Project description:BackgroundCervical cerclage has been proposed as an effective treatment for cervical insufficiency, but there has been controversy regarding the surgical options of cervical cerclage in singleton and twin pregnancies. This study aimed to compare the pregnancy outcomes between transvaginal cervical cerclage (TVC) and laparoscopic abdominal cervical cerclage (LAC) in patients with cervical insufficiency. We also aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety, and provide more evidence to support the application of cervical cerclage in twin pregnancies.MethodsA retrospective study was carried out from January 2015 to December 2021. The primary outcomes were the incidence of spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB) < 24 weeks, < 28, < 32, < 34 weeks, and < 37weeks, gestational age at delivery, and the incidence of admission for threatened abortion or preterm birth after cervical cerclage. The secondary outcomes included admission to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, adverse neonatal outcomes and neonatal death. We also analysed the pregnancy outcomes of twin pregnancies after cervical cerclage.ResultsA total of 289 patients were identified as eligible for inclusion. The LAC group (n = 56) had a very low incidence of sPTB ˂ 34 weeks, and it was associated with a significant decrease in sPTB < 28 weeks, ˂32 weeks, ˂34 and < 37 weeks, and admission to the hospital during pregnancy for threatened abortion or preterm birth after cervical cerclage (0 vs.27%; 1.8% vs. 40.3%; 7.1% vs. 46.8%; 14% vs. 63.5%, 8.9% vs. 62.2%, respectively; P < 0.001), and high in gestational age at delivery compared with the TVC group (n = 233) (38.3 weeks vs.34.4 weeks,P < 0.001). Neonatal outcomes in the LAC group were significantly better than those in the TVC group. The mean gestational age at delivery was 34.3 ± 1.8 weeks, with a total foetal survival rate of 100% without serious neonatal complications in twin pregnancies with LAC.ConclusionIn patients with cervical insufficiency, LAC appears to have better pregnancy outcomes than TVC. For some patients, LAC is a recommended option and may be selected as the first choice. Even in twin pregnancies, cervical cerclage can improve pregnancy outcomes with a longer latency period, especially in the LAC group.
Project description:IntroductionVaginal suturing can be challenging to teach and learn due to the surgical assistant's limited operative field visualization. Data on resident training and comfort with cerclage placement using models are limited. The aim of this activity was to assess learner satisfaction with practice using a novel model allowing for full visualization during transvaginal cervical cerclage placement.MethodsOB/GYN residents participated in a 1-hour combined lecture and hands-on cerclage training simulation with the novel model. Pre- and postsession survey responses were assessed with descriptive statistics and paired t tests.ResultsTwenty residents with a median of 2 (SD = 1.6) years of residency experience participated. Ninety-five percent reported no prior cerclage simulation training; 60% reported placing cerclages in practice. Pre- and posttest analysis indicated a significant decrease in perceived need for further training (M = 4.05, SD = 1.07, vs. M = 3.45, SD = 0.86; p = .024) and an increase in comfort performing a cerclage placement (M = 2.55, SD = 1.16, vs. M = 3.85, SD = 0.79; p < .001). After the simulation, residents reported more comfort in cerclage placement with decreasing supervision (M = 2.05, SD = 1.02, vs. M = 2.30, SD = 1.01; p = .021); 90% reported that learning to place a cerclage was easy.DiscussionImplementing a novel, low-cost model allowing full operative field visualization significantly improved reported comfort regarding cervical cerclage placement and resulted in high satisfaction amongst residents. Future research should evaluate the training's impact on clinical skills.
Project description:ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the evidence across surgical specialties as to whether staples or sutures better improve patient and provider level outcomes.DesignA systematic review of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis of pooled estimates.ResultsEleven systematic reviews, including 13,661 observations, met the inclusion criteria. In orthopaedic surgery sutures were found to be preferable, and for appendicial stump sutures were protective against both surgical site infection and post surgical complications. However, staples were protective against leak in ilecolic anastomosis. For all other surgery types the evidence was inconclusive with wider confidence intervals including the possibly of preferential outcomes for surgical site infection or post surgical complication for either staples or sutures. Whilst reviews showed substantial variation in mean differences in operating time (I(2) 94%) there was clear evidence of a reduction in average operating time across all surgery types. Few reviews reported on length of stay, but the three reviews that did (I(2) 0%, including 950 observations) showed a non significant reduction in length of stay, but showed evidence of publication bias (P-value for Egger test 0.05).ConclusionsEvidence across surgical specialties indicates that wound closure with staples reduces the mean operating time. Despite including several thousand observations, no clear evidence of superiority emerged for either staples or sutures with respect to surgical site infection, post surgical complications, or length of stay.
Project description:Surgery with parotidectomy is the preferable treatment for most parotid tumors. Our meta-analysis compared the differences between the use of the LigaSure (LS) device and the conventional suture ligation technique (CT) in parotidectomies. A literature search in databases including EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library was carried out. Studies including parotidectomy using LS and CT were included with the intraoperative and postoperative parameters collected. Continuous operative time data were measured by mean differences (MDs). Discrete data on postoperative complications, including facial palsy, postoperative bleeding, and salivary complications, were evaluated with risk differences (RDs). All values were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Five studies were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in operative time in the LS group (MD: -21.92; 95% CI, -30.18 to -13.66). In addition, the analysis indicated that the incidence of postoperative complications, including permanent facial palsy (RD, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.06 to 0.05), temporary facial palsy (RD, 0.00; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.04), salivary complications (RD, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.06), and postoperative bleeding (RD, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.04), were all similar between the LS group and the CT group. According to the results, the LS device appears to be a safe and useful tool and could shorten the operative time in patients needing parotidectomy.
Project description:Transabdominal cerclage (TAC) is reported to be effective for preventing preterm birth in women with unsuccessful transvaginal cerclage (TVC) history. However, TAC has rarely been performed in twin pregnancy given the lack of sufficient evidence and the technical difficulty of the operation. Thus, it is unclear whether TAC is an effective procedure for twin pregnancy in women with a history of unsuccessful TVC. The aim of this study is to compare the characteristics and pregnancy outcomes after TAC in twin pregnancy versus singleton pregnancy, to examine whether twin pregnancy is a risk factor for very preterm birth (before 32 weeks) after TAC, and to determine whether TAC is effective in preventing preterm birth in twin pregnancy. This single-center retrospective cohort study included women who underwent TAC because of unsuccessful TVC history between January 2007 and June 2018. Of 165 women who underwent TAC, 19 had twins and 146 had singletons. Our results showed that the neonatal survival rate improved dramatically when TAC was performed (15.4% (prior pregnancy) vs 94.0% (after TAC) in twins, p<0.01; 22.8% (prior pregnancy) vs 91.1% (after TAC) in singletons, p<0.01). Moreover, the risk of very preterm birth was significantly decreased after TAC in both groups (36/39 (92.3%) (prior pregnancy) vs 2/19 (10.5%) (after TAC) in twins, p<0.01; 290/337 (86.1%) (prior pregnancy) vs 17/146 (11.6%) (after TAC) in singletons, p<0.01). More advanced maternal age and history of prior preterm delivery between 26+0 and 36+6 weeks were independently associated with very preterm birth, whereas the presence of a twin pregnancy was not associated with very preterm birth on multivariate logistic regression analysis. These results suggest that TAC is associated with successful prevention of very preterm birth and improved neonatal survival rates in the absence of procedure-related major complications in women with twin pregnancy and previous unsuccessful TVC history.
Project description:Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combining minimally invasive grafting of the left internal mammary artery to the left anterior descending artery with percutaneous coronary intervention has become a viable option for treating coronary artery disease. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare HCR with conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in a range of clinical outcomes and hospital costs.To identify potential studies, systematic searches were carried out in various databases. The key search terms included "hybrid revascularization" AND "coronary artery bypass grafting" OR "HCR" OR "CABG." This was followed by a meta-analysis investigating the need for blood transfusion, hospital costs, ventilation time, hospital stay, cerebrovascular accident, myocardial infarction, mortality, postoperative atrial fibrillation, renal failure, operation duration, and ICU stay.The requirement for blood transfusion was significantly lower for HCR: odds ratio 0.38 (95% confidence intervals [CIs] 0.31-0.46, P?<?.00001) as was the hospital stay: mean difference (MD) -1.48 days (95% CI, -2.61 to -0.36, P?=?0.01) and the ventilation time: MD -8.99?hours (95% CI, -15.85 to -2.13, P?=?.01). On the contrary, hospital costs were more expensive for HCR: MD $3970 (95% CI, 2570-5370, P?<?.00001). All other comparisons were insignificant.In the short-term, HCR is as safe as conventional CABG and may offer certain benefits such as a lower requirement for blood transfusion and shorter hospital stays. However, HCR is more expensive than conventional CABG.
Project description:ObjectiveA meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed to compare the effects of miniaturized extracorporeal circulation (MECC) and conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC) on morbidity and mortality rates after cardiac surgery.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted using Ovid, PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane databases. Randomized controlled trials from the year 2000 with n > 40 patients were considered. Key search terms included variations of "mini," "cardiopulmonary," "bypass," "extracorporeal," "perfusion," and "circuit." Studies were assessed for bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The primary outcomes were postoperative mortality and stroke. Secondary outcomes included arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, renal failure, blood loss, and a composite outcome comprised of mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction and renal failure. Duration of intensive care unit, and hospital stay was also recorded.ResultsThe 42 studies eligible for this study included a total of 2154 patients who underwent CECC and 2196 patients who underwent MECC. There were no significant differences in any preoperative or demographic characteristics. Compared with CECC, MECC did not reduce the incidence of mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, and renal failure but did significantly decrease the composite of these outcomes (odds ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.81; P = .0002). MECC was also associated with reductions in arrhythmia (odds ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54-0.83; P = .0003), blood loss (mean difference [MD], -96.37 mL; 95% CI, -152.70 to -40.05 mL; P = .0008), hospital stay (MD, -0.70 days; 95% CI, -1.21 to -0.20 days; P = .006), and intensive care unit stay (MD, -2.27 hours; 95% CI, -3.03 to -1.50 hours; P < .001).ConclusionsMECC demonstrates clinical benefits compared with CECC. Further studies are required to perform a cost-utility analysis and to assess the long-term outcomes of MECC. These should use standardized definitions of endpoints such as mortality and renal failure to reduce inconsistency in outcome reporting.
Project description:Transverse patellar fractures are a relatively common injury and typically require surgical fixation. An adequate restoration of patella integrity is essential for proper functioning of the extensor mechanism of the knee and for the prevention of patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Currently, the treatment of transverse fractures of the patellar bone involves several surgical techniques, most of which involve the use of metallic implants. Despite good clinical results following surgery, numerous complications exist, including primarily symptomatic hardware following surgical treatment. The purpose of this article is to describe the technique for treatment of a transverse patellar fracture using a high-resistance tape (FiberTape; Arthrex) and a tensioner (Arthrex) instead of traditional metallic implants.
Project description:Sutures are an increasing focus of research in knee arthroplasty (KA). Whether knotless barbed sutures (KBS) are safe and efficient in KA remains controversial. The objective of our study is to compare the clinical outcomes of KA according to wound closure method: KBS versus knotted traditional sutures (KTS). To clarify this, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nine articles involving 10 studies were included in this study. The dataset consisted of 1729 patients with 1754?KA. Among these, 814 patients' wounds were closed with KBS and 915 with KTS. Our analysis indicates that KBS is preferable for KA wound closure given its shorter wound closure time and lower total cost; postoperative Knee Society scores and complication rates were similar to those of surgeries using KTS. The subgroup analysis revealed that closure of arthrotomy with KBS appears to be associated with a lower risk of complications. This meta-analysis indicates that use of KBS in KA reduces operative time and cost. KBS is the preferred option for wound closures, including arthrotomy and reattachment of subcutaneous and subcuticular tissues. Given the possible biases, adequately powered and better-designed studies with longer follow-up are required to reach a firmer conclusion.
Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of fibrin sealant compared to sutures in periodontal surgery.MethodsFive electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, Cochrane and Web of Science) were screened from initiation to January 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fibrin sealant to sutures in periodontal surgery using this search equation: (Periodont* OR Periodontitis) AND ("fibrin tissue adhesive" OR "fibrin glue" OR "fibrin sealant" OR "fibrin sealant system" OR "fibrin adhesive system" OR "fibrin fibronectin sealant system"). Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the revised tool to assess risk of bias in randomized trials (RoB 2). The level of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE tool.ResultsA total of 240 publications were found as search results in the screened databases. Four RCTs were included in this systematic review based on predetermined inclusion criteria. The trials were published between 1987 and 2014. All the RCTs compared fibrin sealant to sutures in periodontal surgery. The sample size included 101 patients. The overall risk of bias in this systematic review was at high risk in 75% of the studies, while 25% of the studies raised some concerns. The level of evidence evaluated using GRADE tool was very low.DiscussionThe current systematic review indicates a low level of evidence of the use of fibrin sealant as an alternative to sutures in periodontal practice. More interventional and multicentric studies should be conducted to support and confirm the results of the included studies.