A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis comparing nonoperative versus operative management for uncomplicated appendicitis: a focus on randomized controlled trials

一项比较非手术治疗与手术治疗单纯性阑尾炎的荟萃分析和试验序贯分析:重点关注随机对照试验

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to provide a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing conservative and surgical treatment in a population of adults with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL. We have exclusively incorporated randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Studies involving participants with complicated appendicitis or children were excluded. The variables considered are as follows: treatment complications, complication-free treatment success at index admission and at 1 year follow-up, length of hospital stay (LOS), quality of life (QoL) and costs. RESULTS: Eight RCTs involving 3213 participants (1615 antibiotics/1598 appendectomy) were included. There was no significant difference between the two treatments in terms of complication rates (RR = 0.66; 95% CI 0.61-1.04, P = 0.07, I(2) = 69%). Antibiotics had a reduced treatment efficacy compared with appendectomy (RR = 0.80; 95% CI 0.71 to 0.90, p < 0.00001, I(2) = 87%) and at 1 year was successful in 540 out of 837 (64.6%, RR = 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.77, p < 0.00001, I(2) = 81%) participants. There was no difference in LOS (mean difference - 0.58 days 95% confidence interval - 1.59 to 0.43, p = 0.26, I(2) = 99%). The trial sequential analysis has revealed that, concerning the three primary outcomes, it is improbable that forthcoming RCTs will significantly alter the existing body of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: As further large-scale trials have been conducted, antibiotic therapy proved to be safe, less expensive, but also less effective than surgical treatment. In order to ensure well-informed decisions, further research is needed to explore patient preferences and quality of life outcomes.

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。