Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing the Efficacy of Radioactive Iodine Monotherapy versus Radioactive Iodine Therapy and Adjunctive Lithium for the Treatment of Hyperthyroidism.

Background: The objective of this article is to evaluate the outcomes in patients undergoing radioactive iodine (RAI) with adjunctive lithium (Li) therapy versus (vs.) RAI therapy alone for the treatment of hyperthyroidism.Methods: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to analyze clinical trials comparing RAI with adjunctive Li therapy vs. RAI therapy alone for the treatment of hyperthyroidism.Results: Six randomized-controlled trials (RCT) involving 755 patients were analyzed. RAI with adjunctive Li was associated with a significantly higher cure rate for hyperthyroidism when compared to RAI alone. Furthermore, a significantly higher cure rate for hyperthyroidism at 12 months was achieved with RAI and adjunctive Li. Adjuvant Li with RAI for ≤ 7 days showed significantly higher cure rate compared to RAI alone, whereas > 7 days of adjuvant Li with RAI did not show any difference in cure rate compared to RAI alone. RAI with adjunctive Li was associated with a significantly higher cure rate for patients with Graves' disease compared to RAI alone. There was no significant difference between RAI with adjunctive Li and RAI alone for toxic nodular thyroid disorder (toxic nodule and toxic multinodular goiter) and thyroid volume >40 grams and ≤40 grams.Conclusions: RAI with adjunctive Li therapy demonstrated superiority over RAI therapy alone with regards to both curing hyperthyroidism and, reduced time till cure, with a limited side effect profile. A large multicenter RCT is required, and if this confirms the data from these smaller trials, then this could change current practice.

Improving the view during flexible sigmoidoscopy: a systematic review of published randomized, controlled trials comparing the use of oral bowel preparation versus enema bowel preparation.

To systematically analyse the published randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of oral bowel preparation (OBP) versus enema bowel preparation (EBP) for diagnostic or screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. Published RCTs, comparing the use of OBP versus EBP, were analysed using RevMan(®), and the combined outcomes were expressed as odds ratios (OR). Eight RCTs evaluating 2457 patients were retrieved from the standard electronic databases. There was significant heterogeneity among included trials. The compliance of the patients (p = 0.32) and the acceptability of both bowel preparation regimens (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.67, 2.99; z = 0.92; p = 0.36) were similar in both groups. In addition, the incidence of adverse reactions (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.54, 1.41; z = 0.57; p = 0.57), the risk of incomplete procedure due to poor bowel preparation (p = 0.18) and the incidence of poor bowel preparation (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.63, 2.33; z = 0.59; p = 0.56) were also similar in both groups. EBP and OBP were equally effective for bowel preparation in patients undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy. Although this study failed to demonstrate the superiority of EBP, at least equivalent efficacy for bowel cleansing may be extrapolated.

Ogilvie's syndrome-related right colon perforation after cesarean section: a case series.

The objective of this article is to discuss and report three cases of right colon perforation secondary to postcesarean Ogilvie's syndrome (OS; colonic pseudo-obstruction) requiring right hemicolectomy. We retrospectively reviewed the case notes of three patients who underwent caesarean section and postoperatively developed OS. OS is an uncommon problem in patients undergoing caesarean section. Abdominal X-ray and water-soluble contrast enema are the main diagnostic modalities. Drip-suck therapy along with endoscopic or pharmacological decompression should be performed in early stages. In a significant percentage of patients, diagnosis is delayed resulting in bowel ischemia and perforation requiring surgical resection and adding significant mortality/morbidity. We recommend our obstetric colleagues to involve surgical team in earlier stages to avoid surgery-related mortality and morbidity. We also advocate general surgeons to be aware of OS in patients after caesarean section and recommend a stepwise systematic approach toward the diagnosis and management of OS.