Suppr超能文献

内镜辅助经口入路切除咽旁间隙肿瘤:系统评价与Meta分析

Endoscopy-Assisted Transoral Approach to Resect Parapharyngeal Space Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Chen Huihong, He Zhiying, Li Guo, Liu Chao, Zhang Diekuo, Huang Donghai, Xie Changning, Jiang Weihong, Qiu Yuanzheng, Zhang Xin, Liu Yong

机构信息

Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, People's Republic of China.

Otolaryngology Major Disease Research, Key Laboratory of Hunan Province, Changsha, Hunan, People's Republic of China.

出版信息

Laryngoscope. 2021 Oct;131(10):2246-2253. doi: 10.1002/lary.29458. Epub 2021 Feb 22.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

By comparing the endoscopy-assisted transoral approach (EATA) with external approaches (EAs) for the resection of parapharyngeal space tumors (PPSTs), we determined whether the EATA has advantages in terms of operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative hospitalization, drainage volume, and complications. At the same time, we summarized the surgical indications for the EATA.

METHODS

Systematic literature retrieval was performed in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang, and CQVIP databases up to February 2020. We calculated the mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous outcomes and pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes. The measured outcomes were operative time, bleeding volume, postoperative hospitalization, drainage volume, and complications.

RESULTS

Seven studies involving 318 patients were eligible. Of these patients, 145 patients underwent EATA and 173 patients underwent EA surgery. All the former tumors were benign and located medial or anteromedial to the carotid sheath except for the unrecorded tumors. Compared with EAs, the EATA significantly shortened the operation time (MD = -5.56 min, 95% CI: -9.58 to -1.55), shrank the bleeding volume (MD = -89.02 ml, 95% CI: -126.16 to -51.88), shortened the postoperative hospitalization (MD = -2.44 days, 95% CI: -3.37 to -1.51), reduced the drainage volume (MD = -32.97 ml, 95% CI: -36.24 to -29.70), and lowered the incidence of complications (OR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.59).

CONCLUSION

As for PPSTs, with an appropriate and precise patient selection, the EATA is a safe, effective, minimally invasive, and aesthetic surgical modality. Laryngoscope, 131:2246-2253, 2021.

摘要

目的

通过比较内镜辅助经口入路(EATA)与外部入路(EA)切除咽旁间隙肿瘤(PPST),我们确定EATA在手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、引流量和并发症方面是否具有优势。同时,我们总结了EATA的手术适应证。

方法

截至2020年2月,在PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、CNKI、万方和维普数据库中进行系统的文献检索。我们计算连续结果的平均差(MD)及其95%置信区间(CI),以及二分结果的合并比值比(OR)及其95%CI。测量的结果包括手术时间、出血量、术后住院时间、引流量和并发症。

结果

7项研究纳入318例患者。其中,145例患者接受EATA手术,173例患者接受EA手术。除未记录的肿瘤外,所有前者的肿瘤均为良性,且位于颈动脉鞘内侧或前内侧。与EA相比,EATA显著缩短了手术时间(MD = -5.56分钟,95%CI:-9.58至-1.55),减少了出血量(MD = -89.02毫升,95%CI:-126.16至-51.88),缩短了术后住院时间(MD = -2.44天,95%CI:-3.37至-1.51),减少了引流量(MD = -32.97毫升,95%CI:-36.24至-29.70),并降低了并发症的发生率(OR = 0.30,95%CI:0.16至0.59)。

结论

对于PPST,在适当且精确的患者选择下,EATA是一种安全、有效、微创且美观的手术方式。《喉镜》,131:2246 - 2253,2021年。

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