Suppr超能文献

Effectiveness of endoscopic versus external surgical approaches in the treatment of orbital complications of rhinosinusitis: a systematic review protocol.

作者信息

Sekhar Vimal, Ao Jack, Iqbal Isma, Ooi Eng Hooi, Munn Zachary

机构信息

Joanna Briggs Institute, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.

Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia.

出版信息

JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2019 Nov;17(11):2378-2389. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2017-003972.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to investigate and compare the effectiveness of endoscopic drainage techniques against external drainage techniques for the treatment of orbital and subperiosteal abscesses as a complication of rhinosinusitis.

INTRODUCTION

Transnasal endoscopic drainage and external drainage techniques have been used in the management of subperiosteal orbital abscesses secondary to rhinosinusitis. Each of these approaches has its own advantages and disadvantages, with extensive literature describing each technique separately. However, there is a lack of guidance in the studies on assessing and comparing the safety, effectiveness and suitability of these techniques. This review aims to compare the effectiveness of these techniques based on measuring outcomes in the literature such as: length of postoperative hospital stay, rate of revision surgery and complication rates.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Eligible studies will include people of all ages diagnosed with subperiosteal abscess, orbital abscess or cavernous sinus thrombosis (Chandler stages III-V) secondary to rhinosinusitis disease, who have also undergone drainage via either an endoscopic approach, external approach or combined surgical approach.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of both published and unpublished literature will be performed to uncover studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Reference lists of studies included in final analyses will also be manually searched and subject matter experts contacted to investigate other sources of literature. Two reviewers will screen studies and a third reviewer will resolve disagreements. Studies will, where possible, be pooled in statistical meta-analysis with heterogeneity of data being assessed using the standard Chi-squared and I tests.

摘要

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