RESUMO
@# Objective To systematically evaluate the application effect of CT-guided Hook-wire localization and CT-guided microcoil localization in pulmonary nodules surgery. Methods The literatures on the comparison between CT-guided Hook-wire localization and CT-guided microcoil localization for pulmonary nodules were searched in PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wanfang, VIP and CNKI databases from the inception to October 2021. Review Manager (version 5.4) software was used for meta-analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the quality of studies. Results A total of 10 retrospective cohort studies were included, with 1 117 patients including 473 patients in the CT-guided Hook-wire localization group and 644 patients in the CT-guided microcoil localization group. The quality of the studies was high with NOS scores>6 points. The result of meta-analysis showed that the difference in the localization operation time (MD=0.14, 95%CI −3.43 to 3.71, P=0.940) between the two groups was not statistically significant. However, the localization success rate of the Hook-wire group was superior to the microcoil group (OR=0.35, 95%CI 0.17 to 0.72, P=0.005). In addition, in comparison with Hook-wire localization, the microcoil localization could reduce the dislocation rate (OR=4.33, 95%CI 2.07 to 9.08, P<0.001), the incidence of pneumothorax (OR=1.62, 95%CI 1.12 to 2.33, P=0.010) and pulmonary hemorrhage (OR=1.64, 95%CI 1.07 to 2.51, P=0.020). Conclusion Although Hook-wire localization is slightly better than microcoil localization in the aspect of the success rate of pulmonary nodule localization, microcoil localization has an obvious advantage compared with Hook-wire localization in terms of controlling the incidence of dislocation, pneumothorax and pulmonary hemorrhage. Therefore, from a comprehensive perspective, this study believes that CT-guided microcoil localization is a preoperative localization method worthy of further promotion.
RESUMO
@#Objective To compare the mortality in lung cancer patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) versus other cancer patients infected with COVID-19. Methods A computer search of PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wanfang database, VIP database and CNKI database was conducted to compare the mortality of lung cancer and other cancers patients infected with COVID-19 from the inception to December 2021. Two thoracic surgeons independently screened the literature, extracted data, and then cross-checked the literature. After evaluating the quality of the included literature, a meta-analysis was performed on the literature using Review Manager 5.4 software. Results A total of 12 retrospective cohort studies were included, covering 3 065 patients infected with COVID-19, among whom 340 patients suffered from lung cancer and the remaining 2 725 patients suffered from other cancers. Meta-analysis results showed that the lung cancer patients infected with COVID-19 had a higher mortality (OR=1.58, 95%CI 1.24 to 2.02, P<0.001). Subgroup analysis results showed that the mortality of two groups of patients in our country was not statistically different (OR=0.90, 95%CI 0.49 to 1.65, P=0.72). Whereas, patients with lung cancer had a higher mortality than those with other cancers in other countries (Brazil, Spain, USA, France, Italy, UK, Netherlands) (OR=1.78, 95%CI 1.37 to 2.32, P<0.001). Conclusion There is a negligible difference in mortality between lung cancer and other cancers patients who are infected with COVID-19 in our country; while a higher mortality rate is found in lung cancer patients in other countries. Consequently, appropriate and positive prevention methods should be taken to reduce the risk of infecting COVID-19 in cancer patients and to optimize the management of the infected population.
RESUMO
@#Objective To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and adverse reactions of paclitaxel and carboplatin with or without bevacizumab in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods The databases including PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP and CBM were searched from inception to October 2022 to collect randomized controlled trials of the clinical efficacy of paclitaxel and carboplatin with or without bevacizumab for the treatment of NSCLC. RevMan 5.4 software was used for meta-analysis. Results Eight randomized controlled trials were enrolled, involving a total of 1 724 patients. Meta-analysis showed that for the treatment of NSCLC, the disease control rate, overall response rate, 1-year survival rate, and 2-year survival rate were higher in the trial group (paclitaxel and carboplatin combined with bevacizumab) than those in the control group (paclitaxel and carboplatin) (P<0.05); however, the incidences of the adverse reactions, such as leukopenia, hemorrhage, proteinuria and hypertension, etc, were higher in the trial group than those in the control group (P<0.05). There were no statistical differences between the trial group and the control group in the incidences of fatigue, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia or hyponatremia, etc (P>0.05). In addition, the median progression-free survival and overall survival were longer in the trial group than those in the control group. Conclusion For the treatment of NSCLC, paclitaxel and carboplatin combined with bevacizumab is superior in terms of disease control, overall response and prolonging patient survival, etc, but will be associated with more adverse reactions.
RESUMO
@#Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of nedaplatin versus cisplatin combined with fluorouracil in the treatment of esophageal neoplasms. Methods PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang, VIP and CBM databases were searched by computer to investigate the randomized controlled studies about the clinical effects of nedaplatin combined with fluorouracil versus cisplatin combined with fluorouracil in the treatment of esophageal neoplasms. The retrieval time was from the establishment of the database to January 2021. And meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Results A total of 12 randomized controlled studies involving 744 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the total effective rate of the nedaplatin group was better than that of the cisplatin group (P<0.05). The incidence of nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and renal impairment in the nedaplatin group was lower than that in the cisplatin group (P<0.05), but the incidence of leukopenia and hemoglobin decline was higher than that in the cisplatin group (P<0.05). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of liver injury, or platelet decline between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Nedaplatin combined with fluorouracil has more advantages than cisplatin combined with fluorouracil in the treatment of esophageal cancer, the incidence of nausea, vomiting and diarrhea is lower, and the damage to kidney function is also smaller.