Suppr超能文献

非器械辅助腰椎减压手术中伤口引流管的系统评价与荟萃分析

A systematic review and meta-analysis of wound drains in non-instrumented lumbar decompression surgery.

作者信息

Davidoff Christopher L, Rogers Jeffrey M, Simons Mary, Davidson Andrew S

机构信息

Macquarie Neurosurgery, Macquarie University Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales 2109, Australia; Department of Neurosurgery, Nepean Hospital, Penrith, New South Wales 2750, Australia.

Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, New South Wales 2109, Australia.

出版信息

J Clin Neurosci. 2018 Jul;53:55-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2018.04.038. Epub 2018 Apr 19.

Abstract

Wound drains are routinely used in lumbar decompressive surgery (LDS). However, it remains unclear whether this practice helps to prevent symptomatic epidural hematoma formation and associated complications, particularly following non-instrumented procedures. A systematic review and meta-analysis was therefore completed to critically appraise the literature. The search protocol was conducted using the Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. Articles meeting the following criteria were included: (i) examined patients undergoing LDS; (ii) included cases receiving post-operative wound drains; (iii) detailed adverse outcomes including symptomatic epidural hematomas or wound infection; and (iv) were published in English in a peer-reviewed journal. Pooled risk differences (RD) for adverse outcomes were calculated using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. Three Level 1b prospective randomized studies and five Level 2b retrospective cohort studies were included, from which 5327 cases were identified as having received a surgical drain and 773 were identified as having received no drainage following non-instrumented LDS. There was no difference between groups in the risk of symptomatic epidural hematoma (RD = 0.02; 95% CI -0.02 - 0.06, p = 0.28) or post-operative infection (RD = 0.00; 95% CI -0.01 - 0.01, p = 0.91). In conclusion, symptomatic epidural hematomas and infection are rare following non-instrumented LDS, with incidence rates unaffected by the routine use of wound drainage.

摘要

伤口引流管在腰椎减压手术(LDS)中经常使用。然而,这种做法是否有助于预防有症状的硬膜外血肿形成及相关并发症仍不清楚,尤其是在非器械辅助手术之后。因此,我们完成了一项系统综述和荟萃分析,以严格评估相关文献。检索方案是通过Ovid MEDLINE、EMBASE、Scopus、Cochrane图书馆和谷歌学术数据库进行的。纳入符合以下标准的文章:(i)研究接受LDS的患者;(ii)包括接受术后伤口引流的病例;(iii)详细描述不良结局,包括有症状的硬膜外血肿或伤口感染;(iv)发表在同行评审期刊上的英文文章。使用综合荟萃分析软件计算不良结局的合并风险差异(RD)。纳入了三项1b级前瞻性随机研究和五项2b级回顾性队列研究,从中确定5327例在非器械辅助LDS后接受了手术引流,773例未接受引流。有症状的硬膜外血肿风险(RD = 0.02;95% CI -0.02 - 0.06,p = 0.28)或术后感染风险(RD = 0.00;95% CI -0.01 - 0.01,p = 0.91)在两组之间没有差异。总之,在非器械辅助LDS后,有症状的硬膜外血肿和感染很少见,发病率不受伤口引流常规使用的影响。

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