Abstract： Objective To summarize the clinical outcomes of maze procedure using bipolar radiofrequency ablation accompanied with valve replacement for the surgical treatment of permanent atrial fibrillation（AF） and rheumatic valve diseases. Methods A total of 124 patients with permanent AF and rheumatic valves diseases undergoing surgical treatment from March 2006 to October 2010 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University were randomly divided into ablation group and control group using coin method with 62 patients in each group. The mean atrial fibrillation duration was（56.1±47.1） months in ablation group, and patients in this group underwent maze procedure using bipolar radiofrequency ablation and valve replacement. The mean atrial fibrillation duration was（43.8±25.6） months in control group, and patients in this group underwent only valve replacement. Demographic characteristics, cardiopulmonary bypass（CPB）time, aortic cross-clamping（ACC）time, mechanical ventilation time, intensive care unit（ICU） length of stay, postoperative complications and follow-up outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results The demographic characteristics of the two groups were not statistically different （P＞0.05）. The CPB time and ACC time between the two groups were not statistically different （P＞ 0.05）. The postoperative hospital stay of ablation group was significantly longer than that of control group （15.8±6.1 d vs. 12.9±3.1d，P=0.001）. No patient needed permanent pacemaker implantation in either group. Postoperative ejection fraction of ablation group was significantly higher than that of control group（59.6%±9.2% vs. 55.5%±5.4%，P＜ 0.01）. The rate of sinus rhythm maintenance at 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months during follow-up in ablation group were 88.5%, 87.5%, 87.1% and 82.4% respectively, 3.3%, 2.2%, 0.0%, and 0.0% in control group respectively, which was statistically different between the two groups（P＜ 0.05）. Conclusion Maze procedure using bipolar radiofrequency ablation is an effective surgical procedure for the treatment of permanent atrial fibrillation.
Objective To compare efficacy of laparoscopic surgery and open surgery in treatment of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Methods The relevant literatures were retrieved from databases including CNKI, CBM, Wanfang, VIP, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase from 2007 to 2017, all the relevant randomized controlled trial (RCT) or non-randomized controlled trial (NRCT) of laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery in patients with rectal cancer were collected according to the inclusion and exclusion criterial. Two reviewers independently screened the literatures, extracted the data, and assessed the bias risk of the included studies. Then, the meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Results A total of 11 RCTs and 9 NRCTs involving 2 036 patients with rectal cancer were included, of these, including 1 021 cases of laparoscopic surgery and 1 015 cases of open surgery. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the operation time was increased ［WMD=14.21, 95% CI (1.92, 26.51)］, the intraoperative blood loss ［WMD=–38.96, 95% CI (–60.29, –7.63)］, first postoperative exhaust time ［WMD=–0.86, 95% CI (–1.14, –0.57)］, first postoperative intake food time ［WMD=–0.89, 95% CI (–1.15, –0.62)］, and postoperative hospitalization time ［WMD=–2.38, 95% CI (–3.44, –1.32)］ were reduced in the laparoscopic surgery as compared with the open surgery; the rate of the sphincter-saving was increased ［OR=2.35, 95% CI (1.67, 3.30)］, the rates of the local recurrence ［OR=0.25, 95% CI (0.13, 0.47)］, postoperative overall complications ［OR=0.34, 95% CI (0.26, 0.43)］, infection of incision ［OR=0.39, 95% CI (0.25, 0.62)］, intestinal obstruction ［OR=0.30, 95% CI (0.17, 0.53)］, lung infection ［OR=0.32, 95% CI (0.18, 0.57)］, and anastomotic fistula ［OR=0.40, 95% CI (0.22, 0.73)］ were decreased in the laparoscopic surgery as compared with the open surgery; the intraoperative lymph node resection ［WMD=–0.99, 95% CI (–2.11, 0.12)］, the rates of the 3-year disease-free survival ［OR=0.91, 95% CI (0.54, 1.54)］, pelvic infection ［OR=0.64, 95% CI (0.17, 2.45)］, anastomotic bleeding ［OR=0.54, 95% CI (0.22, 1.34)］, urinary retention ［OR=0.71, 95% CI (0.34, 1.48)］, and urinary tract infection ［OR=1.22, 95% CI (0.45, 3.30)］ had no significant differences between these two surgeries. Conclusion Laparoscopy surgery is still safer, more effective, and more reliable than conventional open surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer, but it needs more clinical RCTs to further provide accurate and reliable results.