Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies.

Background: Single-incision laparoscopy surgery (SILS) is a new laparoscopic technique that has emerged in the past decade. Whether it has advantages over conventionl laparoscopy surgery (CLS) is inconclusive. This article aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer through high-quality literature text mining and meta-analysis. Methods: Relevant articles were searched on the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from January 2012 to November 2021. All data was from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in order to increase the confidence of the analytical results.The main outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative complications. Results: A total of 10 RCTs were included, involving 1609 patients. The quality of the included studies was generally high. No significant difference was found between SILS and CLS in the postoperative complications, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph nodes removed, readmission, reoperation, complication level I- II, complication level IIIa, complication level IIIb, prolonged Ileus, blood loss, infection, anastomotic leakage and operation time. The results showed that SILS group had a higher rate of intraoperative complications, but it had lower incision length and better cosmetic effects. Conclusion: These results indicate that SILS did not have a comprehensive and obvious advantage over the CLS. On the contrary, SILS has higher intraoperative complications, which may be related to the more difficulty of SILS operation, but SILS still has better cosmetic effects, which is in line with the concept of surgical development. Therefore, the SILS needs to be selected in patients with higher cosmetic requirements and performed by more experienced surgeons.

Impact of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium Bundle on Delirium and Cognitive Function.

BACKGROUND: Differences in short-term cognitive function between mechanically ventilated patients treated with multicomponent interventions and those receiving routine nursing care have not been established because of the lack of follow-up in previous studies. PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate the effects of the pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) care bundle on delirium occurrence and clinical outcomes, specifically in terms of short-term cognitive function, in mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: Data on 243 patients with mechanical ventilation were analyzed from January 2017 to February 2019. The eligible patients were divided randomly into two groups. The control group ( n = 120) received usual care, whereas the intervention group ( n = 123) received the PAD bundle, including pain monitoring and management, light sedation and daily awakening, early mobility, sleep promotion, and delirium monitoring. The incidence and duration of delirium, ventilator time, and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay were compared between the two groups. Upon discharge from the ICU and at 3 and 6 months after discharge, cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment scale and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The incidence of delirium was reduced significantly in the intervention group, and significant decreases in the duration of delirium, ventilator time, and ICU length of stay were found. Cognitive impairment in the intervention group was significantly lower at the 3-month follow-up assessment. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The PAD bundle was shown to be associated with a lower incidence of delirium and improved clinical outcomes. Short-term cognitive impairment occurred in fewer patients who were managed with the PAD bundle after ICU discharge. Our findings indicate that the PAD bundle has the potential to improve clinical outcomes. The administrative staff of ICUs should use strategies, such as interdisciplinary teamwork, to facilitate the buy-in and implementation of interventions.

Non-coding RNA in drug resistance of gastric cancer.

Gastric cancer (GC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. The poorly prognosis and survival of GC are due to diagnose in an advanced, non-curable stage and with a limited response to chemotherapy. The acquisition of drug resistance accounts for the majority of therapy failure of chemotherapy in GC patients. Although the mechanisms of anticancer drug resistance have been broadly studied, the regulation of these mechanisms has not been completely understood. Accumulating evidence has recently highlighted the role of non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), including long non-coding RNAs and microRNAs, in the development and maintenance of drug resistance due to their regulatory features in specific genes involved in the chemoresistant phenotype of GC. We review the literature on ncRNAs in drug resistance of GC. This review summarizes the current knowledge about the ncRNAs' characteristics, their regulation of the genes involved in chemoresistance and their potential as targeted therapies for personalized treatment in resistant GC.