ABSTRACT
There are no guidelines for the most effective medication to reduce hepatic encephalopathy (HE) or the associated mortality. The purpose of this study is to determine the most effective possible treatment among the single treatment options or the combined treatment options for decreasing the morbidity and mortality of HE. We evaluated the outcomes by various parameters such as the quality of life, reduction in ammonia, all causes of mortality, adverse events, reversal of minimal HE, and development of overt HE. We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus till the 19th of January 2023 for studies that assess various treatment options for HE. Data were extracted from eligible studies and pooled in a frequentist network meta-analysis as standardized mean difference (SMD) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) using the MetaInsight web-based tool. The Cochrane Tool was used to assess the randomized controlled trials' quality (RCT), while the NIH tool was used to assess the quality of the included cohort studies. Utilizing the R software, the network meta-analysis was conducted. In addition to a significant variation in cases of (Lactulose and Rifaximin) compared with Rifaximin (RR= 0.39, 95% CI [0.17; 0.89]), the results demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of overt HE in (Lactulose and Rifaximin) compared with placebo (RR=0.19, 95% CI [0.09; 0.40]). Most arms demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of overt HE compared to albumin and placebo. The results also demonstrated a significant reduction in ammonia between L-ornithine-L-aspartate (LOLA) and probiotics (MD= -19.17, 95% CI [-38.01; -0.32]), as well as a significant difference in the incidence of LOLA compared to placebo (MD= -22.62, 95% CI [-39.16; -6.07]). This network meta-analysis has significant data for managing subclinical HE in people without a history of overt HE. Our analysis showed that (Lactulose and Rifaximin), followed by (Rifaximin and L-carnitine), followed by (Lactulose and Rifaximin with zinc) were the best combinations regarding overt HE. LOLA reduced ammonia best, followed by Nitazoxanide and finally Lactulose. (Lactulose and Nitazoxanide) have the least adverse effects, followed by (Rifaximin and L-carnitine), then Probiotics. Yet, all mortality outcomes and quality of life changes yielded no useful findings. Future studies like RCTs must be done to compare our therapies directly.
ABSTRACT
In this study, we aim to explore the differences among the three types of fixation methods for the components of the knee joint in patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA). These methods are cemented, uncemented, and hybrid fixation. Cemented fixation means that a special type of grout is used to attach the components to the bone. Uncemented fixation means that the components are designed to fit tightly into the bone and allow new bone growth to secure them. Hybrid fixation means that a combination of cemented and uncemented fixation is used for different components. We searched four online databases to find studies relevant to our research question. We use the R program (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) for network meta-analysis (NMA) to analyze the data from the studies. We calculate the mean difference (MD) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome, which are statistical measures of the difference and the uncertainty between methods. We use these measures for continuous outcomes, meaning they can have any value. For dichotomous outcomes, meaning they can only have two values, we use the risk ratio (RR) and the 95% CI, which are statistical measures of the relative risk and the uncertainty between methods. We assess the quality of randomized controlled trials, which are studies that randomly assign participants to different methods, using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool 1, a tool that evaluates the potential biases in the studies. We include 21 studies, and our analysis shows that cemented TKA reveals a statistically significant decrease in pain with hybrid TKA (MD = -2.82). That said, we find no significant differences between uncemented and cemented or hybrid (MD = -0.80 and -2.02, respectively). The results show that there is no significant difference between uncemented TKA and cemented TKA or hybrid technique (RR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.35-2.14; RR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.22-2.39, respectively). Also, we find no significant difference between cemented TKA and hybrid TKA (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.24-2.93). Cemented TKA is associated with a lower risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) incidence rate. Moreover, it shows a significant decrease in pain compared to hybrid TKA. Future research is needed to compare among the three interventions.
ABSTRACT
This study aims to compare the outcomes and advantages of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed using conventional surgical techniques with those conducted using robotic-assisted methods in terms of operation time, Oxford knee score, range of motion, tourniquet time, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis index. We performed a literature search through five databases, namely, PubMed, Cochrane Central, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science, from inception until July 3, 2023. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and cohorts comparing conventional TKA with robotic-assisted TKA were included. The risk of bias of the included RCTs was determined using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the National Institutes of Health tool for cohort studies. We conducted a meta-analysis using Review Manager 5.4. To analyze continuous data, we calculated the mean difference (MD) along with its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). By synthesizing data from a comprehensive analysis, the study unveiled noteworthy distinctions between robotic-assisted arthroplasty and conventional arthroplasty across critical parameters. First, a substantial alteration in the hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle was observed, with the robotic-assisted approach demonstrating a significant difference (MD = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.25-1.43, p = 0.005). Second, in terms of operative time, a notable reduction in surgical duration was noted with conventional TKA (MD = 16.85, 95% CI = 8.08-25.63, p = 0.0002). The assessment of tourniquet time exhibited a significantly longer duration for robotic-assisted arthroplasty (MD = 35.70, 95% CI = 27.80-43.61, p < 0.001). Our findings indicate that conventional TKA outperforms robotic-assisted TKA, primarily due to its shorter operative and tourniquet times, along with a more favorable change in the HKA angle. However, it is worth noting that robotic-assisted TKA showed a slight advantage in pain outcomes, although this advantage was not statistically significant. To gain a more comprehensive understanding, we recommend conducting a large-scale randomized controlled trial that directly compares both TKA methods. This trial should evaluate costs and long-term outcomes while ensuring consistent follow-up durations among studies. Such an approach would greatly assist orthopedic decision-making and contribute to improved TKA outcomes.
