【Abstract】Objective To investigate the influent factors on normal intraabdominal pressure （IAP） and establish the IAP regressive equation. Methods The IAPs of 106 hospitalized patients were determined through monitoring the bladder pressures. The relationship between IAP and 14 factors including age, gender, height, weight, body mass index （BMI）, previous and recent abdominal surgical history, reasons for admission，complications and their quantities were analyzed，respectively.Results The mean IAP of the hospitalized patients was 5.5 mm Hg with a range from 0.4 mm Hg to 12.8 mm Hg. The difference among IAPs of different grades of BMIs had statistical significance （F=5.550，P＜0.01）. The male IAPs were 2.0 mm Hg higher than the female IAPs，which had statistical significance （t=3.122，P＜0.01）. The other 12 factors had no significant effects on IAP （Pgt;0.05）. Conclusion Normal IAP is possibly influenced by gender and BMI，and it is individually different.
Objective To assess the efficacy of high-dose chemotherapy versus moderate-dose chemotherapy in the treatment of osteosarcoma. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMbase, OVID database, CBMdisc, Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library, and handsearched Journal of Chinese Oncology, Journal of Chinese Clinical Oncology and Tumor. The search time was updated to Feburary 2006.The quality of the included studies was evaluated by two reviewers and meta-analyses were performed on the results of homogenous studies. Results Four studies involving 937 participants with primary, high-grade and non-metastatic extremity osteosarcoma were included. All the included studies were judged to be inadequate at reporting randomization and blinding, only one reported allocation concealment. All included studies reported the number of withdrawals and the reasons for these. The meta-analyses showed that there were no significant differences in 5-year event free survival (EFS) (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.96 to1.25), 5-year overall survival (OS) (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.97 to1.20), local recurrence rate (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.57), proportion of good histological response (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.07), proportion of limb salvage [RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.02) between the high-dose group and the moderate-dose group. The 5-year EFS of the good histological response group was significantly higher than in the poor histological response group [OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.76 to 3.39,Plt;0.00001 ). Conclusions No advantage is shown for high-dose chemotherapy over moderate-dose chemotherapy in 5-year EFS, 5-year OS, local recurrence rate, proportion of good histological response and proportion of limb salvage. Histological response to preoperative chemotherapy is an independent prognosis factor for osteosarcoma. Due to the potential risk of selection bias, performance bias and publication bias, the evidence is not b enough to judge whether high-dose chemotherapy is better than moderate-dose chemotherapy in the treatment of osteosarcoma. Our conclusion suggests that large-scale randomized trials should be performed.
Objictive To evaluate the efficacy of decompression with and without fusion in the treatment of degenerative lumbar disease. Methods We searched the Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2006), MEDLINE (1966 to April, 2006), EMBASE (1984 to April, 2006), the China Biological Medicine Database (to Dec., 2005), VIP (1989 to April, 2006) and hand-searched several related journals for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized controlled trials (quasi-RCTs) involving the comparison of the outcomes between decompression with and without fusion in the treatment of degenerative lumbar disease. The quality of the included trials was assessed. RevMan 4.2.8 software was used for statistical analysis. Results Seven studies involving 412 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis indicated that no statistically significant differences were observed between the two operative procedures in the cumulative clinical outcome (OR1.83, 95%CI 0.92, 3.41), incidence of postoperative leg pain (OR 1.04, 95%CI 0.48, 2.25), incidence of perioperative complications (OR 1.15, 95%CI 0.51, 2.60), incidence of re-operation (OR 0.68, 95%CI 0.30, 1.56) or pre and postoperative pain scores [Pre-op WMD 0.12, 95%CI (-0.44,0.68); Post-op WMD 0.08, 95%CI (-1.08,1.25)]. The only statistical significance was observed in the incidence of postoperative back pain (OR 0.25, 95%CI 0.14, 0.46). Four studies described the length of operation, the intraoperative blood loss, the duration of external fixation postoperative and the total cost in hospital, which revealed that decompression alone was superior to decompression plus fusion. Three studies described the relationships between the clinical outcome and the changes in segmental range of motion/disc height pre- and post-operatively, as well as the flexion-extension radiographs, which revealed that decompression plus fusion was superior to decompression alone. Conclusions There are no significant differences between the two procedures in clinical outcomes, incidences of postoperative leg pain, re-operation and complications. Decompression with fusion leads to fewer patients suffering from postoperative lumbago than that of decompression alone. There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the radiographs may predict the clinical outcomes. More high quality, large-scale randomized controlled trials are required.