Network meta analysis of the effectiveness of surgery combined with multiple interventions in treating patients with ear keloids / 中华整形外科杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective@#To evaluate the effectiveness of surgery combined with multiple interventions in treating patients with ear keloid by network meta-analysis.@*Methods@#Databases including " PubMed" , " Cochrane Library" were searched using key words " (((((((((((Ear, External[MeSH Terms]]] OR (Ears, Exernal]] OR (Outer Ear]] OR (Ear, Outer]] OR (Ears, Outer]] OR (External Ear]]] AND (((keloid[Mesh Terms]]] OR (keloids]]] AND ((((((surgery[MeSH Terms]]] OR (operative therapy]] OR (operative procedures]] OR (invasive procedures]] OR (operations]]]] AND (randomized controlled trial[pt]]" , database " Embase" was searched using key words ((′external ear′/exp] OR(′auricle′/exp] OR (′ear lobe′/exp]] AND ((′surgery′/exp] OR (′ear surgery′/exp]] AND (′keloid′/exp] AND (′randomized controlled trial′/exp] and Chineses journals full-text database, China biology medicine disc, VIP database, and Wanfang database were searched using key words in chinese version "耳瘢痕疙瘩,手术" to obtain the randomized controlled trails about surgery combined with multiple interventions in the treatment of ear keloid from the establishment of each database to June 2018. EndNote X7, Revman 5.3, STATA 14.0, GeMTC 14.3 statistical software were used to extract data from studies, study quality assessment, drawing network figure, publication bias analysis, traditional meta-analysis, heterogeneity test, consistency test, similarity test, network meta-analysis.@*Results@#A total of 18 trails involving 8 therapeutic measures were included, and 1 425 patients with ear keloid were included. All of the 18 trails had high risk of bias. The network figure shows that there are 28 different pairwise comparisons among the eight treatments. Of the 18 studies included, 10 were directly compared, and the remaining 18 were not directly evidenced, those comparisons will be made indirectly by the network meta-analysis. The basic symmetry of each point in the funnel plot and the P values of Beggs test and Eggers test were all greater than 0.05, shows that the existence of publication bias is less likely. Traditional meta-analysis showed that the efficiency of surgery + hormone, surgery + pressure, surgery + radiotherapy and surgery + hormone + radiotherapy were better than that of simple surgery, and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05); the efficiency of surgery + hormone + radiotherapy was better than that of surgery + hormone, the difference was statistically significant(P=0.001); surgery + hormone + fluorouracil and surgery + hormone + radiotherapy had statistical significance(P<0.05). Efficiency is higher than surgery + radiotherapy, the difference is statistically significant. The rest of the direct comparisons are not statistically significant. All P values in the heterogeneity test were greater than 0.1 and I2 was less than 50%, so there was no significant heterogeneity in the study. 8 treatments formed 4 closed loops, the inconsistency factor IF ranged from 0.06 to 0.23, and the lower limit of 95% CI was 0, it means than the consistency of those loops were good. The similarity test of the 18 studies was good. Based on Bayesian theory, the random effect model of MCMC method was analyzed by network meta analysis. The results of 7 combined therapies were statistically significant compared with those of simple operation, and were superior to those of simple operation. The results of the seven combined therapies were statistically significant as follows surgery + hormone + fluorouracil VS surgery + radiotherapy (OR = 0.28, 95% CI 0.08-0.93], surgery + hormone + fluorouracil was better than surgery + hormone; surgery + hormone + radiotherapy + VS surgery + hormone (OR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.01-0.23], surgery + hormone + radiotherapy Surgery + hormone + radiotherapy VS surgery + pressure (OR = 0.07, 95% CI 0.01-0.37], surgery + hormone + radiotherapy is better than surgery + pressure; surgery + hormone + radiotherapy VS surgery + radiotherapy (OR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.01-0.30], surgery + hormone + radiotherapy is better than surgery + radiotherapy. There was no significant difference in the curative effect between the other combined treatments. The SUCRA curves were drawn according to the randomized effect model of MCMC. The SUCRA values of each treatment measure were as follows surgery, 0.4%; surgery + hormone, 33.0%; surgery + pressure, 52.2%; surgery + radiotherapy, 34.6%; surgery + imiquimod 53.3%; surgery + fluorouracil 51.6%; surgery + hormone + fluorouracil, 76.4%; surgery + hormone + radiotherapy, 34.6%; surgery + hormone + fluorouracil, 53.3%; surgery + hormone Radiotherapy, 98.4%. According to the results of SUCRA chart, the effectiveness of each treatment measure was sorted as follows operation + hormone + radiotherapy > operation + hormone + fluorouracil > operation + imiquimod > operation + pressure > operation + fluorouracil > operation + radiotherapy > operation + hormone > operation.@*Conclusions@#Surgery combined with a variety of treatments for ear keloid were superior to simple surgical treatment, of which surgery + hormone + radiotherapy is the best.