ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety between intrathoracic anastomosis (IA) and cervical anastomosis (CA) after esophagectomy using gastric tube. MethodsWe electronically searched databases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 11, 2014), Web of Knowledge, CNKI, CBM, and WanFang Data for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of IA vs. CA after esophagectomy using gastric tube from inception to Nov, 2014. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 10 RCTs involving 1 138 patients were included, of which, 570 patients were in the IA group and the other 568 patients were in the CA group. The results of meta-analysis showed that the incidences of anastomotic leak (RR=2.72, 95%CI 1.67 to 4.45, P<0.05) and injury of recurrent laryngeal nerve (RR=5.64, 95%CI 2.41 to 13.18, P<0.05) in the IA group were significantly lower than those in the CA group, but the IA group had a higher rate of positive margins (RR=0.25, 95%CI 0.09 to 0.67, P<0.05). There were no significant differences between two groups in postoperative anastomotic stricture (RR=1.12, 95%CI 0.73 to 1.74), pulmonary complications (RR=1.10, 95%CI 0.60 to 2.01), operation mortality (RR=1.03, 95%CI 0.55 to 1.94), tumor recurrence (RR=1.57, 95%CI 0.72 to 3.44) and chylothorax (RR=0.76, 95%CI 0.24 to 2.36). ConclusionIA after esophagectomy using gastric tube has lower rates of anastomotic leak and injury of recurrent laryngeal nerve than CA but with a higher rate of positive margins. There are no significant differences between the two surgical operations in operation mortality, postoperative anastomotic stricture and pulmonary complications. IA could reduce the incidence of postoperative complications and is an effective and safe surgical operation for digestive tract reconstruction after esophagectomy. Due to limited quality and quantity of included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify the conclusion for long-term efficacy and the quality of life.
ObjectiveTo explore the risk factors of myasthenic crisis after thymectomy (MCAT) for patients with myasthenia gravis (MG). MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 8, 2015), Web of Knowledge, CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data from inception to August 31, 2015, to collect case-control studies and retrospective cohort studies about the MCAT for patients with MG. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed using Stata 13.0 software. ResultsA total of 17 studies involving 394 patients with myasthenic crisis and 1642 controls were included. Of the 17 studies, 11 were retrospective cohort studies and 6 were case-control studies. The results of meta-analysis showed that:a) univariate analysis indicated that history of myasthenic crisis (OR=8.05, 95%CI 5.80 to 11.15, P<0.01), bulbar symptoms (OR=5.10, 95%CI 3.01 to 8.67, P<0.01), preoperative severity of gravis (Osserman-stage) (OR=10.55, 95%CI 7.28 to 15.30, P<0.01), postoperative pulmonary infection (OR=10.77, 95%CI 3.88 to 29.95, P<0.01), thymoma (OR=2.37, 95%CI 1.50 to 3.75, P<0.01), dose of pyridostigmine (MD=0.45, 95%CI 0.29 to 0.62, P<0.01), AChRAb level >100 nmol/L (OR=12.14, 95%CI 4.80 to 30.73, P<0.01) and operation time (MD=0.57, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.88, P<0.01) were the risk factors of MCAT; b) multivariate analysis showed that, history of myasthenic crisis (OR=5.06, 95%CI 2.30 to 11.14, P<0.01), bulbar symptoms (OR=5.21, 95%CI 2.62 to 10.35, P<0.01), preoperative severity of gravis (Osserman-stage) (OR=5.82, 95%CI 2.60 to 13.04, P<0.01) and AChRAb level >100 nmol/L (OR=8.38, 95%CI 3.31 to 23.08, P<0.01) were the independent risk factors of MCAT. ConclusionThe independent risk factors of MCAT for patients with MG are history of myasthenic crisis, bulbar symptoms, preoperative severity of gravis (Osserman-stage) and AChRAb level >100 nmol/L.