Suppr超能文献

内镜与显微镜下经蝶窦手术治疗垂体瘤:随机和非随机对照试验的系统评价与荟萃分析

Endoscopic versus microscopic transsphenoidal surgery in the treatment of pituitary tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials.

作者信息

Bastos Rodrigo V S, Silva Carla Maria D M, Tagliarini Jose Vicente, Zanini Marco Antonio, Romero Flavio R, Boguszewski Cesar Luiz, Nunes Vania Dos Santos

机构信息

Departamento de Clínica Médica, Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu, Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), Botucatu, SP, Brasil.

Departamento de Oftalmologia e Otorrinolaringologia, Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu, Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), Botucatu, SP, Brasil.

出版信息

Arch Endocrinol Metab. 2016 Oct;60(5):411-419. doi: 10.1590/2359-3997000000204. Epub 2016 Sep 5.

Abstract

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials that compared pure endoscopic with microscopic transsphenoidal surgery (TSS) in the resection of pituitary tumors. Embase, PubMed, Lilacs, and Central Cochrane were used as our data sources. The outcomes were total tumor resection, achievement of biochemical control of functioning adenomas, hospital stay and surgery complications. The randomized trials were analyzed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Two randomized and three prospective controlled non-randomized studies were included. Two studies, including 68 patients, evaluated total tumor resection and the meta-analysis did not show differences between the groups [RR: 1.45 (95% CI: 0.87, 2.44)]. Three studies involving 65 patients analyzed the achievement of biochemical control and no statistical difference was found [RR: 0.94 (95% CI: 0.7, 1.26)]. All five studies compared the frequency of postoperative complications between intervention and control group and meta-analysis favored for a low rate of postoperative complications in the endoscopic TSS group [(RR: 0.37 (95% CI: 0.16, 0.83)]. Due to the low evidence level and low number of observations, the results of our meta-analysis should not be viewed as a final proof of inferiority or superiority of one approach in relation to the other. More data including higher numbers of observations are needed.

摘要

我们对比较单纯内镜经蝶窦手术(TSS)与显微镜下经蝶窦手术切除垂体瘤的随机对照试验和非随机对照试验进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。使用Embase、PubMed、Lilacs和Cochrane中央对照试验注册库作为我们的数据来源。结局指标包括肿瘤全切率、功能性腺瘤生化控制达标率、住院时间和手术并发症。采用推荐分级的评估、制定与评价(GRADE)方法对随机对照试验进行分析。纳入了两项随机对照试验和三项前瞻性对照非随机研究。两项研究(共68例患者)评估了肿瘤全切率,荟萃分析未显示两组之间存在差异[风险比(RR):1.45(95%置信区间:0.87,2.44)]。三项研究(共65例患者)分析了生化控制达标情况,未发现统计学差异[RR:0.94(95%置信区间:0.7,1.26)]。所有五项研究均比较了干预组和对照组术后并发症的发生率,荟萃分析显示内镜经蝶窦手术组术后并发症发生率较低[RR:0.37(95%置信区间:0.16,0.83)]。由于证据水平较低且观察数量较少,我们的荟萃分析结果不应被视为一种方法相对于另一种方法优劣的最终证据。需要更多包括更多观察数量的数据。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/12a7/10118634/c79ac858b44e/2359-4292-aem-60-05-0411-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