Endoscopic gastroplasty to treat medically uncontrolled obesity needs more quality data: A systematic review

Endoscopic gastroplasty (EG) has been used in clinical practice to treat obesity. This systematic review has the objective of assessing if there is an acceptable level of scientific evidence on the safety and effectiveness of EG. A thorough search strategy was used up to October 2018, including the 2 most common techniques: endoscopic suturing and the primary obesity surgery endolumenal procedure. The quality of the studies was evaluated through the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for use in Systematic Reviews—“Checklist for Case Series”—and summarized using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Only 1 randomized controlled trial (moderate GRADE evidence) was found, and the remaining were case reports or small case series (very low GRADE evidence). The literature has low scientific quality. All studies, with 1 exception, are small case series with short follow-up. One of the randomized controlled trials did not meet the primary endpoint for weight loss in both groups (EG × sham) after 1-year follow-up. The case series reported from 16% to 19% total weight loss, but few had more than 6 months of follow-up. Serious adverse events ranged from 2% to 10%. Based on current literature, there is not enough quality scientific evidence regarding long-term weight loss and the procedure’s safety to recommend the use of EG in current clinical practice.     

经后颅窝乙状窦后入路三叉神经微血管减压术的快速康复外科护理

目的 探讨快速康复外科 （FTS）理念在经后颅窝乙状窦后入路三叉神经微血管减压术围术期患者护理中的应用效果。方法 选择2018年1月~2019年1月我院收治并行经后颅窝乙状窦后入路三叉神经微血管减压患者100例，随机分成观察组和对照组，每组50例。对照组应用常规方法进行围术期护理，观察组应用FTS理念进行围术期护理。比较两组焦虑情况、术后并发症发生率、平均住院日及平均住院费用。结果 观察组轻度焦虑多于对照组，中、重度焦虑少于对照组（P＜0.05）；观察组术后并发症发生率低于对照组[恶心呕吐（4.00% vs 16.00%）、尿路感染（4.00% vs 18.00%）、颅内感染（0 vs 8.00%）、颅内血肿（2.00% vs 14.00%）和术后应激性疼痛（16.00% vs 34.00%）]，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；观察组平均住院日和平均住院费用均低于对照组[（9.13±1.14）d vs（12.44±0.89）d]；[（2.15±0.66）万元 vs （3.05±0.61）万元]，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论 应用FTS理念能缓解经后颅窝乙状窦后入路三叉神经微血管减压术患者术前紧张恐惧的心理，减少术后并发症，缩短患者住院日，降低住院费用，护理效果较好。     

电视辅助胸腔镜下解剖性肺切除治疗I期肺癌的临床效果

目的 探讨电视辅助胸腔镜下解剖性肺切除治疗Ⅰ期肺癌的临床效果。方法 采用回顾性研究方法,选取2015年5月至2017年1月广西医科大学附属肿瘤医院收治的I期肺癌患者84例,按照手术方法不同将患者分为两组:观察组和对照组,每组各42例。观察组患者实施电视辅助胸腔镜下解剖性肺切除术治疗,对照组患者给予传统开胸肺叶切除术治疗。比较两组患者的住院时间、切口长度、术中出血量、手术时间、1年和3年生存情况及生活质量评分(SF-36生活量表)变化。结果 观察组患者的住院时间短于对照组(6. 13±1. 46 vs. 10. 39±2. 41 d),切口长度小于对照组(4. 38±1. 09 vs. 11. 84±3. 25 cm),术中出血量少于对照组(284. 62±54. 21 vs. 397. 57±61. 49 ml),差异均具有统计学意义(P <0. 05);而两组手术时间比较(165. 28±33. 24 vs. 156. 39±30. 92 min),差异无统计学意义(P> 0. 05)。观察组患者的1、3年生存率[97. 62%(41/42)、90. 48%(38/42)]均高于对照组[88. 10%(37/42)、76. 19%(32/42)],但差异无统计学意义(P> 0. 05)。观察组患者的各项生活质量评分[精神健康(75. 42±6. 87 vs 61. 30±4. 15分)、情感职能(81. 38±7. 15 vs. 73. 49±5. 76分)、社会功能(82. 67±5. 78 vs. 75. 42±4. 35分)、一般健康状况(79. 49±6. 17 vs.70. 31±5. 04分)、精力(84. 37±5. 45 vs. 74. 13±6. 07分)、生理职能(86. 52±6. 88 vs. 76. 93±6. 42分)、躯体疼痛(83. 46±7. 49 vs. 74. 33±5. 79分)、生理功能(70. 39±4. 31 vs. 61. 38±3. 56分)]均高于对照组,且差异具有统计学意义(P <0. 05)。结论 与传统开胸肺叶切除术相比,电视辅助胸腔镜下解剖性肺切除治疗I期肺癌手术损伤更小、短期生存率更高,且有助于提高患者术后生活质量水平,这对改善患者预后有重要意义,值得临床推广应用。     

腹腔镜下子宫双侧动脉阻断术联合清宫术治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠疗效分析

目的 探讨腹腔镜下子宫双侧动脉阻断术联合清宫术治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠疗效及对内分泌的影响.方法 选择2011年1月至2015年12月剖宫产瘢痕妊娠患者57例,其中A组32例患者给予超声引导下清宫术治疗,B组25例患者给予腹腔镜下子宫双侧动脉阻断术联合清宫术治疗,比较两组患者出血量、住院时间、月经复潮时间、术后人绒毛膜促性腺激素(hCG)降至正常时间,并发症情况及术前(T0)、术后第1d(T1)、第3d(T2)神经内分泌激素水平.结果 ①B组患者出血量低于A组,住院时间、月经复潮时间短于A组,比较差异有统计学意义(t出血量=31.85,k院时间=9.36,t月经复t潮时间=16.37,均P＜0.05);②B组患者并发症发生率为8.00％,低于A组的15.63％,比较差异有统计学意义(x2=9.35,P＜0.05);③B组T1、T2血清COR、β-EP、GLU水平低于A组(CORF交互=17.67,β-EPF交互=132.36,6LUF交互=155.38,均P＜0.05).结论 腹腔镜下子宫双侧动脉阻断术联合清宫术治疗剖宫产瘢痕妊娠微创优势明显,安全性高,对内分泌影响较轻.     

New Zealand Emergency Medicine Network: A collaboration for acute care research in New Zealand

The specialty of emergency medicine in Australasia is coming of age. As part of this maturation there is a need for high‐quality evidence to inform practice. This article describes the development of the New Zealand Emergency Medicine Network, a collaboration of committed emergency care researchers who share the vision that New Zealand/Aotearoa will have a world‐leading, patient‐centred emergency care research network, which will improve emergency care for all, so that people coming to any ED in the country will have access to the same world‐class emergency care.