Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Front Surg ; 11: 1369169, 2024.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38933652

RESUMO

Background: Advancements in surgical techniques have improved outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatic surgery. To date there have been no meta-analyses comparing robotic and laparoscopic approaches for distal pancreatectomies (DP) in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to explore the oncological outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Methods: A systematic search was conducted for studies reporting laparoscopic, robotic or open surgery for DP. Frequentist network meta-analysis of oncological outcomes (overall survival, resection margins, tumor recurrence, examined lymph nodes, administration of adjuvant therapy) were performed. Results: Fifteen studies totalling 9,301 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. 1,946, 605 and 6,750 patients underwent LDP, RDP and ODP respectively. LDP (HR: 0.761, 95% CI: 0.642-0.901, p = 0.002) and RDP (HR: 0.757, 95% CI: 0.617-0.928, p = 0.008) were associated with overall survival (OS) benefit when compared to ODP. LDP (HR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.793-1.27, p = 0.968) was not associated with OS benefit when compared to RDP. There were no significant differences between LDP, RDP and ODP for resection margins, tumor recurrence, examined lymph nodes and administration of adjuvant therapy. Conclusion: This study highlights the longer OS in both LDP and RDP when compared to ODP for patients with PDAC. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO (CRD42022336417).

2.
Int J Surg ; 2024 May 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38701514

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Ageing population is a worldwide phenomenon with correspondingly higher proportion of older patients being treated in the hospital setting. Sarcopenia, which increases with age, has serious negative implications on health, hospitalization and overall postoperative recovery. There is no mutual consensus on perioperative management of sarcopenia in surgical patients in Singapore. The purpose of this study is to create greater clarity pertaining to the recognition of sarcopenia, the application of assessment criteria of sarcopenia and perioperative management of surgical patients in Singapore. METHODS: A modified Delphi consensus consisting of a panel of experts from Singapore forming a multidisciplinary team, including surgeons, geriatricians, anesthesiologists, physiotherapists and dieticians. Eight recommendations were proposed by the steering committee. Literature search from MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus for articles up till June 2023 were performed to support recommendation statements. The expert panel voted on agreement to recommendation statements and graded the level of evidence supporting each statement through surveys to achieve consensus, set at 85% a priori. RESULTS: The panelists underwent two rounds of anonymized, independent voting before reaching consensus for all eight statements. After the first round, seven statements reached consensus, including the corresponding grading for level of evidence. The statement which did not achieve consensus was revised with supporting literature and after the second round of survey, all eight statements and level of evidence reached consensus, completing the Delphi process. These eight statements covered themes to (1) encourage the identification of sarcopenia, (2) guide pre-operative and (3) post-operative management of sarcopenia. CONCLUSION: With the varying approaches in perioperative management, poor understanding of and identification of sarcopenia can result in suboptimal management of sarcopenia in surgical patients. Given the abundance of evidence linking beneficial impact on recovery and post-operative complications with prudent management of sarcopenia, it is imperative and urgent to achieve awareness and consensus.

3.
Biosensors (Basel) ; 13(12)2023 Nov 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38131758

RESUMO

Falls are a prevalent cause of injury among older people. While some wearable inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor-based systems have been widely investigated for fall risk assessment, their reliability, validity, and identification ability in community-dwelling older people remain unclear. Therefore, this study evaluated the performance of a commercially available IMU sensor-based fall risk assessment system among 20 community-dwelling older recurrent fallers (with a history of ≥2 falls in the past 12 months) and 20 community-dwelling older non-fallers (no history of falls in the past 12 months), together with applying the clinical scale of the Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest). The results show that the IMU sensor-based system exhibited a significant moderate to excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.838, p < 0.001), an acceptable level of internal consistency reliability (Spearman's rho = 0.471, p = 0.002), an acceptable convergent validity (Cronbach's α = 0.712), and an area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.590 for the IMU sensor-based receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The findings suggest that while the evaluated IMU sensor-based system exhibited good reliability and acceptable validity, it might not be able to fully identify the recurrent fallers and non-fallers in a community-dwelling older population. Further system optimization is still needed.


Assuntos
Acidentes por Quedas , Equilíbrio Postural , Humanos , Idoso , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Medição de Risco/métodos , Curva ROC
4.
JAMA Oncol ; 9(2): 215-224, 2023 02 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36480211

RESUMO

Importance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved survival outcomes of patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in both first- and second-line settings. However, the benefit of ICIs in patients with low programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression remains unclear. Objective: To derive survival data for patient subgroups with low PD-L1 expression from clinical trials comparing ICIs with chemotherapy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and to perform a pooled analysis. Data Sources: Kaplan-Meier curves from the randomized clinical trials were extracted after a systematic search of Scopus, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science from inception until October 1, 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials that investigated the effectiveness of anti-PD-1-based regimens for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and that reported overall survival (OS), progression-free survival, or duration of response were included in this meta-analysis. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Kaplan-Meier curves of all-comer populations, subgroups with high PD-L1, and those with low PD-L1 (when available) were extracted from published articles. A graphic reconstructive algorithm was used to calculate time-to-event outcomes from these curves. In studies with unreported curves for subgroups with low PD-L1 expression, KMSubtraction was used to impute survival data. KMSubtraction is a workflow to derive unreported subgroup survival data with from subgroups. An individual patient data pooled analysis including previously reported and newly imputed subgroups was conducted for trials with the same treatment line and PD-L1 scoring system. Data analysis was conducted from January 1, 2022, to June 30, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes included Kaplan-Meier curves and hazard ratios (HRs) for OS for subgroups with low PD-L1 expression. Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival and duration of response. Results: The randomized clinical trials CheckMate-648, ESCORT-1st, KEYNOTE-590, ORIENT-15, KEYNOTE-181, ESCORT, RATIONALE-302, ATTRACTION-3, and ORIENT-2 were included, totaling 4752 patients. In the pooled analysis of first-line trials that evaluated a tumor proportion score (CheckMate-648 and ESCORT-1st), no significant benefit in OS was observed with immunochemotherapy compared with chemotherapy in the subgroup of patients who had a tumor proportion score lower than 1% (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74-1.12; P = .38) compared with chemotherapy. In the pooled analysis of first-line trials that evaluated combined positive score (KEYNOTE-590 and ORIENT-15), there was a significant but modest OS benefit for immunochemotherapy compared with chemotherapy in the subgroup with a combined positive score lower than 10 (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.94; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings suggest a lack of survival benefit of ICI-based regimens in the first-line setting compared with chemotherapy alone in the subgroup with a tumor proportion score lower than 1%.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Esofágicas , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas do Esôfago , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores de Checkpoint Imunológico/uso terapêutico , Antígeno B7-H1 , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas do Esôfago/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamento farmacológico
5.
PeerJ ; 5: e3580, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28761784

RESUMO

Here, we report three attempts to replicate a finding from an influential psychological study (Griskevicius et al., 2011b). The original study found interactions between childhood SES and experimental mortality-priming condition in predicting risk acceptance and delay discounting outcomes. The original study used US student samples. We used British university students (replication 1) and British online samples (replications 2 and 3) with a modified version of the original priming material, which was tailored to make it more credible to a British audience. We did not replicate the interaction between childhood SES and mortality-priming condition in any of our three experiments. The only consistent trend of note was an interaction between sex and priming condition for delay discounting. We note that psychological priming effects are considered fragile and often fail to replicate. Our failure to replicate the original finding could be due to demographic differences in study participants, alterations made to the prime, or other study limitations. However, it is also possible that the previously reported interaction is not a robust or generalizable finding.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...