• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利：CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法，用中文像聊天一样搜索，搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐，让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版，准确专业，支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式，支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述，25分钟生成高质量综述，智能提取关键信息，辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

外科学系统评价——德国外科学会研究中心的建议。

Systematic reviews in surgery-recommendations from the Study Center of the German Society of Surgery.

机构信息

Study Center of the German Society of Surgery (SDGC), University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.

Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.

出版信息

Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2021 Sep;406(6):1723-1731. doi: 10.1007/s00423-021-02204-x. Epub 2021 Jun 15.

DOI:10.1007/s00423-021-02204-x
PMID:34129108
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8481197/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews are an important tool of evidence-based surgery. Surgical systematic reviews and trials, however, require a special methodological approach.

PURPOSE

This article provides recommendations for conducting state-of-the-art systematic reviews in surgery with or without meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

For systematic reviews in surgery, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) should be searched. Critical appraisal is at the core of every surgical systematic review, with information on blinding, industry involvement, surgical experience, and standardisation of surgical technique holding special importance. Due to clinical heterogeneity among surgical trials, the random-effects model should be used as a default. In the experience of the Study Center of the German Society of Surgery, adherence to these recommendations yields high-quality surgical systematic reviews.

摘要

背景

系统评价是循证外科的重要工具。然而，外科系统评价和试验需要特殊的方法学方法。

目的

本文提供了有关在有或没有荟萃分析的情况下进行最先进的外科系统评价的建议。

结论

对于外科系统评价，应检索 MEDLINE（通过 PubMed）、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册（CENTRAL）。批判性评价是每一个外科系统评价的核心，其中关于盲法、行业参与、外科经验和手术技术标准化的信息具有特殊重要性。由于外科试验之间存在临床异质性，应默认使用随机效应模型。根据德国外科协会研究中心的经验，遵守这些建议可产生高质量的外科系统评价。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e56d/8481197/60296b669e2f/423_2021_2204_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e56d/8481197/cb2f2ae45f10/423_2021_2204_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e56d/8481197/60296b669e2f/423_2021_2204_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e56d/8481197/cb2f2ae45f10/423_2021_2204_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e56d/8481197/60296b669e2f/423_2021_2204_Fig2_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Systematic reviews in surgery-recommendations from the Study Center of the German Society of Surgery.外科学系统评价——德国外科学会研究中心的建议。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2021 Sep;406(6):1723-1731. doi: 10.1007/s00423-021-02204-x. Epub 2021 Jun 15.
2
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
3
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区，服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中，叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
4
Methodological quality of systematic reviews comprising clinical practice guidelines for cardiovascular risk assessment and management for noncardiac surgery.系统评价方法学质量的临床实践指南，涵盖心血管风险评估和非心脏手术管理。
Br J Anaesth. 2021 Dec;127(6):905-916. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.08.016. Epub 2021 Sep 20.
5
The Value of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Surgery.手术中系统评价和荟萃分析的价值。
Eur Surg Res. 2021;62(4):221-228. doi: 10.1159/000519593. Epub 2021 Oct 28.
6
Drug, devices, technologies, and techniques for blood management in minimally invasive and conventional cardiothoracic surgery: a consensus statement from the International Society for Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery (ISMICS) 2011.微创和传统心胸外科手术中血液管理的药物、器械、技术与方法：国际微创心胸外科协会（ISMICS）2011年共识声明
Innovations (Phila). 2012 Jul-Aug;7(4):229-41. doi: 10.1097/IMI.0b013e3182747699.
7
The Study Centre of the German Surgical Society: current trials and results.德国外科学会研究中心：当前试验及结果。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2012 Apr;397(4):611-8. doi: 10.1007/s00423-012-0922-z. Epub 2012 Feb 29.
8
Surgical site infection prevention in abdominal surgery: is intraoperative wound irrigation with antiseptics effective? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.腹部手术部位感染预防：术中使用防腐剂冲洗伤口是否有效？系统评价和荟萃分析方案。
BMJ Open. 2023 Feb 14;13(2):e066140. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066140.
9
Clinical guidelines and payer policies on fusion for the treatment of chronic low back pain.临床指南和支付方政策对慢性下腰痛融合治疗的影响。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Oct 1;36(21 Suppl):S144-63. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822ef5b4.
10
Key Steps in Conducting Systematic Reviews for Underpinning Clinical Practice Guidelines: Methodology of the European Association of Urology.开展临床实践指南的系统评价的关键步骤：欧洲泌尿外科学会的方法学。
Eur Urol. 2018 Feb;73(2):290-300. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.08.016. Epub 2017 Sep 13.

引用本文的文献

1
Surgical systematic reviews: best available evidence or disposable waste?外科系统评价：是最佳可用证据还是一次性垃圾？
Innov Surg Sci. 2024 Jul 16;10(2):61-64. doi: 10.1515/iss-2022-0029. eCollection 2025 Jun.
2
Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Management of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.胰腺神经内分泌肿瘤的手术治疗与非手术治疗：一项系统评价与Meta分析
Ann Surg Oncol. 2025 Jul 24. doi: 10.1245/s10434-025-17819-3.
3
The role of the MicroBiome in PANCreatic cancer and its precursors- the study protocol of the MiBiPanc systematic review and meta-analysis.

本文引用的文献

1
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.PRISMA 2020 声明：系统评价报告的更新指南。
BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
2
Not yet IDEAL?-evidence and learning curves of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy.尚未达到理想状态？——微创胰十二指肠切除术的证据和学习曲线
Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr. 2020 Dec;9(6):812-814. doi: 10.21037/hbsn.2020.03.22.
3
Considerations and methods for placebo controls in surgical trials (ASPIRE guidelines).手术试验中安慰剂对照的考虑因素和方法（ASPIRE 指南）。
微生物群落在胰腺癌及其癌前病变中的作用——MiBiPanc系统评价与荟萃分析的研究方案
Syst Rev. 2025 Jul 18;14(1):150. doi: 10.1186/s13643-025-02910-3.
4
The Effectiveness of Patient Education on Laparoscopic Surgery Postoperative Outcomes to Determine Whether Direct Coaching Is the Best Approach: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.患者教育对腹腔镜手术术后结局的有效性：确定直接指导是否为最佳方法——随机对照试验的系统评价
JMIR Perioper Med. 2024 Jun 27;7:e51573. doi: 10.2196/51573.
5
Towards a Standardization of Learning Curve Assessment in Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery.迈向微创肝脏手术学习曲线评估的标准化
Ann Surg. 2024 Jun 26;281(2):252-64. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006417.
6
The introduction of a 42 + 4 h work week for surgical residents in Switzerland - a stakeholder analysis.瑞士为外科住院医师引入每周工作 42+4 小时制度-利益相关者分析。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2024 Jun 24;409(1):197. doi: 10.1007/s00423-024-03385-x.
7
Effect of artificial or autologous coverage of the pancreatic remnant or anastomosis on postoperative pancreatic fistulas after partial pancreatectomy: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.部分胰腺切除术后人工或自体覆盖残胰或吻合口对术后胰瘘的影响：随机临床试验的荟萃分析。
BJS Open. 2024 May 8;8(3). doi: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae059.
8
Is neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery the appropriate treatment for esophagogastric signet ring cell carcinomas? A systematic review and meta-analysis.新辅助化疗后行手术是否是食管胃印戒细胞癌的合适治疗方法？一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Front Surg. 2024 May 6;11:1382039. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2024.1382039. eCollection 2024.
9
Promising Results of Associating Liver Partition and Portal Vein Ligation for Staged Hepatectomy for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma in a Systematic Review and Single-Arm Meta-Analysis.在一项系统评价和单臂荟萃分析中，肝门部胆管癌分期肝切除联合肝分割和门静脉结扎术的良好结果。
Cancers (Basel). 2024 Feb 13;16(4):771. doi: 10.3390/cancers16040771.
10
Framework for a living systematic review and meta-analysis for the surgical treatment of bladder cancer: introducing EVIglance to urology.膀胱癌手术治疗的实时系统评价与荟萃分析框架：向泌尿外科引入EVIglance
Int J Surg Protoc. 2023 Sep 18;27(2):9-15. doi: 10.1097/SP9.0000000000000008. eCollection 2023 Oct.
Lancet. 2020 Mar 7;395(10226):828-838. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)33137-X.
4
Learning Curves of Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy in Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Introduction of a Standardization.减重手术中腹腔镜 Roux-en-Y 胃旁路术和袖状胃切除术的学习曲线：系统评价及标准化介绍。
Obes Surg. 2020 Feb;30(2):640-656. doi: 10.1007/s11695-019-04230-7.
5
Attitudes of editors of core clinical journals about whether systematic reviews are original research: a mixed-methods study.核心临床期刊编辑对系统评价是否为原始研究的态度：一项混合方法研究。
BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 30;9(8):e029704. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029704.
6
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.《随机对照试验偏倚风险评估工具2：修订版》
BMJ. 2019 Aug 28;366:l4898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898.
7
Laparoscopic Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.腹腔镜与开腹胰十二指肠切除术的比较：随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Ann Surg. 2020 Jan;271(1):54-66. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003309.
8
Evidence-based recommendations for blinding in surgical trials.基于证据的手术试验中盲法使用建议。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2019 May;404(3):273-284. doi: 10.1007/s00423-019-01761-6. Epub 2019 Mar 1.
9
Systematic review of the quantity and quality of randomized clinical trials in pancreatic surgery.胰腺外科随机临床试验数量和质量的系统评价。
Br J Surg. 2019 Jan;106(1):23-31. doi: 10.1002/bjs.11030.
10
Exploring and adjusting for potential learning effects in ROLARR: a randomised controlled trial comparing robotic-assisted vs. standard laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection.探索并调整ROLARR中的潜在学习效应：一项比较机器人辅助与标准腹腔镜手术治疗直肠癌切除术的随机对照试验
Trials. 2018 Jun 27;19(1):339. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2726-0.