Dataset Information

Predicting Neurologic Recovery after Surgery in Patients with Deficits Secondary to MESCC: Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: Systematic literature review and expert survey OBJECTIVE.: The aim of this study was to determine factors associated with neurologic improvement in patients with neurologic deficits secondary to metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). Clear understanding of these factors will guide surgical decision-making by helping to elucidate which patients are more likely to benefit from surgery and how surgeons can increase the probability of neurologic and functional restoration.Surgical spinal cord decompression has been shown to improve neurologic function in patients with symptomatic MESCC. However, prognostication of neurologic improvement after surgery remains challenging, owing to sparse data and complexity of these patients.PubMed and Embase databases were searched for relevant publications. PRISMA Statement guided publication selection and data reporting. GRADE guidelines were used for evidence quality evaluation and recommendation formulation.Low-quality evidence supports the use of the duration and severity of neurologic deficit as predictors of neurological recovery in patients with MESCC. Low-quality evidence supports the use of thoracic level of compression and previous irradiation as adverse predictors of neurological recovery. Nearly all of the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor members who responded to the survey agreed that ambulation with assistance represented a successful surgical result and that duration of ambulation loss and the severity of weakness should be considered when trying to predict whether surgery would result in restoration of ambulation.Review of literature and expert opinion support the importance of duration of ambulation loss and the severity of neurologic deficit (muscle strength, bladder function) in prediction of neurologic recovery among patients with symptomatic MESCC. Efforts to reduce the duration of ambulation loss and to prevent progression of neurologic deficits should be made to improve the probability of neurologic recovery.2.

SUBMITTER: Laufer I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5581189 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Predicting Neurologic Recovery after Surgery in Patients with Deficits Secondary to MESCC: Systematic Review.

Laufer Ilya I Zuckerman Scott L SL Bird Justin E JE Bilsky Mark H MH Lazáry Áron Á Quraishi Nasir A NA Fehlings Michael G MG Sciubba Daniel M DM Shin John H JH Mesfin Addisu A Sahgal Arjun A Fisher Charles G CG

Spine 20161001

<h4>Study design</h4>Systematic literature review and expert survey OBJECTIVE.: The aim of this study was to determine factors associated with neurologic improvement in patients with neurologic deficits secondary to metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). Clear understanding of these factors will guide surgical decision-making by helping to elucidate which patients are more likely to benefit from surgery and how surgeons can increase the probability of neurologic and functional rest ...[more]

PMID: 27488300

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe best evidence-enhanced recovery care pathway is yet to be defined for patients undergoing spinal surgery. Minimally invasive surgery, multimodal analgesia, early mobilization, and early postoperative nutrition have been considered as critical components of enhanced recovery in spinal surgery (ERSS). The objective of this study will be to synthesize the evidence underpinning individual components of a proposed multidisciplinary enhanced recovery pathway for patients undergoing spinal surgery.MethodsThis is the study protocol for a systematic review of complex interventions. Our team identified 22 individual care components of a proposed pathway based on clinical practice guidelines and published reviews. We will include systematic reviews and meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, and observational studies in adults or pediatric patients evaluating any one of the pre-determined care components. Our primary outcomes will be all-cause mortality, morbidity outcomes (e.g., pulmonary, cardiac, renal, surgical complications), patient-reported outcomes and experiences (e.g., pain, quality of care experience), and health services outcomes (e.g., length of stay and costs). We will search the following databases (1990 onwards) MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL). Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion. The risk of bias for individual studies will be appraised using appropriate tools. A narrative synthesis will be provided with the information presented in the text and tables to summarize and explain the characteristics and findings of the included studies. Due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity, we do not anticipate to conduct meta-analyses. Confidence in cumulative evidence for each component of care will be classified according to the GRADE system.DiscussionThis systematic review will identify, evaluate, and integrate the evidence underpinning individual components of a pathway for patients undergoing spinal surgery. The formation of an evidence-based pathway will allow for the standardization of clinical care delivery within the context of enhanced recovery in spinal surgery.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42019135289.

Project description:Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways are multimodal, evidence-based approaches to optimize patient outcome after surgery. However, the use of ERAS protocols to improve morbidity and recovery time without compromising safety following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains to be elucidated.We conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of ERAS protocols compared with conventional perioperative care (CPC) in patients following PD.PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library were searched between January 2000 and June 2015.The patients who underwent PD with ERAS protocols or CPC were eligible. The studies that compared postoperative length of hospital stay (PLOS), postoperative complications, or in-hospital costs in the 2 groups were included.A meta-analysis, meta-regression, sensitivity analysis, and subgroup analysis were performed to estimate the postoperative outcomes between the 2 groups and identified the potential confounders. We used the methodological index for nonrandomized studies checklist to assess methodological qualities. Weighted mean differences (WMD) or odds ratios (OR) were calculated with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The publication bias tests were also performed through the funnel plots.In total, 14 nonrandomized comparative studies with 1409 ERAS cases and 1310 controls were analyzed. Implementation of an ERAS protocol significantly reduced PLOS (WMD: -4.17 days; 95%CI: -5.72 to -2.61), delayed gastric emptying (OR: 0.56; 95%CI: 0.44-0.71), overall morbidity (OR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.54-0.74), and in-hospital costs compared to CPC (all P?<?0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in other postoperative outcomes. Age, gender, and ERAS component implementation did not significantly contribute to heterogeneity for PLOS as shown by meta-regression analysis.Our study suggested that ERAS was as safe as CPC and improved recovery of patients undergoing PD, thus reducing in-hospital costs. General adoption of ERAS protocols during PD should be recommended.

Project description:ObjectivesTo conduct a systematic review of qualitative studies which explore health professionals' experiences of and perspectives on the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway.DesignSystematic review of qualitative literature using a qualitative content analysis. Literature includes the experiences and views of a wide range of multidisciplinary team and allied health professional staff, to incorporate a diverse range of clinical and professional perspectives.Data sourcesPsycINFO, Medline, CINAHL and PubMed were searched in May 2017.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesThe searches included relevant qualitative studies across a range of healthcare contexts. We included studies published from 2000 to 2017, as an appropriate time frame to capture evidence about ERAS after implementation in the late 1990s. Only studies published in the English language were included, and we included studies that explicitly stated that they used qualitative approaches.Data extraction and synthesisLiterature searches were conducted by the first author and checked by the second author: both contributed to the extraction and analysis of data. Studies identified as relevant were assessed for eligibility using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme guidance.ResultsEight studies were included in the review, including studies in six countries and in four surgical specialties. Included studies focus on health professionals' experiences of ERAS before, during and after implementation in colorectal surgery, gastrointestinal surgery, abdominal hysterectomy and orthopaedics. Five main themes emerged in the analysis: communication and collaboration, resistance to change, role and significance of protocol-based care, and knowledge and expectations. Professionals described the importance of effective multidisciplinary team collaboration and communication, providing thorough education to staff and patients, and appointing a dedicated champion as means to implement and integrate ERAS pathways successfully. Evidence-based guidelines were thought to be useful for improvements to patient care by standardising practices and reducing treatment variations, but were thought to be too open to interpretation at local levels. Setting and managing 'realistic' expectations of staff was seen as a priority. Staff attitudes towards ERAS tend to become more favourable over time, as practices become successfully 'normalised'. Strengths of the review are that it includes a wide range of different studies, a variety of clinical populations, diversity of methodological approaches and local contexts. Its limitation is the inclusion of a small number of studies, although these represent six countries and four surgical specialties, and so our findings are likely to be transferable.ConclusionsStaff feel positive about the implementation of ERAS, but find the process is complex and challenging. Challenges can be addressed by ensuring that multidisciplinary teams understand ERAS principles and guidelines, and communicate well with one another and with patients. Provision of comprehensive, coherent and locally relevant information to health professionals is helpful. Identifying and recruiting local ERAS champions is likely to improve the implementation and delivery of ERAS pathways.Prospero registration numberCRD42017059952.

Dataset Information

Predicting Neurologic Recovery after Surgery in Patients with Deficits Secondary to MESCC: Systematic Review.

Publications

Predicting Neurologic Recovery after Surgery in Patients with Deficits Secondary to MESCC: Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets