Safety and Efficacy of the Moderate Sedation During Flexible Bronchoscopic Procedure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Moderate sedatives have been increasingly used to improve patient comfort during flexible bronchoscopy (FB). However, routine use of moderate sedation during FB is controversial because its efficacy and safety are not well established.This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of moderate sedation during FB.A search was made of Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to May 2014.Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were included.The main analysis was designed to examine the efficacy of moderate sedation during FB in sedation than no-sedation.The willingness to repeat FB was significantly more in sedation than no-sedation (odds ratio [OR] 2.30; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–4.73; P = 0.02; I² = 22.5). The duration of FB was shorter in sedation group than no-sedation group (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.21; 95% CI −0.38 to −0.03; P = 0.02; I² = 78.3%). Event of hypoxia was not significantly different between sedation and no-sedation groups (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.42–1.73; P = 0.67; I² = 0%). The SpO₂ during procedure was not different between sedation and no-sedation groups (SMD −0.14; 95% CI −0.37 to 0.08; P = 0.21; I² = 49.9%). However, in subgroup analysis without supplemental oxygen, the SpO₂ was significantly lower in sedation than no-sedation group (SMD −0.45; 95% CI −0.78 to −0.11; P = 0.01; I² = 0.0%).According to this meta-analysis, moderate sedation in FB would be useful in patients who will require repeated bronchoscopies as well as safe in respiratory depression. To our knowledge, although the various sedative drugs are already used in the real field, this analysis was the first attempt to quantify objective results. We anticipate more definite and studies designed to elucidate standardized outcomes for moderate sedation in FB.     

Assessment of the reporting of quality and outcome measures in hepatic resections: a call for 90-day reporting in all hepatectomy series

BackgroundThe aim of this paper is to assess the current state of quality and outcomes measures being reported for hepatic resections in the recent literature.MethodsMedline and PubMed databases were searched for English language articles published between 1 January 2002 and 30 April 2013. Two examiners reviewed each article and relevant citations for appropriateness of inclusion, which excluded papers of liver donor hepatic resections, repeat hepatectomies or meta-analyses. Data were extracted and summarized by two examiners for analysis.ResultsFifty-five studies were identified with suitable reporting to assess peri-operative mortality in hepatic resections. In only 35% (19/55) of the studies was the follow-up time explicitly stated, and in 47% (26/55) of studies peri-operative mortality was limited to in-hospital or 30 days. The time period in which complications were captured was not explicitly stated in 19 out of 28 studies. The remaining studies only captured complications within 30 days of the index operation (8/28). There was a paucity of quality literature addressing truly patient-centred outcomes.ConclusionQuality outcomes after a hepatic resection are inconsistently reported in the literature. Quality outcome studies for a hepatectomy should report mortality and morbidity at a minimum of 90 days after surgery.     

Dorsal suspension for Morton’s neuroma: A comparison with neurectomy

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate and compare the clinical outcomes of dorsal suspension with those of neurectomy for the treatment of Morton’s neuroma.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study of dorsal suspension and neurectomy group. The dorsal suspension was performed by dorsal transposition of neuroma over the dorsal transverse ligament after neurolysis. The visual analog scale (VAS), the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), postoperative satisfaction, and complications were evaluated.ResultsBoth groups reported significant pain relief, and there were no significant differences between the groups with respect to postoperative pain. The postoperative FAAM outcomes showed no significant between-group differences. Satisfaction analysis showed ‘excellent’ and ‘good’ results in the dorsal suspension and neurectomy groups (95% and 77.7%, respectively). Complications of numbness and paresthesia reported in the dorsal suspension group (5% and 5%, respectively) were significantly fewer than those of neurectomy group (61.1% and 33.3%, respectively) (both, p < .05).ConclusionsWith its favorable results, dorsal suspension can be another operative option for the treatment of Morton’s neuroma.Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative case series.     

肝细胞癌TACE术后病灶存活或复发18F-FDGPET/CT和增强CT诊断价值Meta分析

目的采用Meta分析方法评价¹⁸F-脱氧葡萄糖正电子发射计算机体层摄影(¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT)和增强CT(CECT)诊断经导管肝动脉化疗栓塞术(TACE)术后存活或复发病灶的临床价值。方法根据PRISMA报告规范开展Meta分析。检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、中国知网、万方和维普数据库中¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT和CECT诊断TACE术后存活或复发病灶的临床研究,时间至2019-04。由2位研究人员独立筛选文献、提取资料,根据诊断准确性研究质量评价工具-2(QUADAS-2)评价纳入研究的偏倚风险后,采用Stata 12.0软件进行Meta分析,计算其汇总敏感度(Sen)和特异度(Spe),绘制受试者工作特征曲线(SROC)并计算曲线下面积(AUC)。结果共纳入10篇¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT及13篇CECT诊断TACE术后存活或复发病灶的原始研究,分别包括322例患者的467个病灶和748例患者的943个病灶。Meta分析显示,¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT诊断TACE术后存活或复发病灶的Sen=0.92(95%CI为0.87~0.94)、Spe=0.95(95%CI为0.82~0.99)、AUC=0.97(95%CI为0.93~0.99);CECT诊断TACE术后存活或复发病灶的Sen=0.72(95%CI为0.66~0.78)、Spe=0.99(95%CI为0.93~1.00)、AUC=0.87(95%CI为0.83~0.89)。此外,CECT诊断TACE术后存活或复发Sen(Z=2.34,P=0.02)和AUC(Z=2.21,P=0.03)值低于¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT,差异有统计学意义。结论相比于CECT,¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT对TACE术后存活或复发病灶具有较高诊断效能,可视为TACE术后存活或复发病灶有效的影像学诊断方法。