral approach or a longer catheter is more likely to succeed in Asian trauma patients. A high BMI is an independent predictor of failure of NT, especially for the anterior as compared to lateral approach.

     

Zonal NephRo Score: external validation for predicting complications after open partial nephrectomy

Purpose

The aim of the study was to externally validate the Zonal NePhRO Score (ZNS) published in 2014 as latest and superior nephrometry score in terms of prediction of perioperative complications and outcome of open partial nephrectomies (OPNs).

Methods

We identified 200 consecutive patients who underwent OPN. Analysis of preoperative CT or MRI scans and retrospective analysis of the patients’ clinical records were performed. Tumour complexity was stratified according to the ZNS into three categories: low (4–6), moderate (7–9) and high (10–12) complexity. Predictors for perioperative complications and surgical parameters were identified using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

Results

Tumour complexity was graded in 19.8 % of the cases as low, in 50.3 % as moderate and in 29.9 % as high. In the multivariate analysis, ZNS was significantly associated with a higher complication rate (OR 1.25, 95 % CI 1.04–1.49, p = 0.014), longer ischaemia time (IT) (β = 1.19, 95 % CI 0.33–2.05, p = 0.007), postoperative drop of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (β = ?1.86, 95 % CI ?3.71 to ?0.01, p = 0.049) and opening of the collecting system (CS) (OR 1.72, 95 % CI 1.40–2.10, p < 0.001). In addition, age and body mass index were identified as independent predictors for complications (OR 1.03, 95 % CI 1.00–1.06, p = 0.043 and OR 1.08, 95 % CI 1.00–1.15, p = 0.031).

Conclusion

The present study is the first external validation of the ZNS as a predictor of perioperative complications in patients undergoing OPN. A higher ZNS score was associated with a longer IT, a higher rate of opening the CS and drop of eGFR.

     

The efficacy of bipolar sealer on blood loss in spine surgery: a meta-analysis

Objective

The purpose of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs was to gather data to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bipolar sealer versus standard electrocautery in the management of spinal disease.

Methods

The electronic databases including Embase, PubMed and Cochrane library were searched to identify relevant studies published from the time of the establishment of these databases up to January 2017. The primary outcomes were total blood loss, requirement of transfusion (rate and amount), and operation time. The secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay and postoperative wound infection. Data analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3 software.

Results

A total of five studies involving 500 patients (261 patients in the BS group and 239 in the control group) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results revealed that application of bipolar sealer could decrease the total blood loss in spine surgery [WMD = ?467.49, 95% CI (685.47 to ?249.51); p < 0.05; I ² = 91%]. Compared with standard electrocautery, bipolar sealer was associated with lower rates of need for transfusion [OR = 0.30, 95% CI (0.16–0.55), p < 0.05; I ² = 0%]. In addition, patients in the BS group were likely to receive less amount of blood transfusion compared with patients in the control group[WMD = ?0.73, 95% CI (?1.37 to ?0.09), p < 0.05; I ² = 76%]. The mean operative time was shorter in the BS groups compared with the control group [SMD = ?0.36, 95% CI (?0.60 to ?0.13), p < 0.05; I ² = 0%]. There was no significant difference in terms of length of hospital stay [WMD = ?0.73, 95% CI (?1.96 to 0.51), p = 0.25; I ² = 67%] and postoperative wound infection [OR = 0.88, 95% CI (0.31–2.48), p = 0.81; I ² = 0.0%] between both groups.

Conclusions

The available evidence suggests that bipolar sealer is superior to standard electrocautery with less blood loss, shorter operation time and less transfusion requirement. There is no significant difference between both groups regarding length of hospitalization and wound infection. Hence, bipolar sealer is recommended in spine surgery. Because of the limitation of our study, more well-designed RCTs with large sample are required to provide further evidence of safety and efficacy between bipolar sealer and standard electrocautery in the treatment of spinal disease.

     

Surgical control and margin status after robotic and open cystectomy in high-risk cases: Caution or equivalence?

Purpose

The benefits of robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) are unclear, especially in patients with high-risk disease (pT3/T4). We evaluated pathological and postoperative outcomes of RARC versus open radical cystectomy (ORC) in these patients.

Methods

We identified bladder cancer patients treated with RARC or ORC from January 2010–August 2014. Clinicodemographic factors were examined for potential confounding. Our primary outcome of interest was positive soft-tissue surgical margins (STSMs). Secondary outcomes included post-operative complications and length of stay (LOS). We used logistic regression to define the association between clinical factors with outcomes of interest, focusing on patients with locally advanced disease.

Results

We identified 472 patients treated with ORC (407, 86.2 %) or RARC (65, 13.8 %) of which 215 (45.6 %) were high-risk cases based on advanced pathologic stage (pT3/4). RARC patients were more commonly men (96.9 vs. 73.2 %, p < 0.01), had better performance status (ECOG 0, 78.5 vs. 59.7 %, p = 0.031), and received less neoadjuvant chemotherapy (21.5 vs. 39.3 %, p = 0.006). Total (52.3 vs. 59.7 %, p = 0.26) and high-grade complication rates (13.8 vs. 19.7 %, p = 0.27) were similar, but median LOS was shorter after RARC (6 vs. 7 days, p < 0.01). On multivariate analysis, prior pelvic radiation (OR: 4.78, 95 % CI: 2.16–10.57), and advanced tumor stage (OR: 3.06, 95 % CI: 1.56–6.03) were independently associated with positive STSMs in high-risk patients but robotic surgical approach was not (OR: 0.81, 95 % CI: 0.29–2.30; p = 0.69).

Conclusion

RARC had similar short-term postoperative outcomes compared to ORC and did not compromise oncological control in patients with extravesical disease.