Efficacy and safety of ilioinguinal neurectomy in open tension-free inguinal hernia repair: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: There is still controversy surrounding routine ilioinguinal neurectomy in open tension-free inguinal hernia repair. METHOD: PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMBASE databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of ilioinguinal neurectomy in open tension-free inguinal hernia repair. Revman 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. RESULT: Meta-analysis revealed that the incidence of severe pain on the first postoperative day was lower in the ilioinguinal neurectomy group (ING) than in the ilioinguinal nerve preservation group (INPG) [P < 0.0001]. The incidence of no pain in the first month postoperatively [P = 0.0004], the incidence of no pain in the sixth months postoperatively [P < 0.00001], and the numbness incidence in the first month postoperatively [P = 0.001] in the ING was higher than that in the INPG. There was no significant difference in the incidence of severe pain in the first month postoperatively [P = 0.20], the numbness incidence in the sixth postoperative month [P = 0.05], the hypoesthesia incidence in the first [P = 0.15] and sixth [P = 0.85] postoperative months between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Ilioinguinal neurectomy in open tension-free inguinal hernia repair can better prevent postoperative pain.

Efficacy and safety of glue mesh fixation for laparoscopic inguinal hernia: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

It is still controversial whether glue can be used for mesh fixation in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. The aim of this meta-analysis was used to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of glue mesh fixation in laparoscopic tension-free inguinal hernia repair. The PubMed database, EMBASE database and Cochrane Library were searched to collect published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on laparoscopic tension-free inguinal hernia repair with glue mesh fixation. Sixteen RCTs and 2409 patients with inguinal hernia were included. The meta-analysis showed that compared with the mechanical mesh fixation group(MMFG), the glue mesh fixation group(GMFG) had significantly reduced incidences of chronic pain[relative risk (RR) = 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.28,0.57), P < 0.00001], urinary retention[RR = 0.53, 95% CI(0.29,0.97), P = 0.04], haematoma[RR = 0.23, 95% CI(0.09,0.58), P = 0.002] and total complications[RR = 0.28, 95% CI(0.18,0.44), P < 0.00001]; there were no significant differences in pain score on postoperative day 1[MD = -1.33, 95% CI(-2.93,0.26), P = 0.10], operation time[MD = 1.46, 95% CI(-3.97,6.88), P = 0.60] and recurrence rate[RR = 0.72, 95% CI(0.35,1.47), P = 0.37] between the two groups. In conclusion, the application of glue mesh fixation in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair is safe and reliable with fewer complications. Moreover, it can reduce the incidence of chronic pain without increasing the recurrence rate. However, due to the small number of cases in this analysis and limitations in the quality of the included studies, the findings need to be further verified by multicentre, large-sample and high-quality RCTs in the future.

The role of prophylactic antibiotics in elective inguinal tension-free hernia repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Whether to use antibiotics to prevent surgical site infection in elective inguinal tension-free hernia repair has been controversial. To systematically evaluate the effect of prophylactic antibiotic application in elective inguinal tension-free hernia repair, we identified all published randomised controlled trials of the effect of prophylactic antibiotic application on elective inguinal tension-free hernia repair were collected by computer retrieval from the China National Knowledge Infrastructure; VIP Database; Wanfang Database; China Biomedical Literature Database; and PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. Meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software. The meta-analysis showed that the total incidence of surgical site infections [P = 0.003] and the incidence of superficial surgical site infections [P = 0.004] in the antibiotic group (AG) were lower than those in the non-antibiotic group (NAG). There was no significant difference in the total incidence of postoperative infections [P = 0.06], deep surgical site infections [P = 0.26] and seroma [P = 0.52] between the AG and the NAG. Based on current evidence, the application of prophylactic antibiotics in elective inguinal tension-free hernia repair can prevent the total incidence of surgical site infections and that of superficial surgical site infections but cannot prevent the total incidence of postoperative infection events, incidence of deep surgical site infections and incidence of seroma.

Meta-analysis on the effect of combining Lianhua Qingwen with Western medicine to treat coronavirus disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a worldwide life-threatening pandemic. Lianhua Qingwen is believed to possess the ability to treat or significantly improve the symptoms of COVID-19. These claims make it important to systematically evaluate the effects of using Lianhua Qingwen with Western medicine to treat COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of combination therapy, employing Lianhua Qingwen with Western medicine, to treat COVID-19, using a meta-analysis approach. SEARCH STRATEGY: China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, VIP Database, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies evaluating the effect of Lianhua Qingwen-Western medicine combination therapy in the treatment of COVID-19. INCLUSION CRITERIA: (1) Research object: hospitalized patients meeting the diagnostic criteria of COVID-19 were included. (2) Intervention measures: patients in the treatment group received Lianhua Qingwen treatment combined with Western medicine, while the control group received either Western medicine or Chinese medicine treatment. (3) Research type: randomized controlled trials and retrospective study were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Two researchers extracted the first author, the proportion of males and females, age, body temperature, course of treatment, rate of disappearance of main symptoms, duration of fever, adverse reactions, and total effectiveness from the literature. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as the effect value for count data, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI were used as the effect value for measurement data. RESULTS: Six articles met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 856 COVID-19 patients. The meta-analysis showed that Lianhua Qingwen combination therapy achieved higher rates of fever reduction (OR = 3.43, 95% CI [1.78, 6.59], P = 0.0002), cough reduction (OR = 3.39, 95% CI [1.85, 6.23], P < 0.0001), recovery from shortness of breath (OR = 10.62, 95% CI [3.71, 30.40], P < 0.0001) and recovery from fatigue (OR = 2.82, 95% CI [1.44, 5.53], P = 0.003), higher total effectiveness rate (OR = 2.51, 95% CI [1.73, 3.64], P < 0.00001), and shorter time to recovery from fever (MD = -1.00, 95% CI [-1.04, 0.96], P < 0.00001), and did not increase the adverse reaction rate (OR = 0.65, 95% CI [0.42, 1.01], P = 0.06), compared to the single medication control. CONCLUSION: The Lianhua Qingwen and Western medicine combination therapy is highly effective for COVID-19 patients and has good clinical safety. As only a small number of studies and patients were included in this review, more high-quality, multicenter, large-sample-size, randomized, double-blind, controlled trials are still needed for verification.

Meta-analysis of arbidol versus lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of arbidol and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using a meta-analysis method. METHODS: The China Knowledge Network, VIP database, WanFang database PubMed database, Embase database, and Cochrane Library were searched for a collection of comparative studies on arbidol and lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19. Meta-analysis was used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Arbidol and lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19. RESULTS: The results of the systematic review indicated that Arbidol had a higher positive-to-negative conversion rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acid on Day 7 (p = 0.03), a higher positive-to-negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid on Day 14 (p = 0.006), a higher improvement rate of chest computed tomography on Day 14 (p = 0.02), a lower incidence of adverse reactions (p = 0.002) and lower rate of mortality (p = 0.007). There was no difference in the rate of cough disappearance on Day 14 (p = 0.24) or the rate of severe/critical illness (p = 0.07) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Arbidol may be superior to lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19. However, due to the small number of included studies and the number of patients, high-quality multicenter large-sample randomized double-blind controlled trials are still needed for verification.

Meta-Analysis on the Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Surgery for Large Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis comparing the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic versus open resection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) larger than 5 cm. METHOD: We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase for relevant articles. Randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials were identified and included in this study. Searching for related articles on large GIST (>5 cm) for laparoscopic resection (laparoscopic group [LAPG]) and open resection (open group [OG]), RevMan 5.3 was used for data analysis, comparing 2 groups of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, complications, length of hospital stay, recurrence rate, disease-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Seven studies including 440 patients were identified for the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that LAPG had less bleeding, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and a better 5-year disease-free survival. There was no significant difference between LAPG and OG in operation time, postoperative complications, recurrence rate, and overall survival. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic resection of large (>5 cm) GIST is safe and feasible and has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss and fast postoperative recovery, with a good outcome in the recent oncology.