Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Orthop Surg Res ; 17(1): 519, 2022 Dec 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36456964

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Since there are currently no systematic evidence-based medical data on the efficacy and safety of PECD, this meta-analysis pooled data from studies that reported the efficacy or safety of PECD for cervical disc herniation to examine the efficacy, recurrence and safety of using PECD to treat cervical disc herniation. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases for studies published from inception to July 2022. Nine nonrandomized controlled trials (non-RCTs) that reported the efficacy or safety of percutaneous endoscopic cervical discectomy for cervical disc herniation were included. We excluded duplicate publications, studies without full text, studies with incomplete information, studies that did not enable us to conduct data extraction, animal experiments and reviews. STATA 15.1 software was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: The proportions of excellent and good treatment results after PECD for CDH were 39% (95% CI: 31-48%) and 47% (95% CI: 34-59%), respectively. The pooled results showed that the VAS scores at 1 week post-operatively (SMD = -2.55, 95% CI: - 3.25 to - 1.85) and at the last follow-up (SMD = - 4.30, 95% CI: - 5.61 to - 3.00) after PECD for cervical disc herniation were significantly lower than the pre-operative scores. The recurrence rate of neck pain and the incidence of adverse events after PECD for cervical disc herniation were 3% (95% CI: 1-6%) and 5% (95% CI: 2-9%), respectively. Additionally, pooled results show that the operative time (SMD = - 3.22, 95% CI: - 5.21 to - 1.43) and hospital stay (SMD = - 1.75, 95% CI: - 2.67to - 0.84) were all significantly lower for PECD than for ACDF. The pooled results also showed that the proportion of excellent treatment results was significantly higher for PECD than for ACDF (OR = 2.29, 95% CI: 1.06-4.96). CONCLUSION: PECD has a high success rate in the treatment of CHD and can relieve neck pain, and the recurrence rate and the incidence of adverse events are low. In addition, compared with ACDF, PECD has a higher rate of excellent outcomes and a lower operative time and hospital stay. PECD may be a better option for treating CHD.


Asunto(s)
Discectomía Percutánea , Desplazamiento del Disco Intervertebral , Animales , Humanos , Desplazamiento del Disco Intervertebral/cirugía , Dolor de Cuello/etiología , Discectomía Percutánea/efectos adversos , Discectomía , Endoscopía/efectos adversos
2.
Biomed Pharmacother ; 156: 113790, 2022 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36244269

RESUMEN

Tumor-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) are key immune regulators of the tumor microenvironment. They reshape the immune microenvironment and prevent antitumor immune responses via their immunosuppressive cargo, thereby determining cancer responsiveness to treatment. In the immune microenvironment of melanoma, tumor-derived EVs influence tumor progression by regulating innate and adaptive immune responses. Tumor-derived EV-based therapy is a cutting-edge and promising strategy for inhibiting melanoma progression and enhancing antitumor immunity. This review aimed to summarize the regulatory roles of EVs in the immune responses and immunotherapy of patients with melanoma. This paper provided insights into future exploration directions and potential clinical strategies targeting EVs for melanoma treatment.


Asunto(s)
Vesículas Extracelulares , Melanoma , Humanos , Vesículas Extracelulares/patología , Melanoma/patología , Inmunoterapia , Microambiente Tumoral , Inmunidad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA