Objective To evaluate the effects of peripheral venous remaining needle sealing with heparin vs. saline in China. Methods A comprehensive, systematic bibliographic search of medical literature from databases of CNKI (1994 to December, 2009) and Wanfang (1990 to December, 2009) was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to catheter sealing with saline vs. heparin. The remaining time of venous needle, the incidence of phlebitis and the catheter blockage were compared, and the quality of RCTs was assessed and meta-analyses were conducted by RevMan 5.0 software. Results Nine RCTs involving 1 770 patients were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that: a) There was a significant difference between heparin sealing and saline sealing in catheter blockage (OR=0.44, 95%CI 0.32 to 0.62, Plt;0.05). The heparin sealing was much better to prevent catheter blockage; b) There was no significant difference between saline sealing and heparin sealing in the incidence of phlebitis (OR=1.26, 95%CI 0.64 to 2.50, Pgt;0.05); and c) The average remaining time of venous catheter between saline sealing and heparin sealing had significant difference (WMD=0.24, 95%CI 0.04 to 0.43, Plt;0.05). Heparin sealing had better effect than saline sealing. Conclusion The meta-analyses of current medical literature in China show that heparin sealing can reduce the incidence of catheter blockage and prolong the remaining time of catheter, although there is no significant effect in the aspect of the incidence of phlebitis.
Objective To compare the perioperative outcomes of atypical segmentectomy between robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) and conventional video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MethodsThe data of patients who underwent minimally invasive anatomic atypical segmentectomy in our hospital from October 2016 to December 2021 were collected. These patients were divided into a RATS group and a VATS group according to the operation method. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to select patients with close clinical baseline characteristics, and the perioperative results of the two groups were compared. ResultsA total of 1 048 patients were enrolled, including 320 males and 728 females, with a mean age of 53.51±11.13 years. There were 277 patients in the RATS group and 771 patients in the VATS group. After 1∶1 PS matching, 277 pairs were selected. Both groups were well balanced for age, sex, smoking history, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, pulmonary function, tumor size, tumor location, and histological type. All patients were R0 resection, and there were no deaths within 30 days after surgery. The RATS group had shorter operative time [85 (75, 105) min vs. 115 (95, 140) min, P<0.001] and less blood loss [50 (30, 100) mL vs. 60 (50, 100) mL, P=0.001]. There were no statistical differences between the two groups in lymph node resection, conversion to thoracotomy, thoracic drainage time, total amount of thoracic drainage or postoperative complications (P>0.05). ConclusionBoth RATS and VATS atypical segmentectomies are safe and feasible for early-stage NSCLC. RATS can effectively shorten the operative time, and reduce blood loss.