Thoracotomy compared to laparotomy in the traumatic diaphragmatic hernia. Systematic review and proportional methanalysis
Acta cir. bras
; 33(1): 49-66, Jan. 2018. tab, graf
Article
in En
| LILACS
| ID: biblio-886249
Responsible library:
BR1.1
ABSTRACT
Abstract Purpose:
To evaluate the most used approach to treat traumatic diaphragmatic ruptures, and in which one the requirement to assess the second cavity is more frequent.Methods:
Systematic review, observational studies.Outcomes:
moment of approach, most commonly via addressed and the requirement to open the other cavity. Bases searched Lilacs, Pubmed, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov and Web of Science. Statisticalanalysis:
StatsDirect 3.0.121 software.Results:
Sixty eight studies (2023 participants) were included. Approach in acute phase was performed four times more than in chronic phase.Approach:
abdominal 65% (IC 95% 63-67%), thoracic 23% (IC 95% 21-24%), abdominal in the acute phase 75% (IC 95% 71-78%), and chronic 24% (IC 95% 19-29%), thoracic in the acute phase 12% (IC 95% 10-14%) and chronic 69% (IC 95% 63-74%). Thorax opening in the abdominalapproach:
10% (95% CI 8-14%). Abdomen opening in the thoracicapproach:
15% (95% CI 7-24%).Conclusions:
The most common approach was the abdominal. The approach in the acute phase was more common. In the acute phase the abdominal approach is more frequent than the thoracic approach. In the chronic phase the thoracic approach is more frequent than the abdominal one. The requirement to open the second cavity was similar in both approaches.Key words
Full text:
1
Index:
LILACS
Main subject:
Thoracotomy
/
Hernia, Diaphragmatic, Traumatic
/
Laparotomy
Type of study:
Observational_studies
/
Systematic_reviews
Limits:
Humans
Language:
En
Journal:
Acta cir. bras
Journal subject:
CIRURGIA GERAL
/
Procedimentos Cir£rgicos Operat¢rios
Year:
2018
Type:
Article