Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39361225

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) are established interventions for alleviating symptoms and enhancing survival in individuals with severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, the long-term outcomes and incidence of reintervention associated with TAVI and SAVR remain uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the incidence of reintervention in TAVI versus SAVR. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled with a random-effects model. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Nine RCTs were included, with 5144 (50.9%) patients randomized to TAVI. Compared with SAVR, TAVI increased reinterventions (RR 1.89; 95% CI 1.29-2.76; p < 0.01) and the need for pacemakers (RR 1.91; 95% CI 1.49-2.45; p < 0.01). In addition, TAVI significantly reduced the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.32- 0.59; p < 0.01). There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.92-1.16; p = 0.55), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.94-1.17; p = 0.44), stroke (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.80-1.17; p = 0.76), endocarditis (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.70-1.33; p = 0.82), and myocardial infarction (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.79-1.41; p = 0.72) between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe AS, TAVI significantly increased the incidence of reinterventions and the need for pacemakers as compared with SAVR.

2.
J Burn Care Res ; 2024 Sep 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39259807

ABSTRACT

Deep burn injuries necessitate effective debridement to promote healing and reduce complications. Traditional surgical debridement is the standard of care; however, it can lead to significant tissue loss, excessive bleeding and delayed healing. Bromelain-based enzymatic debridement offers a potential less invasive alternative that aims to selectively remove necrotic tissue while preserving viable ones. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis comprehensively compares bromelain debridement versus standard care in the management of partial and full-thickness burns. Cochrane Library, Embase, and Medline were searched until May 30th, 2024 for studies comparing bromelain debridement versus standard care. R version 4.4.0 was used to pooled risk ratio and mean difference in a random-effects model. We included seven studies, comprising 484 participants, of whom 238 (49%) were treated with enzymatic debridement. Bromelain significantly reduced time to eschar removal (MD - 7.60 days 95% CI [-9.76, -5.44]; I² = 70%) in comparison with standard care. Additionally, bromelain group presented a significant reduction in the risk of surgical excision (RR 0.17; 95% CI [0.06, 0.47]; I² = 79%) and need for autografts (RR 0.40; 95% CI [0.18, 0.93]; I² = 76%) in comparison with standard group. No differences were found in behalf of time to wound closure (MD -7.64; 95% CI [-18.46]-[3.18]; I2 = 86%), nor in Modified Vancouver Scar Scale (MD -0.36; 95% CI [-0.96]-[0.23]; I2 = 0%). Bromelain-based enzymatic debridement may accelerate eschar removal and reduce the need for surgical excision and autografts, without adversely affecting wound closure time or long-term scar quality.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL