Suppr超能文献

基于脆弱指数和反向脆弱指数分析 2000 年至 2020 年期间进行的肛门瘘随机对照试验。

An analysis of randomized controlled trials on anal fistula conducted between 2000 and 2020 based on the Fragility Index and Reverse Fragility Index.

机构信息

Colorectal Unit, Department of Surgery, Hospital Universitario Donostia, San Sebastian, Spain.

出版信息

Colorectal Dis. 2023 Aug;25(8):1572-1577. doi: 10.1111/codi.16645. Epub 2023 Jul 3.

Abstract

AIM

The aim of this work was to evaluate the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on anal fistula management using the news tools of Fragility Index (FI), Reverse Fragility Index (RFI) and their corresponding fragility quotients.

METHOD

A systematic search was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines which utilized MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases. Inclusion criteria included RCTs related to the management of anal fistula published from 2000 to 2022 with dichotomous outcomes measures and 1:1 allocation. Calculation of FI and RFI was performed by creating 2 × 2 contingency tables by successively changing one nonevent to an event for each outcome measure until the result was made nonsignificant or significant, respectively. The Fragility Quotients were calculated by dividing the FI or RFI by the total sample size. Fragile results were defined as those with a FI or RFI equal to or less than the number of patients lost to follow-up. Additionally, those with a FI or RFI less than 3 were also considered fragile. Studies were considered extremely fragile if FI was ≤1 or FQ was ≤0.01.

RESULTS

There were 36 RCTs that met our criteria, with 3223 patients. Among these, 19 (53%) were positive RCTs (p < 0.005) and 17 (47%) were negative RCTs (p > 0.05). The median FI was 2 (0-5). The analysis by categorical subgroup showed a strong correlation between FI and the p-value (p = 0.000) and the number of events (p = 0.011). The median RFI was 5 (3.5-9.5) and the subgroup analysis showed a strong correlation between RFI and the p-value (p = 0.000), sample size (0.021) and number needed to treat/number needed to harm (0.000). We considered 63.2% of positive RCTs to be fragile and 35.3% of negative RCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study we demonstrated the lack of robustness of study findings in published RCTs in the field of anal fistula.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估使用脆弱指数(FI)、反向脆弱指数(RFI)及其相应的脆弱性系数等新工具评估肛瘘管理中随机对照试验(RCT)的稳健性。

方法

根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,对 MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane 图书馆和 Web of Science 数据库进行了系统检索。纳入标准包括 2000 年至 2022 年发表的与肛瘘管理相关的、具有二项结局指标和 1:1 分配的 RCT。通过对每个结局指标逐一将一个非事件转换为事件,创建 2×2 列联表来计算 FI 和 RFI,直到结果变得无统计学意义或有统计学意义,分别。脆弱性系数是通过将 FI 或 RFI 除以总样本量来计算的。脆弱的结果被定义为 FI 或 RFI 等于或小于失访患者数的结果。此外,FI 或 RFI 小于 3 的结果也被认为是脆弱的。如果 FI 等于或小于 1 或 FQ 等于或小于 0.01,则认为研究极脆弱。

结果

共有 36 项符合标准的 RCT,共纳入 3223 例患者。其中,阳性 RCT 19 项(53%)(p<0.005),阴性 RCT 17 项(47%)(p>0.05)。FI 的中位数为 2(0-5)。分类亚组分析显示 FI 与 p 值(p=0.000)和事件数(p=0.011)之间存在很强的相关性。RFI 的中位数为 5(3.5-9.5),亚组分析显示 RFI 与 p 值(p=0.000)、样本量(0.021)和需要治疗/需要伤害的人数(0.000)之间存在很强的相关性。我们认为 63.2%的阳性 RCT 是脆弱的,35.3%的阴性 RCT 是脆弱的。

结论

本研究表明,发表的肛瘘领域 RCT 研究结果缺乏稳健性。

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