Comparing Capitonnage and Uncapitonnage Techniques for Pulmonary Hydatid Cysts: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

肺包虫囊肿的囊腔切除术与非囊腔切除术的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:2

Abstract

Surgery is the primary treatment for pulmonary hydatid cysts. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the results of capitonnage and uncapitonnage techniques for the surgery of pulmonary hydatid cysts. Descriptive Boolean queries were used to search PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles published up to June 2022 to evaluate the outcomes of pulmonary hydatid cysts in terms of mortality, postoperative complications, and hospital stay. A total of 12 studies were included. An analysis of the total side effects revealed that there was a statistically significant difference between the capitonnage and uncapitonnage groups (odds ratio=3.81, 95% confidence interval=[1.75-8.31], P < .001). The results showed that more side effects were observed in the uncapitonnage group than in the capitonnage group. The risk of side effects in the uncapitonnage group is 3.81 times higher than in the capitonnage group. The results showed that more prolonged air leak was seen in uncapitonnage group than in the capitonnage group (odds ratio=4.18, 95% confidence interval=[1.64-10.64], P=.003). The results show that more empyema was observed in uncapitonnage group than in the capitonnage group (odds ratio=4.76, 95% confidence interval=[1.29-17.57], P =0.020). An analysis of atelectasis and mean hospital stay revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between the capitonnage and uncapitonnage groups. The results reveal the advantages of capitonnage in the treatment of pulmonary hydatid cysts and that the capitonnage method is quite effective in reducing complications compared to the uncapitonnage method.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。