Objective To evaluate the clinical effect and safety of nerve sparing radical hysterectomy(NSRH) for cervical cancer compared with radical hysterectomy (RH). Methods We searched the Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2010), MEDLINE (1960 to March, 2010), EMbase (1960 to March, 2010), CBM (1960 to March, 2010), VIP (1960 to March, 2010) and CNKI (1960 to March, 2010), and hand searched related literatures. With a defined search strategy, both randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials of comparing NSRH with RH for cervical cancer were identified. Data were extracted and evaluated by two reviewers independently. The quality of the included trials was evaluated by Cochrane’s evaluation criterion. Meta-analysis was conducted with the Cochrane collaboration’s RevMan 4.2.2 software. Results Nine controlled clinical trials involving 742 patients were identified. The meta-analysis showed that: a) There was statistical significance in postoperative recovery of bladder function between two groups; compared with RH, NSRH was much better in aspects of the recovery time of post void residual urine volume (PVR) (WMD= – 5.80, 95%CI – 6.22 to – 5.37), the bladder dysfunction morbidity (RR=0.43, 95%CI (0.26 to 0.75), and the urodynamic study; b) The operation time of NSRH was longer than that of RH with a significant difference (WMD=37.23, 95%CI 12.84 to 61.61); c) There was no significant difference between two groups in bleeding amount (WMD=19.66, 95%CI – 51.57 to 90.90); d) There was no significant difference between two groups in both survival rate and recurrent rate (RR=0.79, 95%CI 0.17 to 3.58); e) There was no significant difference between two groups in resection extension and pathologic outcome, such as, infiltration around uterus and vessels; f) One trail showed a significant difference between two groups that NSRH seldom led to anorectal and sexual dysfunction. Conclusions Compared with RH, NSRH can quickly improve the postoperative recovery of bladder, anorectal and sexual functions, but haven’t larger quantity of operative bleeding, larger resection extension, lower survival rates and higher recurrence rates except longer operation time. NSRH can improve the quality of postoperative life and is safe. However, the trails available for this systematic review were limited, as well as non-randomized controlled trails. Some outcomes were only included by one trail. So there is no confirmed conclusion about these. The prospective randomized controlled trials are required for further investigation.
Objective To systematically review the prognostic value of perineural invasion (PNI) for patients with early-stage cervical cancer. Methods We searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 10, 2016), CNKI, WanFang Data, CBM and VIP databases to collect case-control studies about prognostic value of PNI in cervical cancer from inception to October, 2016. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software. Results Seven case-control studies from eight articles involving 1 218 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: (1) On Cox's model multivariate analysis, PNI was not identified as an independent risk factor for disease free survival (DFS) (HR=0.73, 95%CI 0.33 to 1.58,P=0.42) or overall survival (OS) (HR=0.89, 95%CI 0.41 to 1.94,P=0.77) with no significant difference; (2) On Kaplan-Meier-curves, DFS (HR=1.86, 95%CI 1.20 to 2.88,P=0.006) and OS (HR=2.43, 95%CI 1.63 to 3.62,P<0.000 1) were both significantly decreased in patients with PNI positive group. Conclusion PNI represents a decreasing disease-free survival and overall survival in patients with early-stage cervical cancer, and is one of the poor prognosis factors which be informed management decisions regarding adjuvant therapy. However, there is no evidence that PNI is an independent factor affecting the prognosis. In view of the limitation of the studies, a large sample prospective controlled trial is warranted to verify the above conclusion.
ObjectiveThrough measuring fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and eosinophil levels of peripheral blood in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with different phenotype of acute exacerbation frequency, to predict the therapeutic effect of glucocorticoid therapy and guide the clinical treatment of different subtypes patients with acute exacerbations of COPD.MethodsA total of 127 patients with acute exacerbation of COPD in Suining Central Hospital from February 2017 to October 2019 were recruited. They were divided four groups according to the number of acute exacerbations in the past one year and the treatment scheme, ie. a frequent acute exacerbation with glucocorticoid treatment group (34 cases), a frequent acute exacerbation with non-glucocorticoid treatment group (31 cases), a non-frequent acute exacerbation with glucocorticoid treatment group (30 cases), and a non-frequent acute exacerbation with non-glucocorticoid treatment group (32 cases). FeNO value, eosinophil ratio in peripheral blood, COPD assessment test (CAT) score, and interleukin-8 (IL-8) concentration were measured before and on the 10th day of treatment, and the differences within group and between groups before and after treatment were compared.ResultsCAT score, FeNO, eosinophil ratio and IL-8 level in the four groups were significantly improved on the 10th day after treatment (all P<0.05). The declines of FeNO value, eosinophil ratio, and IL-8 level on the 10th day of treatment compared with those before treatment in the frequent acute exacerbation with glucocorticoid treatment group and the frequent acute exacerbations with non-glucocorticoid treatment group were larger than those in the non-frequent acute exacerbation with glucocorticoid treatment group and the non-frequent acute exacerbation with non-glucocorticoid treatment group (all P<0.05). The declines of FeNO value, blood eosinophil ratio and IL-8 level in the frequent acute exacerbation with glucocorticoid treatment group were also statistically significantly larger than those in the frequent acute exacerbations with non-glucocorticoid treatment group (all P<0.05). The improvement of CAT score in the frequent acute exacerbation with glucocorticoid treatment group was greater than that in other three groups (all P<0.05). There was no significant difference in CAT score between the non-frequent acute exacerbation with glucocorticoid treatment group and the non-frequent acute exacerbation with non-glucocorticoid treatment group (P>0.05).ConclusionsThe degree of airway inflammation is more obvious in patients with frequent acute exacerbation phenotype of COPD. FeNO value can reflect the level of airway inflammation in patients with frequent acute exacerbation of COPD and evaluate the response to glucocorticoid therapy.