Robotic versus Open Radical Cystectomy: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To critically review the currently available evidence of studies comparing robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with open radical cystectomy (ORC).

Methods

A comprehensive review of the literature from Pubmed, Web of Science and Scopus was performed in April 2014. All relevant studies comparing RARC with ORC were included for further screening. A pooled meta-analysis of all comparative studies was performed and publication bias was assessed by a funnel plot.

Results

Nineteen studies were included for the analysis, including a total of 1779 patients (787 patients in the RARC group and 992 patients in the ORC group). Although RARC was associated with longer operative time (p <0.0001), patients in this group might benefit from significantly lower overall perioperative complication rates within 30 days and 90 days (p = 0.005 and 0.0002, respectively), more lymph node yields (p = 0.009), less estimated blood loss (p <0.00001), lower need for perioperative and intraoperative transfusions (p <0.0001 and <0.0001, respectively), and shorter postoperative length of stay (p = 0.0002). There was no difference between two groups regarding positive surgical margin rates (p = 0.19).

Conclusions

RARC appears to be an efficient alternative to ORC with advantages of less perioperative complications, more lymph node yields, less estimated blood loss, lower need for transfusions, and shorter postoperative length of stay. Further studies should be performed to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes between RARC and ORC.     

Laparoscopic Nephrectomy versus Open Nephrectomy for Patients with Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To compare efficacy and safety of laparoscopicnephrectomy (LN) versusopen nephrectomy (ON) in the management of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

A systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was performed up to October 2014.This systematic review was performed based on observational comparative studies that assessed the two techniques. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and risk ratio (RR), with their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI), were calculated to compare continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively.

Results

Seven studies were identified, including 195 cases (118 LN / 77 ON). Although LN was associated with longer operative time (WMD 30.236, 95%CI 14.541 −45.932, P<0.001) and the specimen might not have been resected as heavy as the ON group (WMD -986.516, 95%CI -1883.24–-89.795, P = 0.031), patients in this group might benefit from a shorter length of hospital stay (WMD -3.576, 95%CI 4.976–-2.176, P <0.001), less estimated blood loss (WMD -180.245, 95%CI -317.939–-42.556, P = 0.010), and lower need of transfusion (RR 0.345, 95%CI 0.183–0.650, P = 0.001). The LN group also had less overall complications (RR 0.545, 95%CI 0.329–0.903, P = 0.018). The need of narcotic analgesics between the two groups might have no significant difference (WMD -54.66, 95%CI -129.76–20.44, P = 0.154).

Conclusion

LN for giant symptomatic ADPKD was feasible, safe and efficacious. Morbidity was significantly reduced compared with the open approach. For an experienced laparoscopist, LN might be a better alternative.     

Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Renal Tumors Larger than 4 cm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

With the establishment of minimally invasive surgery in society, the robot has been increasingly widely used in the urologic field, including in partial nephrectomy. This study aimed to comprehensively summarize the currently available evidence on the feasibility and safety of robotic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors of >4 cm.

Method and Findings

An electronic database search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was performed. This systematic review and meta-analysis was based on all relevant studies that assessed robotic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors of >4 cm. Five studies were included. The meta-analysis involved 3 studies from 11 institutions including 154 patients, while the narrative review involved the remaining 2 studies from 5 institutions including 64 patients. In the meta-analysis, the mean ischemic time, operation time, and console time was 28, 319, and 189 minutes, respectively. The estimated blood loss and length of stay was 317 ml and 3.8 days, respectively. The rates of conversion, positive margins, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, hilar clamping, and collecting system repair were 7.0%, 3.5%, 7.0%, 9.8%, 93.9%, and 47.5%, respectively. The narrative review showed results similar to those of the meta-analysis.

Conclusions

Robotic partial nephrectomy is feasible and safe for renal tumors of >4 cm with an acceptable warm ischemic time, positive margin rate, conversion rate, complication rate, operation time, estimated blood loss, and length of stay.     

Laparoscopic Versus Open Radical Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to summarize and quantify the current evidence on the therapeutic efficacy of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) compared with open radical nephrectomy (ORN) in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in a meta-analysis. METHODS: Data were collected by searching Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect for reports published up to September 26, 2016. Studies that reported data on comparisons of therapeutic efficacy of LRN and ORN were included. The fixed-effects model was used in this meta-analysis if there was no evidence of heterogeneity; otherwise, the random-effects model was used. RESULTS: Thirty-seven articles were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed that the overall mortality was significantly lower in the LRN group than that in the ORN group (odds ratio [OR] =0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.95). However, there was no statistically significant difference in cancer-specific mortality (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.55-1.07), local tumor recurrence (OR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.65-1.14), and intraoperative complications (OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 0.83-1.94). The risk of postoperative complications was significantly lower in the LRN group (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.65-0.78). In addition, LRN has been shown to offer superior perioperative results to ORN, including shorter hospital stay days, time to start oral intake, and convalescence time, and less estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, and anesthetic consumption. CONCLUSION: LRN was associated with better surgical outcomes as assessed by overall mortality and postoperative complications compared with ORN. LRN has also been shown to offer superior perioperative results to ORN.     

Robotic versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Aim

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of robotic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Knowledge was performed. Systematic review was carried out to identify studies comparing robotic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy in gastric cancer. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were also analyzed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the surgery. A fixed effects model or a random effects model was utilized according to the heterogeneity.

Results

Four studies involving 5780 patients with 520 (9.00%) cases of robotic gastrectomy and 5260 (91.00%) cases of open gastrectomy were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to open gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy has a significantly longer operation time (weighted mean differences (WMD) =92.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): 55.63 to 129.12, P<0.00001), lower blood loss (WMD: -126.08, 95% CI: -189.02 to -63.13, P<0.0001), and shorter hospital stay (WMD = -2.87; 95% CI: -4.17 to -1.56; P<0.0001). No statistical difference was noted based on the rate of overall postoperative complication, wound infection, bleeding, number of harvested lymph nodes, anastomotic leakage and postoperative mortality rate.

Conclusions

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that robotic gastrectomy is a better alternative technique to open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. However, more prospective, well-designed, multicenter, randomized controlled trials are necessary to further evaluate the safety and efficacy as well as the long-term outcome.     

A Propensity-Score Matched Comparison of Perioperative and Early Renal Functional Outcomes of Robotic versus Open Partial Nephrectomy

Objectives

To compare the perioperative and early renal functional outcomes of RPN with OPN for kidney tumors.

Materials and Methods

A total of 209 RPN or OPN patients with availability of preoperative cross-sectional imaging since 2009 at our center were included. To adjust for potential baseline confounders propensity-score matching was performed, which resulted in 94 OPNs matched to 51 RPNs. Perioperative and early renal functional outcomes were compared.

Results

In propensity-score matched analysis, RPN procedures were well tolerated and resulted in significant decreases in postoperative analgesic time (24 vs. 48 hr, p<0.001) and visual analog pain scale (3 vs. 4, p<0.001). Besides, the RPN patients had a significantly shorter LOS (9 vs. 11 days, p = 0.008) and less EBL (100 vs. 200 ml, p<0.001), but median operative time was significantly longer (229 vs. 182 min, p<0.001). Ischemia time, transfusion rates, complication rates, percentage eGFR decline and CKD upstaging were equivalent after RPN versus OPN. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, RPN patients were less likely to have a prolonged LOS (odds ratio [OR]: 0.409; p = 0.016), while more likely to experience a longer operative time (OR: 4.296; p = 0.001). However, the statistical significance for the protective effect of RPN versus OPN in EBL was not confirmed by examining the risk of EBL≥400 ml (OR: 0.488; p = 0.212).

Conclusions

When adjusted for potential selection biases, RPN offers comparable perioperative and early renal functional outcomes to those of OPN, with the added advantage of improved postoperative pain control and a shorter LOS.     

Partial versus Complete Fundoplication for the Correction of Pediatric GERD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

There is no consensus as to what extent of “wrap” is required in a fundoplication for correction of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

Objective

To evaluate if a complete (360 degree) or partial fundoplication gives better control of GERD.

Methods

A systematic search of MEDLINE and Scopus identified interventional and observational studies of fundoplication in children. Screening identified those comparing techniques. The primary outcome was recurrence of GERD following surgery. Dysphagia and complications were secondary outcomes of interest. Meta-analysis was performed when appropriate. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

Results

2289 abstracts were screened, yielding 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 12 retrospective cohort studies. The RCTs were pooled. There was no difference in surgical success between partial and complete fundoplication, OR 1.33 [0.67,2.66]. In the 12 cohort studies, 3 (25%) used an objective assessment of the surgery, one of which showed improved outcomes with complete fundoplication. Twenty-five different complications were reported; common were dysphagia and gas-bloat syndrome. Overall study quality was poor.

Conclusions

The comparison of partial fundoplication with complete fundoplication warrants further study. The evidence does not demonstrate superiority of one technique. The lack of high quality RCTs and the methodological heterogeneity of observational studies limits a powerful meta-analysis.     

A Comparison of Technique Modifications in Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To compare the effectiveness of different technique modifications in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analyses.

Data Sources

Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Central from January 1st 1997 until April 1st 2014.

Study Design

All cohort studies and randomized clinical trials comparing fully laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with modifications of the standard technique including hand-assisted, retroperitoneoscopic and single port techniques, were included.

Data-Extraction and Analysis

The primary outcome measure was the number of complications. Secondary outcome measures included: conversion to open surgery, first warm ischemia time, estimated blood loss, graft function, operation time and length of hospital stay. Each technique modification was compared with standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Data was pooled with a random effects meta-analysis using odds ratios, weighted mean differences and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals. To assess heterogeneity, the I2 statistic was used. First, randomized clinical trials and cohort studies were analyzed separately, when data was comparable, pooled analysis were performed.

Results

31 studies comparing laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with other technique modifications were identified, including 5 randomized clinical trials and 26 cohort studies. Since data of randomized clinical trials and cohort studies were comparable, these data were pooled. There were significantly less complications in the retroperitoneoscopic group as compared to transperitoneal group (OR 0.52, 95%CI 0.33–0.83, I2 = 0%). Hand-assisted techniques showed shorter first warm ischemia and operation times.

Conclusions

Hand-assistance reduces the operation and first warm ischemia times and may improve safety for surgeons with less experience in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The retroperitoneoscopic approach was significantly associated with less complications. However, given the, in general, poor to intermediate quality and considerable heterogeneity in the included studies, further high-quality studies are required.

Trial Registration

The review protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database before the start of the review process (CRD number 42013006565).     

Laparoscopic versus Open Radical Cystectomy in Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies

Background and Objective

More recently laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) has increasingly been an attractive alternative to open radical cystectomy (ORC) and many centers have reported their early experiences in the treatment of bladder cancer. Evaluate the safety and efficacy of LRC compared with ORC in the treatment of bladder cancer.

Methods

A systematic search of Medline, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was performed up to Mar 1, 2013. Outcomes of interest assessing the two techniques included demographic and clinical baseline characteristics, perioperative, pathologic and oncological variables, and post-op neobladder function and complications.

Results

Sixteen eligible trials evaluating LRC vs ORC were identified including seven prospective and nine retrospective studies. Although LRC was associated with longer operative time (p<0.001), patients might benefit from significantly fewer overall complications (p<0.001), less blood loss (p<0.001), shorter length of hospital stay (p<0.001), less need of blood transfusion (p<0.001), less narcotic analgesic requirement (p<0.001), shorter time to ambulation (p = 0.03), shorter time to regular diet (p<0.001), fewer positive surgical margins (p = 0.006), fewer positive lymph node (p = 0.05), lower distant metastasis rate (p = 0.05) and fewer death (p = 0.004). There was no significant difference in other demographic parameters except for a lower ASA score (p = 0.01) in LRC while post-op neobladder function were similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

Our data suggest that LRC appears to be a safe, feasible and minimally invasive alternative to ORC with reliable perioperative safety, pathologic & oncologic efficacy, comparable post-op neobladder function and fewer complications. Because of the inherent limitations of the included studies, further large sample prospective, multi-centric, long-term follow-up studies and randomized control trials should be undertaken to confirm our findings.     

Comparison of Porcine Small Intestinal Submucosa versus Polypropylene in Open Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS) with polypropylene in open inguinal hernia repair.

Method

Electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were used to compare patient outcomes for the two groups via meta-analysis.

Result

A total of 3 randomized controlled trials encompassing 200 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in recurrence (P = 0.16), hematomas (P = 0.06), postoperative pain within 30 days (P = 0.45), or postoperative pain after 1 year (P = 0.12) between the 2 groups. The incidence of discomfort was significantly lower (P = 0.0006) in the SIS group. However, the SIS group experienced a significantly higher incidence of seroma (P = 0.03).

Conclusions

Compared to polypropylene, using SIS in open inguinal hernia repair is associated with a lower incidence of discomfort and a higher incidence of seroma. However, well-designed larger RCT studies with a longer follow-up period are needed to confirm these findings.     

Immediate versus Delayed Sequential Bilateral Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS), the cataract surgery that is performed in both eyes simultaneously, is gaining popularity worldwide compared to the traditional treatment paradigm: delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery (DSBCS), the surgery that is performed in each eye on a different day as a completely separate operation. ISBCS provides advantages to patients and patients’ families in the form of fewer hospital visits. Additionally, patients enjoy rapid rehabilitation, lack of anisometropia - potentially reducing accidents and falls, and avoid suboptimal visual function in daily life. The hospital may benefit due to lower cost.

Objective

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate ISBCS and DSBCS.

Data Sources

Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, CINAHL, Health Economic Evaluations Database (HEED), ISI Web of Science (Thomson-Reuters) and the Cochrane Library were searched.

Participants

Not applicable.

Methods

Literature was systematically reviewed using EPPI-Reviewer 4 gateway. Meta-analysis was conducted using STATA v. 13.0. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated and heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics. Fixed-effect and random-effect models were computed based on heterogeneity. Meta-analysis was done by instrument used to calculate utility score.

Results

In total, 9,133 records were retrieved from multiple databases and an additional 128 records were identified through grey literature search. Eleven articles with 3,657 subjects were included for analysis. Our meta-analysis results indicated significant improvement in post-operative utility score using TTO, EQ5D, HUI3, VF-7, and VF-14 and a non-significant improvement using Catquest questionnaire for both surgeries. For ISBCS versus DSBCS, utility-specific fixed-effect model provided an overall SMD of the utility score using the TTO method as 0.12 (95% CI: -0.15, 0.40), EQ5D as 0.14 (95% CI: -0.14, 0.41), HUI3 as 0.12 (95% CI: -0.15, 0.40), VF-7 as -0.02 (95% CI: -0.15, 0.10), and Catquest Questionnaire as 1.45 (95% CI: -0.88, 2.01). The results for utility score, which were measured using various instruments, indicated non-significant improvement in the utility due to DSBCS compared to ISBCS. However, a significant improvement in post-operative utility score was seen using Catquest questionnaire for ISBCS compared to DSBCS. The included studies using VF-14 instrument were highly heterogeneous (I² = 97.1%). Results provided SMD of -0.25 (95% CI:-1.06, 0.57) using VF-14 indicating non-significant improvement in the utility due to DSBCS compared to ISBCS surgery. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) significantly improved after both surgeries (overall SMD of BCVA due to ISBCS was -1.79 (95% CI: -2.45, -1.14) and due to DSBCS was -1.53 (95% CI: -2.25, -0.81)). A non-significant improvement was seen in BCVA due to ISBCS when compared to DSBCS (SMD = -0.18; 95% CI: -0.37, 0.01).

Conclusion

Both surgeries, ISBCS and DSBCS significantly improve patients’ quality of life and visual acuity. Further, ISBCS may deliver certain additional benefits at the individual and societal levels as well.     

Ologen Implant versus Mitomycin C for Trabeculectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To evaluate the application of the Ologen implant compared to mitomycin C (MMC) on the outcome of trabeculectomy and to examine the balance of risks and benefits.

Methods

A systematic literature search (Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the Chinese Biomedicine Database) was performed. Randomized controlled trials comparing the Ologen implant with MMC in trabeculectomy were selected. The efficacy measures were the weighted mean differences (WMDs) for the intraocular pressure reduction (IOPR), the reduction in glaucoma medications, and the relative risks (RRs) for success rates. The tolerability measures were RRs for adverse events. The pooled effects were calculated using the random-effects model.

Results

Seven randomized controlled trials including 227 eyes were included in this meta-analysis. The WMDs of the IOPR comparing the Ologen group with the MMC group were −2.98 (95% Cl: −5.07 to −0.89) at one month, −1.41 (−3.72 to 0.91) at three months, −1.69 (−3.68 to 0.30) at six months, −1.94 (−3.88 to 0.01) at 12 months, and 0.65 (−2.17 to 0.47) at 24 months. There was no statistically significance except at one and 12 months after surgery. No significant difference in the reduction in glaucoma medications or complete and qualified success rates were found. The rates of adverse events also did not differ significantly between Ologen and MMC.

Conclusions

The Ologen implant is comparable with MMC for trabeculectomy in IOP-lowering efficacy, reduction in the number of glaucoma medications, success rates, and tolerability. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously since relevant evidence is still limited, although it is accumulating. Further large-scale, well-designed randomized controlled trials are urgently needed.     

A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews and Panoramic Meta-Analysis: Staples versus Sutures for Surgical Procedures

Objective

To systematically evaluate the evidence across surgical specialties as to whether staples or sutures better improve patient and provider level outcomes.

Design

A systematic review of systematic reviews and panoramic meta-analysis of pooled estimates.

Results

Eleven 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 (I² 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 (I² 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).

Conclusions

Evidence 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.     

Comparison of Ultrasonic Scalpel versus Conventional Techniques in Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Carcinoma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives

To compare surgical efficacy and postoperative recovery of ultrasonic scalpel (USS) with conventional techniques for the resection of gastric carcinoma.

Methods

A systematic search of major medical databases (PubMed, Embase, CCRT and CNKI) was conducted. Both randomized and non-randomized controlled trials (RCTs and nRCTs) were considered eligible. Operation time (OT), intraoperative blood loss (BL) and postoperative complications (POC) rates as well as postoperative hospitalization days, number of dissected lymph nodes, abdominal drainage volume and time for recovery of gastrointestinal functions were synthesized and compared.

Results

Nineteen studies were included (7 RCTs and 12 nRCTs), in which 1930 patients were enrolled totally (946 in the USS group and 984 in the conventional group). Monopolar electrocautery and ligation were used as the conventional methods. Comparative meta-analysis showed perioperative outcomes were significantly improved using USS compared with conventional surgical instrumentation. OT was reduced from a weighted mean of 185.3 min in the conventional group to 151.0 min in the USS group (MD = −33.30, 95% CI [−41.75, −24.86], p<0.001) and intraoperative BL was decreased from a weighted mean of 217.9 ml in the conventional group to 111.6 ml in the USS group (MD = −113.42, 95% CI [−142.05, −84.79], p<0.001). Results from RCTs subgroup were consistent with those from nRCTs subgroup. The weighted cumulative risk of POC accounted for 8.9% (0%–25%) and 12.9% (5.5%–45%) in the USS and conventional groups, respectively. Pooled estimated results from nRCTs (OR = 0.54, 95% CI [0.27, 1.06], p = 0.07) and RCTs (RR = 0.75, 95% CI [0.44, 1.26], p = 0.27) showed no significant difference between the USS and control groups. Analysis of secondary outcomes showed the improvements of the USS group over control group regarding the number of dissected lymph nodes, postoperative hospitalization days, abdominal drainage volume and time for recovery of gastrointestinal functions.

Conclusion

Compared with conventional electrosurgery, the USS is a safe and effective technique with more short-term advantages in open surgery for gastric cancer.     

Parathyroid Cystic Adenoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ObjectiveTo review diagnostic imaging modalities for parathyroid cystic adenomas (PCA). Since PCAs are a rare (0.5%-1%) subclass of parathyroid adenomas, and due to their cystic component, imaging modalities known to be efficient for diagnosing solid adenomas might fail in localizing them.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review using the PubMed and Cochrane databases for English articles on PCAs published between 1995 and 2020. A meta-analysis of the retrieved data was performed.ResultsOverall, 39 studies, reporting on a total of 160 patients, were included in the analysis. Two thirds (68%) of the patients were female, with a mean age of 53.9 years. A single cystic adenoma was detected in 98.1% of cases. The mean blood calcium corrected for albumin level was 12.6 ± 2.7 mg/dL, and the mean parathyroid hormone level was 565.5 ± 523.8 pg/mL. The mean PCA sizes as measured by ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT), and ex vivo measurement were 4.8 ± 3.6, 5.2 ± 3.2, and 3.5 cm, respectively. The median weight was 8.1 g. PCA was detected in 86% of US examinations; 100% of US-guided fine needle aspiration, 4-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT), or magnetic resonance imaging examinations; and 61% of 99m-technetium sestamibi scan with single-photon emission computed tomography ((99m)Tc-SPECT). (99m)Tc-SPECT showed a significantly lower diagnostic rate than US (odds ratio, 3.589), US-guided fine needle aspiration, CT combined with 4D-CT, and the combination of US, CT, 4D-CT, and magnetic resonance imaging (P < .001).ConclusionAlthough US and 4D-CT showed a significantly high rate in diagnosing PCA, (99m)Tc-SPECT showed a lower PCA diagnostic rate. These findings suggest that larger cystic lesions suspected as PCAs should be further evaluated using 4D-CT rather than (99m)Tc-SPECT.     

Stent-Assisted Coiling versus Coiling in Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysm: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Purpose

Stent-assisted coiling was initially invented for wide-neck aneurysms, but is now used for smaller berry aneurysms. The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficiency of stent-assisted coiling with conventional coiling in treatment of intracranial aneurysms.

Methods

A meta-analysis of studies that compared stent-assisted coiling with coiling only was conducted by searching English literatures via Pubmed, Medline and Cochrane Library databases without restricting the publication year. The primary outcomes in this study were immediate occlusion, progressive thrombosis rate, all-complication rate and angiographic recurrence. The secondary outcomes examined were packing density, mortality, permanent complication and thromboembolic complication rate.

Results

Ten retrospective cohort studies were included. There is currently only one unfinished randomized study. Although the stent-assisted coiling group tended to show a lower initial occlusion rate than that of the coiling-only group (57.6% versus 68.7%; OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.30–1.44; P = 0.30), it achieved a significantly higher progressive thrombosis rate during follow up compared to that of the coiling only group (37.5% versus 19.4%; OR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.95–3.86; P<0.00001) and a significantly lower recurrence rate (16.2% versus 34.4%; OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.25–0.49; P<0.00001). With respect to safety concerns, the all-complication rate (17.6% versus 15.9%; OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.77–1.62; P = 0.56), mortality rate (9.1% versus 2.6%; OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 0.68–7.82; P = 0.18), permanent complication rate (5.6% versus 3.9%; OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.96–2.41; P = 0.08) and thromboembolic complication rate (4.2% versus 4.9%; OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.41–2.38; P = 0.97) did not show significant difference between the two groups.

Conclusions

Stent-assisted coiling has a lower recurrence rate than conventional coiling. Analysis of complication events did not show any significant difference between the two methods. Despite the findings reported herein, further validation by well-designed prospective studies is needed.     

Terlipressin versus Norepinephrine in the Treatment of Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a severe and progressive functional renal failure occurring in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. Terlipressin is recognized as an effective treatment of HRS, but it is expensive and not widely available. Norepinephrine could be an effective alternative. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of norepinephrine compared to terlipressin in the management of HRS.

Methods

We searched the Medline, Embase, Scopus, CENTRAL, Lilacs and Scielo databases for randomized trials of norepinephrine and terlipressin in the treatment of HRS up to January 2014. Two reviewers collected data and assessed the outcomes and risk of bias. The primary outcome was the reversal of HRS. Secondary outcomes were mortality, recurrence of HRS and adverse events.

Results

Four studies comprising 154 patients were included. All trials were considered to be at overall high risk of bias. There was no difference in the reversal of HRS (RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.76 to 1.23), mortality at 30 days (RR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.68 to 1.17) and recurrence of HRS (RR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.36 to 1.45) between norepinephrine and terlipressin. Adverse events were less common with norepinephrine (RR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.83).

Conclusions

Norepinephrine seems to be an attractive alternative to terlipressin in the treatment of HRS and is associated with less adverse events. However, these findings are based on data extracted from only four small studies.     

Metamizole-Associated Adverse Events: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Metamizole is used to treat pain in many parts of the world. Information on the safety profile of metamizole is scarce; no conclusive summary of the literature exists.

Objective

To determine whether metamizole is clinically safe compared to placebo and other analgesics.

Methods

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and several clinical trial registries. We screened the reference lists of included trials and previous systematic reviews. We included randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of metamizole, administered to adults in any form and for any indication, to other analgesics or to placebo. Two authors extracted data regarding trial design and size, indications for pain medication, patient characteristics, treatment regimens, and methodological characteristics. Adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and dropouts were assessed. We conducted separate meta-analyses for each metamizole comparator, using standard inverse-variance random effects meta-analysis to pool the estimates across trials, reported as risk ratios (RRs). We calculated the DerSimonian and Laird variance estimate T² to measure heterogeneity between trials. The pre-specified primary end point was any AE during the trial period.

Results

Of the 696 potentially eligible trials, 79 trials including almost 4000 patients with short-term metamizole use of less than two weeks met our inclusion criteria. Fewer AEs were reported for metamizole compared to opioids, RR = 0.79 (confidence interval 0.79 to 0.96). We found no differences between metamizole and placebo, paracetamol and NSAIDs. Only a few SAEs were reported, with no difference between metamizole and other analgesics. No agranulocytosis or deaths were reported. Our results were limited by the mediocre overall quality of the reports.

Conclusion

For short-term use in the hospital setting, metamizole seems to be a safe choice when compared to other widely used analgesics. High-quality, adequately sized trials assessing the intermediate- and long-term safety of metamizole are needed.     

The Comparison between Robotic and Manual Ablations in the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To examine in what aspects and to what extent robotic ablation is superior over manual ablation, we sought to design a meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes between the two ablations in the treatment of atrial fibrillation.

Methods and Results

A literature search was conducted of PubMed and EMBASE databases before December 1, 2013. Data were extracted independently and in duplicate from 8 clinical articles and 792 patients. Effect estimates were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) or odds ratio (OR) and the accompanied 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Pooling the results of all qualified trials found significant reductions in fluoroscopic time (minutes) (WMD; 95% CI; P: -8.9; -12.54 to -5.26; <0.0005) and dose-area product (Gy×cm²) (WMD; 95% CI; P: -1065.66; -1714.36 to -416.96; 0.001) for robotic ablation relative to manual ablation, with evident heterogeneity (P<0.0005) and a low probability of publication bias. In subgroup analysis, great improvement of fluoroscopic time in patients with robotic ablation was consistently presented in both randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials, particularly in the former (WMD; 95% CI; P: -12.61; -15.13 to -10.09; <0.0005). Success rate of catheter ablation was relatively higher in patients with robotic ablation than with manual ablation (OR; 95% CI; P: 3.45; 0.24 to 49.0; 0.36), the difference yet exhibiting no statistical significance.

Conclusions

This study confirmed and extended previous observations by quantifying great reductions of fluoroscopic time and dose-area product in patients referred for robotic ablation than for manual ablation in the treatment of atrial fibrillation, especially in randomized clinical trials.