输卵管卵巢脓肿早期不同治疗方法的发病率比较

S. Saha, Sujata Saha
{"title":"输卵管卵巢脓肿早期不同治疗方法的发病率比较","authors":"S. Saha, Sujata Saha","doi":"10.21613/gorm.2020.1094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE: A tubo-ovarian abscess needs hospitalization and early treatment with parenteral antibiotics only or along with imaging-guided drainage. This meta-analysis juxtaposes between these interventions - the length of stay in hospital in days, surgery requirement for those not responding to the initial treatment, and readmission. STUDY DESIGN: The eligible papers searched in various databases (PubMed, Central, Embase, and Scopus) irrespective of their language or date of publication. The Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal tool and Cochrane collaboration tool were used to appraise observational and randomized controlled trials, respectively. When a comparable outcome was reported from at least three studies of similar study design, they were included in the meta-analysis (fixed-effect model). Otherwise, outcomes were reported narratively. RESULTS: From 164 studies, five eligible papers (four non-randomized studies and one randomized controlled trials) were reviewed. These studies sourced data from 609 tubo-ovarian abscess patients. Overall, all studies had at least one unclear risk of bias components. The length of stay in the hospital among the tubo-ovarian abscess patients favored the initial parenteral antibiotic only treatment (WMD= -3.26; 95% CI= -4.93 to -1.58; p<0.001; I2=80.9%; p-value of Cochranes Q=0.005); however, on sensitivity analysis (meta-analysis with random-effect model) this difference disappeared. Less than three studies of a particular study design reported each of the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSION: The current evidence on how these outcomes vary between the juxtaposed interventions received by the tubo-ovarian abscess patients remains inconclusive due to the inadequate number of good quality randomized controlled trials","PeriodicalId":93778,"journal":{"name":"Journal of gynecology, clinical obstetrics and reproductive medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of the Morbidities Associated with Different Early Treatments in Tubo-Ovarian Abscess Patients\",\"authors\":\"S. Saha, Sujata Saha\",\"doi\":\"10.21613/gorm.2020.1094\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVE: A tubo-ovarian abscess needs hospitalization and early treatment with parenteral antibiotics only or along with imaging-guided drainage. This meta-analysis juxtaposes between these interventions - the length of stay in hospital in days, surgery requirement for those not responding to the initial treatment, and readmission. STUDY DESIGN: The eligible papers searched in various databases (PubMed, Central, Embase, and Scopus) irrespective of their language or date of publication. The Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal tool and Cochrane collaboration tool were used to appraise observational and randomized controlled trials, respectively. When a comparable outcome was reported from at least three studies of similar study design, they were included in the meta-analysis (fixed-effect model). Otherwise, outcomes were reported narratively. RESULTS: From 164 studies, five eligible papers (four non-randomized studies and one randomized controlled trials) were reviewed. These studies sourced data from 609 tubo-ovarian abscess patients. Overall, all studies had at least one unclear risk of bias components. The length of stay in the hospital among the tubo-ovarian abscess patients favored the initial parenteral antibiotic only treatment (WMD= -3.26; 95% CI= -4.93 to -1.58; p<0.001; I2=80.9%; p-value of Cochranes Q=0.005); however, on sensitivity analysis (meta-analysis with random-effect model) this difference disappeared. Less than three studies of a particular study design reported each of the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSION: The current evidence on how these outcomes vary between the juxtaposed interventions received by the tubo-ovarian abscess patients remains inconclusive due to the inadequate number of good quality randomized controlled trials\",\"PeriodicalId\":93778,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of gynecology, clinical obstetrics and reproductive medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of gynecology, clinical obstetrics and reproductive medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21613/gorm.2020.1094\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of gynecology, clinical obstetrics and reproductive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21613/gorm.2020.1094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:输卵管卵巢脓肿需要住院治疗和早期治疗,仅使用肠外抗生素或配合图像引导引流。这项荟萃分析并列分析了这些干预措施——住院天数、对初始治疗无效的患者的手术要求和再入院。研究设计:在各种数据库(PubMed, Central, Embase和Scopus)中检索符合条件的论文,无论其语言或出版日期。乔安娜布里格斯研究所的关键评估工具和Cochrane协作工具分别用于评估观察性试验和随机对照试验。当至少三个类似研究设计的研究报告了可比较的结果时,它们被纳入元分析(固定效应模型)。否则,结果报告是叙述性的。结果:从164项研究中,纳入5篇符合条件的论文(4项非随机研究和1项随机对照试验)。这些研究的数据来自609例输卵管卵巢脓肿患者。总的来说,所有的研究至少有一个不明确的偏倚风险成分。输卵管卵巢脓肿患者的住院时间倾向于单纯肠外抗生素治疗(WMD= -3.26;95% CI= -4.93 ~ -1.58;p < 0.001;I2 = 80.9%;科克伦的p值Q=0.005);然而,在敏感性分析(随机效应模型的荟萃分析)中,这种差异消失了。一个特定研究设计的少于三个研究报告了每个剩余的结果。结论:由于质量良好的随机对照试验数量不足,目前关于输卵管卵巢脓肿患者接受的并置干预措施之间这些结果如何变化的证据仍然不确定
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparison of the Morbidities Associated with Different Early Treatments in Tubo-Ovarian Abscess Patients
OBJECTIVE: A tubo-ovarian abscess needs hospitalization and early treatment with parenteral antibiotics only or along with imaging-guided drainage. This meta-analysis juxtaposes between these interventions - the length of stay in hospital in days, surgery requirement for those not responding to the initial treatment, and readmission. STUDY DESIGN: The eligible papers searched in various databases (PubMed, Central, Embase, and Scopus) irrespective of their language or date of publication. The Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal tool and Cochrane collaboration tool were used to appraise observational and randomized controlled trials, respectively. When a comparable outcome was reported from at least three studies of similar study design, they were included in the meta-analysis (fixed-effect model). Otherwise, outcomes were reported narratively. RESULTS: From 164 studies, five eligible papers (four non-randomized studies and one randomized controlled trials) were reviewed. These studies sourced data from 609 tubo-ovarian abscess patients. Overall, all studies had at least one unclear risk of bias components. The length of stay in the hospital among the tubo-ovarian abscess patients favored the initial parenteral antibiotic only treatment (WMD= -3.26; 95% CI= -4.93 to -1.58; p<0.001; I2=80.9%; p-value of Cochranes Q=0.005); however, on sensitivity analysis (meta-analysis with random-effect model) this difference disappeared. Less than three studies of a particular study design reported each of the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSION: The current evidence on how these outcomes vary between the juxtaposed interventions received by the tubo-ovarian abscess patients remains inconclusive due to the inadequate number of good quality randomized controlled trials
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信