Dataset Information

Perioperative corticosteroids for reducing postoperative complications following esophagectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This updated systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of perioperative corticosteroid administration versus placebo for esophageal cancer patients following scheduled esophagectomy.

Methods

We searched databases through June 30, 2023. We included articles on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing perioperative corticosteroid administration with placebo in esophageal cancer patients with esophagectomy. The outcomes were the death rate during hospitalization, length of hospital stay, and short-term complications. Risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CIs) for each estimated effect size were applied for dichotomous outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) and corresponding 95% CIs for each estimated effect size were applied for continuous outcomes. We used GRADE to evaluate the quality of each of the outcome and the level of recommendations.

Results

Nine RCTs with 508 participants were included in this study. Severe outcomes, including the length of hospital stay, leakage, mortality during the hospitalization period in the corticosteroid group was comparable to that in the control group, but positive effects of corticosteroid administration were observed on the length of intensive care unit stay (MD -3.1, 95% CI - 5.43 to - 0.77), cardiovascular disorders (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21-0.94) and other general complications (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.29-0.85).

Conclusions

Peri-operative intravenous corticosteroid administration may reduce cardiovascular disorders, other general complications and the length of ICU stay without carrying severe outcomes. More high quality RCTs are warranted to further investigate the effects of corticosteroids on postoperative mortality and complications for esophageal cancer patients with esophagectomy.

Systematic review registration

Cochrane, registration number: 196.

SUBMITTER: Zou WW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10870429 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Perioperative corticosteroids for reducing postoperative complications following esophagectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zou Wan-Wan WW Mok Hsiao-Pei HP Zhu Qi-Kun QK Luo Jing J Yang Song S Cen Jian-Zheng JZ Gao Qiang Q

BMC surgery 20240215 1

<h4>Background</h4>This updated systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of perioperative corticosteroid administration versus placebo for esophageal cancer patients following scheduled esophagectomy.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched databases through June 30, 2023. We included articles on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing perioperative corticosteroid administration with placebo in esophageal cancer patients with esophagectomy. The outcomes were the deat ...[more]

PMID: 38360649

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionEdema and ecchymosis after facial plastic surgery are a troublesome concern for both patients and surgeons. Corticosteroid administration is thought to shorten the recovery period and reduce these sequelae. Data regarding the efficacy of corticosteroid administration remains controversial among surgeons.ObjectiveWe conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effect of pre- and postoperative corticosteroids on postoperative complications in patients undergoing facial reconstructive surgery supported with different subgroup analysis.MethodsA comprehensive literature search of articles was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Central, SCOPUS, and EBSCO through October 2019. We included all clinical trials in which patients underwent any type of facial plastic surgery to study the effect of corticosteroids on postoperative complications. We performed subgroup analysis according to the types and doses of corticosteroid preparation, in addition to a subgroup analysis of pre- or postoperative corticosteroid usage. All statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan software.ResultsNineteen studies were included in this systematic review, but only 10 of them were eligible for meta-analysis. The periorbital edema and ecchymosis scores were significantly reduced in the corticosteroids group compared to placebo -0.82, 95% CI (-1.37, -0.26), and -0.95, 95% CI (-1.32, -0.57), respectively. However, these significant differences were not maintained at day 3 and 7. Smaller doses of corticosteroid (8 mg and 10 mg) were associated with smaller differences in the mean score of upper and lower eyelid edema and ecchymosis, while the higher doses were associated with greater differences. Furthermore, preoperative corticosteroid usage significantly reduced the intraoperative bleeding when compared to placebo for higher doses > 50 mg per day (p < 0.0001), but not for 8 mg corticosteroid (p = 0.06). Adding postoperative steroid dose to the preoperative one was associated with less edema and ecchymosis than preoperative administration alone.ConclusionThis comprehensive meta-analysis confirms a statistically significant benefit of preoperative corticosteroids. Furthermore, continuing the steroids postoperatively is associated with long-term reduction of complications. Higher doses of corticosteroids are associated with a more significant reduction in edema and ecchymosis, but further studies are recommended to determine the postoperative side effects, including surgical site infection and delayed healing.

Project description:Background Goal-directed therapy (GDT) aims to assure tissue perfusion, by optimizing doses and timing of fluids, inotropes, and vasopressors, through monitoring of cardiac output and other basic hemodynamic parameters. Several meta-analyses confirm that GDT can reduce postoperative complications. However, all recent evidences focused on high-risk patients and on major abdominal surgery. Objectives The aim of the present meta-analysis is to investigate the effect of GDT on postoperative complications (defined as number of patients with a least one postoperative complication) in different kind of surgical procedures. Data sources Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on perioperative GDT in adult surgical patients were included. The primary outcome measure was complications, defined as number of patients with at least one postoperative complication. A subgroup-analysis was performed considering the kind of surgery: major abdominal (including also major vascular), only vascular, only orthopedic surgery. and so on. Study appraisal and synthesis methods Meta-analytic techniques (analysis software RevMan, version 5.3.5, Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, England, UK) were used to combine studies using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results In 52 RCTs, 6325 patients were enrolled. Of these, 3162 were randomized to perioperative GDT and 3153 were randomized to control. In the overall population, 2836 patients developed at least one complication: 1278 (40%) were randomized to perioperative GDT, and 1558 (49%) were randomized to control. Pooled OR was 0.60 and 95% CI was 0.49–0.72. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the main result. The analysis enrolling major abdominal patients showed a significant result (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59–0.87, p = 0.0007, 31 RCTs, 4203 patients), both in high- and low-risk patients. A significant effect was observed in those RCTs enrolling exclusively orthopedic procedures (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35–0.80, p = 0.002, 7 RCTs, 650 patients. Also neurosurgical procedures seemed to benefit from GDT (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.21–0.78, p = 0.008, 2 RCTs, 208 patients). In both major abdominal and orthopedic surgery, a strategy adopting fluids and inotropes yielded significant results. The total volume of fluid was not significantly different between the GDT and the control group. Conclusions and implications of key findings The present meta-analysis, within the limits of the existing data, the clinical and statistical heterogeneity, suggests that GDT can reduce postoperative complication rate. Moreover, the beneficial effect of GDT on postoperative morbidity is significant on major abdominal, orthopedic and neurosurgical procedures. Several well-designed RCTs are needed to further explore the effect of GDT in different kind of surgeries. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s44158-021-00026-3.

Project description:ObjectiveTo identify, appraise, and synthesise the best available evidence on the efficacy of perioperative interventions to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in adult patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, CINHAL, and CENTRAL from January 1990 to December 2017.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials investigating short term, protocolised medical interventions conducted before, during, or after non-cardiac surgery were included. Trials with clinical diagnostic criteria for PPC outcomes were included. Studies of surgical technique or physiological or biochemical outcomes were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisReviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of evidence. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Quality of evidence was summarised in accordance with GRADE methods. The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs. Secondary outcomes were respiratory infection, atelectasis, length of hospital stay, and mortality. Trial sequential analysis was used to investigate the reliability and conclusiveness of available evidence. Adverse effects of interventions were not measured or compared.Results117 trials enrolled 21 940 participants, investigating 11 categories of intervention. 95 randomised controlled trials enrolling 18 062 participants were included in meta-analysis; 22 trials were excluded from meta-analysis because the interventions were not sufficiently similar to be pooled. No high quality evidence was found for interventions to reduce the primary outcome (incidence of PPCs). Seven interventions had low or moderate quality evidence with confidence intervals indicating a probable reduction in PPCs: enhanced recovery pathways (risk ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.21 to 0.58), prophylactic mucolytics (0.40, 0.23 to 0.67), postoperative continuous positive airway pressure ventilation (0.49, 0.24 to 0.99), lung protective intraoperative ventilation (0.52, 0.30 to 0.88), prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy (0.55, 0.32 to 0.93), epidural analgesia (0.77, 0.65 to 0.92), and goal directed haemodynamic therapy (0.87, 0.77 to 0.98). Moderate quality evidence showed no benefit for incentive spirometry in preventing PPCs. Trial sequential analysis adjustment confidently supported a relative risk reduction of 25% in PPCs for prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy, epidural analgesia, enhanced recovery pathways, and goal directed haemodynamic therapies. Insufficient data were available to support or refute equivalent relative risk reductions for other interventions.ConclusionsPredominantly low quality evidence favours multiple perioperative PPC reduction strategies. Clinicians may choose to reassess their perioperative care pathways, but the results indicate that new trials with a low risk of bias are needed to obtain conclusive evidence of efficacy for many of these interventions.Study registrationProspero CRD42016035662.

Project description:BackgroundThe choice of anastomosis technique after esophagectomy is closely associated with the postoperative complications. Whether circular stapled or linear stapled anastomosis is the optimal technique has not been established. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to show the latest and most comprehensive published assessment of circular stapled anastomosis in comparison with linear stapled anastomosis in postoperative complications.MethodsDatabases (PubMed, Embase, Web of science, Cochrane Library) were searched for all randomized controlled trials and comparative studies comparing circular stapled anastomosis with linear stapled anastomosis after esophagectomy. The odd ratio and mean difference with 95% confidence interval were calculated. We used the Higgins I² statistics to assess the statistical heterogeneity between studies. Review manager (version 5.4) software was used in this analysis.ResultsSixteen studies with 2322 patients were included in our study. The study demonstrated that the use of linear stapled technique after esophagectomy could reduce the risk of both anastomotic leakage (P = 0.0003) and stricture (P < 0.00001) compared with circular stapled technique. Stratification by anastomotic site showed that no matter what kind of anastomotic site (cervical or thoracic anastomosis) was used, linear stapled anastomosis could effectively reduce the anastomotic stricture in comparison with circular stapled anastomosis. Moreover, linear stapled anastomosis could decrease the risk of thoracic anastomotic leakage. There were no significant differences between circle stapled anastomosis and linear stapled anastomosis in reflux esophagitis (P = 0.17), pneumonia (P = 0.91), operation time (P = 0.41) and hospital stay (P = 0.38).ConclusionsThe study suggested that linear stapled anastomosis could be considered to be an optimal treatment associated with a reduced risk of anastomotic leakage and stricture in comparison with circular stapled anastomosis.

Project description:IntroductionSepsis is associated with a dysregulated host response to infection and impaired endogenous corticosteroid metabolism. As such, therapeutic use of exogenous corticosteroids is a promising adjunctive intervention. Despite a large number of trials examining this research question, uncertainty persists regarding the effect of corticosteroids on survival in sepsis. Several large randomised controlled trials have been published recently prompting a re-evaluation of the available literature.Methods and analysisA rigorous and reproducible search and screening process from a Cochrane review on the same topic was comprehensive to October 2014. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Cochrane trial registry and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible randomised controlled trials investigating the use of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis from September 2014. Outcomes have been chosen by a semi-independent guideline panel, created in the context of a parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendation on the topic. This panel includes clinicians, content experts, methodologists and patient representatives, who will help identify patient-important outcomes that are critical for deciding whether to use or not use corticosteroids in sepsis. Two reviewers will independently screen and identify eligible studies; a third reviewer will resolve any disagreements. We will use RevMan to pool effect estimates from included studies for each outcome using a random-effect model. We will present the results as relative risk with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes and as mean difference or standardised mean difference for continuous outcomes with 95% CI. We will assess the certainty of evidence at the outcome level using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. We will conduct a priori subgroup analyses, which have been chosen by the parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendation panel.Ethics and disseminationThe aim of this systematic review is to summarise the updated evidence on the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis.Trial registration numberCRD42017058537.

Dataset Information

Perioperative corticosteroids for reducing postoperative complications following esophagectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Systematic review registration

Publications

Perioperative corticosteroids for reducing postoperative complications following esophagectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets