Suppr超能文献

结直肠吻合手术中吻合器与手工缝合方法:随机对照试验的系统评价

Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

作者信息

Lustosa Suzana Angélica da Silva, Matos Delcio, Atallah Alvaro Nagib, Castro Aldemar Araujo

机构信息

Centro Universitário Fundação Oswaldo Aranha, Volta Redonda, Brazil.

出版信息

Sao Paulo Med J. 2002 Sep 2;120(5):132-6. doi: 10.1590/s1516-31802002000500002.

Abstract

CONTEXT

The interest in the results from comparisons between handsewing and stapling in colorectal anastomoses has been reflected in the progressive increase in the number of clinical trials. These studies, however, do not permit conclusions to be drawn, given the lack of statistical power of the samples analyzed.

OBJECTIVE

To compare stapling and handsewing in colorectal anastomosis, testing the hypothesis that in colorectal anastomosis the technique of stapling is superior to that of handsewing.

DESIGN

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. SURVEY STRATEGY: Systematic revision of the literature and meta-analysis were used, without restrictions on language, dates or other considerations. The sources of information used were Embase, Lilacs, Medline, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Database, and letters to authors and industrial producers of staples and thread.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were included in accordance with randomization criteria. The external validity of the studies was investigated via the characteristics of the participants, the interventions and the variables analyzed. An independent selection of clinical studies focusing on analysis of adult patients attended to on an elective basis was made by two reviewers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by the same reviewers. In addition to the randomization criteria, the masking, treatment intention, losses and exclusions were also analyzed. The meta-analysis was performed using risk difference and weighted average difference, with their respective 95% confidence intervals. The variables studied were mortality, clinical and radiological anastomotic dehiscence, anastomotic stricture, hemorrhage, reoperation, wound infection, time taken to perform the anastomosis and hospital stay.

RESULTS

Nine clinical trials were selected. After verifying that it was possible to perform one of the two techniques being compared, 1,233 patients were included, of whom 622 underwent stapling and 611 the handsewing technique. No statistical difference was found between the variables, except for stenosis, which was more frequent in stapling (p < 0.05), and the time taken to perform the anastomosis, which was greater in handsewing (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The evidence found was insufficient to demonstrate superiority of the stapling method over handsewing, independent of the level of colorectal anastomosis.

摘要

背景

结直肠吻合术中手工缝合与吻合器吻合比较结果引发的关注,已体现在临床试验数量的逐步增加上。然而,鉴于所分析样本缺乏统计学效力,这些研究无法得出结论。

目的

比较结直肠吻合术中吻合器吻合与手工缝合,验证结直肠吻合术中吻合器技术优于手工缝合这一假设。

设计

对随机对照试验进行系统评价。

调查策略

采用文献系统综述和荟萃分析,不受语言、日期或其他因素限制。所使用的信息来源包括Embase、Lilacs、Medline、Cochrane对照临床试验数据库,以及致作者和吻合器及缝线生产厂家的信函。

入选标准

根据随机化标准纳入研究。通过参与者特征、干预措施和所分析变量来调查研究的外部效度。由两名评审员独立挑选侧重于择期就诊成年患者分析的临床研究。

数据收集与分析

由相同评审员评估研究的方法学质量。除随机化标准外,还分析了盲法、治疗意向、失访和排除情况。采用风险差异和加权平均差异及其各自的95%置信区间进行荟萃分析。所研究的变量包括死亡率、临床和影像学吻合口裂开、吻合口狭窄、出血、再次手术、伤口感染、吻合操作时间和住院时间。

结果

选择了9项临床试验。在确认可以采用两种比较技术之一后,纳入1233例患者,其中622例行吻合器吻合,611例行手工缝合技术。除狭窄在吻合器吻合中更常见(p<0.05)以及吻合操作时间在手工缝合中更长(p<0.05)外,各变量之间未发现统计学差异。

结论

所发现的证据不足以证明吻合器方法优于手工缝合,无论结直肠吻合的水平如何。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ce24/11152340/5a495fb14ed1/1806-9460-spmj-120-05-132-gf01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验