RESUMO
AIM: To investigate the effect of internal limiting membrane transplantation and autologous blood on treating refractory giant macular hole. METHODS: Thirty-seven eyes with giant macular hole of the smallest hole diameter >700 µm, the maximum diameter of the substrate >1000 µm and hole formation factor <0.6 underwent surgical treatment. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Nineteen eyes with surgical flip of the internal limiting membrane in group A, 18 eyes with internal limiting membrane transplantation in group B who underwent the tamponade of internal limiting membrane into the hole, autologous plasma was used to seal the hole. The patients were followed up for 3mo, optical coherence tomography and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) were recorded before and after operation, and the results were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: At 3mo after operation, BCVA of the two groups was significantly improved compared with that before operation (tA=4.192, tB=4.374, P<0.05). But there was no significant difference in visual acuity between the two groups (χ2=0.128, P>0.05). At 3mo after operation, the closure rate of group A was 68.4%, and 100% in group B. (χ2=5.628, P<0.05). The defect diameter of inner segment/outer segment at 3mo after the operation was significantly lower than that before operation (tA=12.287, tB=15.481, P<0.05), and the difference was statistically significant (t=2.552, P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Internal limiting membrane transplantation combined with autologous whole blood can improve the postoperative closure rate of the refractory large aperture, and can effectively improve the postoperative visual acuity.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the methodological quality and reporting quality on Meta-analysis being published in the Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery. METHODS: Computerized literature searching was carried out in Wanfang Medical Online to collect articles that Meta-analysis was used in the Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery since it was founded till July, 2014. Manual retrieval was also conducted. Two researchers independently screened for literature and extracted data. Qualities on methodologies or on the processes of reporting and reviewing were evaluated by both AMSTAR and PRISMA scales. RESULTS: Forty-two papers on meta-analyses were included in this study. Results on the quality of methodology evaluation showed that the lowest and highest scores were 6 and 9 respectively, the median score was 7. Two articles (4.8%) were rated as high, 40 articles (95.2%) as moderate and 0 articles (0%) as low. Although the quality of methodology was above the average, however, there were still some problems seen in some papers as the conflict of interest was not stated, the list of studies (included and excluded) was not provided, a comprehensive literature search was not performed, the likelihood of publication bias was not assessed, etc. Results on the quality of reporting evaluation showed that the lowest and highest scores were 14 and 22 respectively, the average score was 18.43 ± 2.03, 3 articles (7.1%) scored less than 15 points, 35 articles (83.3%) scored 15.5-21 points, and 4 articles (9.6%) scored 21.5-27 points. The included reviews had high quality on the titles of the report, inclusion criteria, rationale of introduction, synthesis of results, results of individual. However, the abstract, objectives of introduction, scheme and registered, inclusion criteria, research screening, additional analysis, conclusion limitations, funding support etc. were lack of comprehensive reports. CONCLUSIONS: Articles on Meta-analysis published in the Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery are of high quality. The Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery can provide better evidence for clinical decision to gastrointestinal surgeons. However, both of qualities on methodology and reports sill call for continuous improvement.
