A Network Meta-Analysis on the Surgical Management of Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: Anterior, Posterior, and Combined.

Background: Thoracolumbar burst fractures (BFs) are traumatic lesions instigated by compression forces. Canal compression and compromise may lead to neurological deficits. Optimal surgical management is yet to be fully defined since various approaches such as anterior, posterior, or combined exist. This study aims to determine the operative performance of these three treatment modalities. Methods: In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was performed, identifying studies comparing anterior, posterior, and/or combined surgical approaches in patients with thoracolumbar BFs. To analyze available evidence, a Bayesian network meta-analysis framework was utilized. Results: In this study, 16 studies were included. The shortest operative times and lowest operative blood losses were found for a posterior approach. The length of stay (LoS) was shorter with the posterior approach compared with the other two modalities. Return to work, postoperative kyphotic angle (PKA), and complications all favored the posterior approach. The visual analog scale score was similar between groups. Conclusions: This study suggests that the posterior approach has significant advantages in terms of operative time, blood loss, LoS, PKA, return to work, and complication rates when compared to the other approaches. Treatment should remain an individualized process, and before choosing an approach, factors such as patient characteristics, surgeon experience, and hospital settings should be considered.

Intraoperative and postoperative impact of pretransplantation transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts in orthotopic liver transplantations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objectives: Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) remains the definitive treatment for patients afflicted with end-stage liver disease (ESLD). Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) have been adapted as a bridge to transplantation, allowing partial normalization of portal pressure and associated symptom improvement. Conflicting evidence exists on TIPS' impact on operative procedures. This study aimed to analyze available evidence on patients who underwent OLT with prior TIPS compared to OLT alone with the intent to determine TIPS' impact on surgical outcomes. Material and Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted, identifying studies comparing TIPS + OLT versus OLT alone in patients with ESLD. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.3. Results: Thirteen studies were included. Operative time, packed red blood cells transfusions, intensive care unit admission, length of stay, dialysis, serum creatinine levels, ascites, vascular complications, bleeding revisions, reintervention, and other complications rates were similar between both groups. Fresh frozen plasma transfusion -2.88 units (-5.42, -0.35; p= 0.03), was lower in the TIPS + OLT group. Conclusion: Our study found TIPS can be safely employed without having detrimental impacts on OLT outcomes, furthermore, these findings also suggest TIPS does not increase bleeding or complications.

Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Anterior and Posterior Approaches.

Background: A thoracolumbar burst fracture (BF) is a severe type of compression fracture, which is the most common type of traumatic spine fractures. Generally, surgery is the preferred treatment, but whether the optimal approach is either an anterior or a posterior approach remains unclear. This study aims to determine whether either method provides an advantage. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted, identifying studies comparing anterior versus posterior surgical approaches in patients with thoracolumbar BFs. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.3. Seven studies were included. Results: An operative time of 87.97 min (53.91, 122.03; p<0.0001) and blood loss of 497.04 mL (281.8, 712.28; p<0.0001) were lower in the posterior approach. Length of hospital stay, complications, reintervention rate, neurological outcomes, postoperative kyphotic angle, and costs were similar between both groups. Conclusions: Surgical intervention is usually selected to rehabilitate patients with BFs. The data obtained from this study suggest that a posterior approach represents a viable alternative to an anterior approach, with various advantages such as a shorter operative time and decreased bleeding.

Hybrid revascularization vs. coronary bypass for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Coronary artery bypass graft is the mainstay of treatment for multivessel coronary artery disease and is superior to percutaneous coronary intervention. Combined approaches such as hybrid coronary revascularization integrate coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous coronary intervention during the same procedure or weeks apart. These attempt to improve surgical morbidity and long-term outcomes. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Per PRISMA criteria, a systematic review of keywords "Hybrid Revascularization," "Hybrid Coronary Revascularization," "Surgical," "Surgery," "Treatment," "CABG," "HCR" and "PCI" was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS. Studies comparing this technique's performance on either single or two-stage approach against traditional multiple vessel coronary artery bypass grafting were screened and analyzed for our review. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Twenty-two studies totaling 6981 participants were ultimately included for analysis. Mean differences in operative time, bleeding, ventilator time and length of stay were significantly lower in the hybrid coronary revascularization group. Odds ratios in transfusions and in-hospital myocardial infarction were also lower in the hybrid coronary revascularization group. Results for in-hospital and all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), stroke, reintervention, and complete revascularization were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows hybrid coronary revascularization is a feasible alternative to traditional coronary artery bypass grafting. Short-and long-term outcomes including mortality, MACE, and postoperative morbidity are similar between both groups, while hybrid approaches are associated with decreased perioperative morbidity.

Single-port versus multiport robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the da Vinci SP platform.

CONTEXT: Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men; robotic prostatectomy has cemented itself as part of the standard of care. Since its approval by the Food and Drug Administration in 2018, the SP console's application has been increasingly studied and compared with the multiport (MP) robotic approach. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines and PROSPERO registration CRD42021228744, a systematic review was performed in April 2021 on single-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies (SP-RARPs) compared to MP. Outcomes of interest were operative time, bleeding, complications, analgesic use, and postoperative continence, and erectile function. Data were analyzed with Review Manager 5.3. RESULTS: Seven studies were included, of which six studies met the inclusion criteria for quantitative synthesis, totalling 1068 patients, out of which 324 underwent SP-RARP and 744 underwent MP-RARP. No differences were found in baseline characteristics such as age, body mass index, prostatic-specific antigen, or stage. No differences in blood loss-15.77 mL [-42.44, 10.89], p = 0.25, operative time 3.93 min [-4.12, 11.98], p = 0.34, or positive surgical margins, with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.78 [0.55, 1.10], p = 0.15-were found. Length of stay was significantly shorter in SP -0.94 days [-1.56, -0.33], p = 0.003, with no differences in complication rates, with an OR of 1.29 [0.78, 2.14], p = 0.32, continence rates, with an OR of 1.29 [0.90, 1.83], p = 0.16, erectile function, with an OR of 0.86 [0.52, 1.40], p = 0.54, or biochemical recurrence. Qualitative evidence suggests decreased opioid consumption. CONCLUSION: SP-RARPs are feasible alternatives to the traditional MP with possible benefits in pain management and length of stay. Future high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Minimally Invasive versus Open Surgery for Spinal Metastasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Bones are the third most common location for solid tumor metastasis affecting up to 10% of patients with solid tumors. When the spine is involved, thoracic and lumbar vertebrae are frequently affected. Access to spinal lesions can be through minimally invasive surgery (MIS) or traditional open surgery (OS). This study aims to determine which method provides an advantage. Following the PRISMA (Preferred Inventory for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines, a systematic review was conducted to identify studies that compare MIS with OS in patients with spinal metastatic disease. Data were analyzed using Review Manager ver. 5.3 (RevMan; Cochrane, London, UK). Ten studies were included. Operative time was similar among groups at -35.23 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI], -73.36 to 2.91 minutes; p=0.07). Intraoperative bleeding was lower in MIS at -562.59 mL (95% CI, -776.97 to -348.20 mL; p<0.00001). OS procedures had higher odds of requiring blood transfusions at 0.26 (95% CI, 0.15 to 0.45; p<0.00001). Both approaches instrumented similar numbers of levels at -0.05 levels (95% CI, -0.75 to 0.66 levels; p=0.89). We observed a decreased need for postoperative bed rest at -1.60 days (95% CI, -2.46 to -0.74 days; p=0.0003), a shorter length of stay at -3.08 days (95% CI, -4.50 to -1.66 days; p=0.001), and decreased odds of complications at 0.60 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.96; p=0.03) in the MIS group. Both approaches revealed similar reintervention rates at 0.65 (95% CI, 0.15 to 2.84; p=0.57), effective rates of reducing metastasis-related pain at -0.74 (95% CI, -2.41 to 0.94; p=0.39), and comparable scores of the Tokuhashi scale at -0.52 (95% CI, -2.08 to 1.05; p=0.41), Frankel scale at 1.00 (95% CI, 0.60 to 1.68; p=1.0), and American Spinal Injury Association Scale at 0.53 (95% CI, 0.21 to 1.37; p=0.19). MIS appears to provide advantages over OS. Larger and prospective studies should fully detail the role of MIS as a treatment for spine metastasis.

Laparoscopic vs open portoenterostomy in biliary atresia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hepatoportoenterostomy remains the cornerstone of treatment for biliary atresia. Current employed techniques include laparoscopy and open surgery. This study aims to determine if either method provides an advantage. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted. Nineteen studies were included. Mean operative time 34.98 (95% CI 20.10, 49.85; p ≤ 0.00001) was longer in laparoscopic while bleeding volumes - 16.63 (95% CI - 23.39, - 9.86; p ≤ 0.00001) as well as the time to normal diet - 2.42 (95% CI - 4.51, - 0.32; p = 0.02) were lower in the laparoscopic group. No differences were observed in mean length of stay - 0.83. Similar complication, transfusions, postoperative cholangitis 0.97, and transplant free survival rates 1.00 (0.63, 1.60; p = 0.99) were seen between groups. Laparoscopic portoenterostomy provides advantages on operative time and bleeding as well as to normal diet when compared to open procedures. Both procedures showed no differences in length of stay, complications, cholangitis, and importantly, native liver survival. Level of evidence: III.

Biliary reconstruction after choledochal cyst resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis on hepaticojejunostomy vs hepaticoduodenostomy.

Choledochal cysts are a rare pediatric biliary pathology. Excision of the extrahepatic cyst and restoration of biliary-enteric continuity through either hepaticoduodenostomy (HD) or Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy (HJ) is the mainstay treatment. This study aims to determine if either method provides an advantage. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted, identifying studies comparing hepaticojejunostomy to hepaticoduodenostomy in patients with choledochal cysts. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.3. Nine studies were included, operative time was shorter - 97.50 [- 172.31, - 22.69] p = 0.01 and bleeding reduced - 48.98 [- 88.25, - 9.71] p = 0.01 in HD. HD was associated with shorter length of stay 2.18 [- 3.87, - 0.50] p = 0.01 and similar cholangitis and reintervention rates. Time to a normal diet was similar between groups. Biliary reflux was seen more frequently in HD 19.14 [2.60, 140.63] p = 0.004. Complications such as leak and cholangitis were similar between groups. HD represents a viable alternative to HJ with various advantages such as shorter operative time, decreased bleeding and shorter length of hospital stay. Bile reflux remains a major limitation.Level of evidence IV.