ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of laryngeal mask versus endotracheal tubes for laparoscopic surgery.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data and CBM databases were electronically searched to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about the efficacy and safety of laryngeal mask versus endotracheal tubes for laparoscopic surgery from inception to April, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 16 RCTs involving 1 593 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: there was no significant difference in the success rate of the first insertion (RR=0.99, 95%CI 0.96 to 1.02, P=0.55). The airway pressure of patients whose position were head higher than foot was significantly lower in the laryngeal mask group than in the tracheal intubation group (MD=–1.20, 95%CI –1.81 to –0.59, P=0.000 1), but there was no significant difference between two groups in reverse position patients (MD=0.48, 95%CI –0.90 to 1.87, P=0.49). The incidence of sore throat (RR=0.58, 95%CI 0.46 to 0.74, P<0.000 01), the incidence of blood stain (RR=0.48, 95%CI 0.30 to 0.77, P=0.002), the incidence of laryngeal spasm/bronchial spasm (OR=0.30, 95%CI 0.11 to 0.80, P=0.02) and the incidence of cough/hiccup (RR=0.10, 95%CI 0.07 to 0.15, P<0.000 01) in the laryngeal mask group were significantly lower than those in the tracheal intubation group.ConclusionThe current evidence shows that compared with tracheal intubation, laryngeal mask can effectively reduce airway pressure of patients whose position are head higher than foot. The risks of various complications are significant higher in tracheal intubation in laparoscopic surgery. Laryngeal mask can maintain patients' normal respiratory functions while reduce damage and do not increase the occurrence of reflux aspiration. Due to limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of different SGLT2 inhibitors in the treatment of heart failure. Methods The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed and EMbase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure from inception to July 2, 2021. Two researchers independently screened literature, extracted data and evaluated the risk of bias of the included studies. Network meta-analysis was then performed using Stata 16.0 software. Results A total of 16 randomized controlled trials, including 15 312 patients, involving 5 interventions, namely dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, canagliflozin, sotagliflozin and ertugliflozin were included. Results of network meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the compound outcome of hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death, hospitalization for heart failure, all-cause mortality, risk of cardiovascular mortality and serious adverse reactions among patients with heart failure among 5 different SGLT2 inhibitors (P>0.05). Compared with placebo, both selective and non-selective SGLT2 inhibitors improved the risk of hospitalization for heart failure, hospitalization for heart failure, or compound cardiovascular mortality (P<0.05), while only selective SGLT2 inhibitors improved the risk of cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and serious adverse events (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between them (P>0.05). The area under the cumulative ordering probability curve of selective and non-selective SGLT2 inhibitors ranked first and second, except for the combined outcome of heart failure or cardiovascular death. Conclusion The current evidence indicates that there is no significant difference in the efficacy and safety of the 5 different SGLT2 inhibitors in the treatment of heart failure, and there is no significant difference between selective SGLT2 inhibitors and non-selective SGLT2 inhibitors. Due to the limited quantity and quality of included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the clinical utilization of robotic bronchoscopes in diagnosis of pulmonary nodules, including MonarchTM and IonTM platforms, and then evaluate the efficacy and safety of the procedure. MethodsPubMed, EMbase, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched by computer for literature about the biopsy of pulmonary nodules with robotic bronchoscope from January 2018 to February 14, 2022. The quality of research was evaluated with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RevMan 5.4 software was used to conduct the meta-analysis. ResultsFinally, 19 clinical studies with 1 542 patients and 1 697 targeted pulmonary nodules were included, of which 13 studies used the IonTM platform and 6 studies used the MonarchTM platform. The overall diagnostic rate of the two systems was 84.96% (95%CI 62.00%-95.00%), sensitivity for malignancy was 81.79% (95%CI 43.00%-96.00%), the mean maximum diameter of the nodules was 16.22 mm (95%CI 10.98-21.47), the mean procedure time was 61.86 min (95%CI 46.18-77.54) and the rate of complications occurred was 4.76% (95%CI 2.00%-15.00%). There was no statistical difference in the outcomes between the two systems. Conclusion Robotic bronchoscope provides a high efficacy and safety in biopsy of pulmonary nodules, and has a broad application prospect for pulmonary nodules diagnosis.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of intravertebral analgesia for external cephalic version. Methods We electronically searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2009), PubMed (1980 to 2009), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to 2009), Ovid EBM Database (1991 to 2009), EMbase (1980 to 2009), CBM (1978 to 2009) and CNKI (1979 to 2009) to collect literature about intravertebral analgesia for external cephalic version. We screened randomized controlled trials (RCTs) according to the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data and evaluated the quality of the included studies, and then performed meta-analyses by using RevMan 5.0.13 software. Results Seven RCTs involving 620 women met the inclusion criteria. Five trials were of relatively high quality, and 1 of low quality and 2 not clear. The result of meta-analyses showed that intravertebral analgesia was superior in external cephalic version with a RR 1.53 and 95%CI 1.24 to 1.88. Conclusion Intravertebral analgesia can increase the successful rate of external cephalic version in the treatment of breech presentation compared with intravenous medicine for systematic use or no analgesia.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of different doses of metoprolol in the treatment of primary hypertension.Methods We searched for randomized controlled trials of different doses of metoprolol in the treatment of primary hypertension. We screened relevant studies according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, evaluated the quality of the included studies, and performed meta-analyses by using The Cochrane Collaboration’s Revman 4.2.8 software. Results Five randomized controlled trials of different doses of metoprolol in the treatment of primary hypertension were included. Two were of high quality and the other three were of low quality. No study reported mortality or the incidence of cardiovascular events, but four studies reported the means and standard deviations of systolic and diastolic blood pressures and heart rate. Based on the two self-control studies, meta-analyses of the levels of systolic and diastolic blood pressures before and after treatment of different doses of metoprolol showed that the combined OR for systolic blood pressure levels was -4.62 [95%CI (-7.77, -1.47), P=0.004]; and for the diastolic blood pressure levels, the combined OR was -5.71 [95%CI (-6.75, -4.68), Plt;0.000 01]. Four studies reported adverse reactions, and meta-analysis of the incidence of non-specific adverse reactions showed that the combined OR was 2.61 [95%CI (1.33, 5.13), P=0.005]. Conclusion A dose-effect relationship may exist between the dose of metoprolol and antihypertensive effect in the treatment of hypertension. When the antihypertensive effect of low-dose metoprolol was inadequate, an increase in the dose may lower blood pressure further. Although high-dose metoprolol has higher incidence of adverse reactions, it can be tolerated by most patients. Therefore, in the treatment of hypertension with metoprolol, an individualized dosing regimen can be applied according to the patient’s tolerance, and blood pressure may be controlled ideally by a gradual increase of the metoprolol dose to its maximum tolerated dose.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and antiviral antibody therapy in the treatment of COVID-19. MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP and SinoMED databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine and antiviral antibody therapies for COVID-19 from inception to June 2022. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies; then, network meta-analysis was performed by using Stata 14.0 software. ResultsA total of 44 RCTs were included. The results of network meta-analysis showed that, for mortality rate, the rank of cumulative probability was: TCM+ standard care (SC) (100%)>convalescent plasma (CP)+SC (42%)>SC (8%). In terms of hospital stay time, the rank of cumulative probability was: TCM+SC (95.5%)>SC (31.4%)>CP+SC (23.2%). In terms of time to viral clearance, the rank of cumulative probability was: TCM+SC (97.4%)>SC (37.4%)>CP+SC (15.2%). In the aspect of mechanical ventilation rate, the rank of cumulative probability was: TCM+SC (98.9%)>CP+SC (42.9%)>SC (8.3%). In the aspect of adverse reactions/events, the rank of cumulative probability was: TCM+SC (99.9%)>SC (47.9%)>CP+SC (2.2%). ConclusionThe current evidence shows that TCM combined with SC is the most effective treatment in reducing mortality, shortening hospitalization time and viral negative conversion time, reducing mechanical ventilation rate, and the incidence of adverse reactions/events is low. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
ObjectiveTo summary the safety and efficiency of the minimally invasive direct cardiac surgery (MIDCS) approach in elderly patients with heart disease. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 60 patients underwent MIDCS in Beijng Anzhen Hospital between April 2010 and January 2013. There were 34 males and 26 females with mean age of 66.4±4.8 years and mean weight of 66.1±10.6 kg. ResultsMean cardiopulmonary bypass time and aortic cross-clamp time was 141.2±57.2 minutes and 99.8±37.6 minutes respectively. A total of 37 patients (90.2%) recovered to beat automatically after heart ceased operation. Median mechanical ventilation time was 17.1±9.1 hours. Mean intensive care unit stay was 22.1±12.2 hours. Mean post operative hospital stay was 7.0±2.5 days. Mean incision length was 5.3±0.9 cm. Mean pericardial draining volume was 466.6±412.1 ml in the first day after operation. No transfusion occurred in 27 (45.0%) patients. Early postoperative mortality was 3.3% (2/60). There were 2 patients of reexplorations for bleeding, 1 patient of the twice tracheal intubation, 1 patient of cardiac arrest after operation, 2 patients of poor healing of skin incision, and 1 patient of injury of right phrenic nerve. When leaving hospital, 47 patients were in heart functional class Ⅰ, 8 patients in class Ⅱ, and 3 patients in class Ⅲ. ConclusionMIDCS is associated with good operative effect in the near future with superior safety and broad application range in elderly patients with heart disease.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of different uses of oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC) in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for lung cancer resection to provide a reference for the selection, clinical use, and rational utilization of absorbable hemostatic materials. MethodsA retrospective analysis of relevant data from inpatients who underwent VATS for lung cancer resection at a tertiary hospital from July 2019 to January 2020 and from July 2020 to December 2020 was conducted. Patients were divided into two groups based on the use of ORC: 1) combined use group (ORC and collagen sponge) and 2) sole-use group (ORC). Safety, efficacy, and economic outcome indicators were compared between the two groups. ResultsThe main analysis included a total of 904 patients, with 466 in the combined use group and 438 in the sole-use group. Compared to the combined use group, the sole-use group had a significantly longer hospital stay, used fewer hemostatic drugs, had a lower average cost of hemostatic materials, and a lower median total hospitalization cost (P<0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss volume, massive blood loss rate, perioperative transfusion rate, reoperation rate, postoperative 48-hour drainage volume, bloody drainage fluid rate, or postoperative laboratory test indicators. ConclusionThere was no significant difference in the safety or efficacy of VATS for lung cancer resection between the sole use of ORC and the combined use of ORC, but the sole use of ORC was associated with a lower cost of hemostatic materials and a lower total hospitalization cost. The sole use of hemostatic gauze in VATS for lung cancer resection may be a more cost-effective choice.