...
首页> 外文期刊>Archives of surgery. >Ultrasonic and nonultrasonic instrumentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
【24h】

Ultrasonic and nonultrasonic instrumentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机译:超声波和非超声波仪器:系统评价和荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasonic surgical instrumentation with nonultrasonic traditional surgical techniques in various types of surgery. DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, Current Contents, and the Cochrane Library were performed for the period of 1990 to June 1, 2005, using relevant search terms. A manual check of all references in accepted studies was also performed. STUDY SELECTION: Only comparative studies (including randomized and nonrandomized control trials) of ultrasonic surgical instrumentation with nonultrasonic instrumentation were accepted. Procedures of interest included the following: colorectal surgery, gynecologic surgery, head and neck surgery, solid organ surgery, vessel harvesting, cholecystectomy, hemorrhoidectomy, mastectomy, and Nissen fundoplication. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators reviewed each study: the first investigator extracted all relevant data, and consensus of each extraction was performed by a second investigator to verify the data. Data were then entered into a database and quality checked for accuracy. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fifty-one primary studies that examined 4902 patients were included in this systematic review, of which 24 were randomized trials and 27 were nonrandomized studies. Comparative meta-analyses for blood loss, surgery time, and hospital length of stay were performed using a random-effects model and stratified by surgery type. Heterogeneity was tested using Q statistics. Statistical significance was defined as P < .05. CONCLUSION: Meta-analysis of outcomes comparing ultrasonic with conventional nonultrasonic surgical instrumentation demonstrates significant improvement of several perioperative outcomes in procedure-specific settings when ultrasonic instrumentation is used.
机译:目的:比较超声外科手术器械与非超声传统外科技术在各种类型手术中的疗效和安全性。数据来源:使用相关搜索词对1990年至2005年6月1日期间的MEDLINE,当前内容和Cochrane图书馆进行了电子搜索。还对接受研究中的所有参考文献进行了手动检查。研究选择:仅接受超声外科器械与非超声器械的比较研究(包括随机和非随机对照试验)。感兴趣的程序包括:结肠直肠手术,妇科手术,头颈手术,实体器官手术,血管收集,胆囊切除术,痔疮切除术,乳腺切除术和尼森胃底折叠术。数据提取:两名研究者对每项研究进行了审查:第一名研究者提取了所有相关数据,第二名研究者对每次提取进行了共识以验证数据。然后将数据输入数据库,并检查质量以确保准确性。数据综合:本系统评价包括51项检查了4902例患者的基础研究,其中24项为随机试验,27项为非随机研究。使用随机效应模型对失血量,手术时间和住院时间进行比较荟萃分析,并按手术类型进行分层。使用Q统计量测试异质性。统计显着性定义为P <.05。结论:对超声结果与常规非超声外科手术器械进行比较的结果荟萃分析表明,在使用超声器械时,在特定于手术的环境中,围手术期的几种结果得到了显着改善。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号