Skull-pin head-holder application during neurosurgery is a highly noxious stimulus that may lead to abrupt hemodynamic change, which is an unfavorable response to maintain hemodynamics stability. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine on hemodynamic response (blood pressure and heart rate) resulting from the application of skull-pin head-holder in neurosurgery.
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. The protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD 420119127876). Electronic databases were searched, without discrimination of publication year, language, and region, to identify all randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of dexmedetomidine on hemodynamic response resulting from skull-pin head-holder application during general anesthesia for neurosurgery. The mean arterial pressure and heart rate were analyzed using random-effect model, and the mean difference (MD) was calculated.
Seventeen trials were identified; a total of 878 patients were enrolled. The analysis indicated that dexmedetomidine infusion reduced the mean arterial pressure (MD -11.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] -16.33 to -7.07, p < 0.00001) and heart rate (MD -14.48, 95% CI -23.10 to -5.86, p = 0.001) during skull-pin head-holder application. Subgroup analysis showed that dexmedetomidine was superior to fentanyl for the attenuation of hemodynamic response. Dexmedetomidine infusion also reduced the incidence of hypertension, tachycardia and brain relaxation score.
The result of this analysis indicates that intraoperative dexmedetomidine administration could decrease the hemodynamic response and provide hemodynamic stability during skull-pin head-holder application in neurosurgery.

The effects of intravenous dexmedetomidine on hemodynamic response in patients undergoing skull-pin head-holder application during neurosurgery - A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

En-bloc resection of giant cell tumors (GCTs) of the distal radius remains the mainstay treatment for those with high-graded lesions. Several techniques have been described for reconstruction of the resected segment, of which transposition of the ipsilateral ulna is scarcely reported.
To investigate the efficacy and safety of the different techniques of ulnar translocation following GCTs total resection.
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted concerning the reported functional outcomes, including grip strength, range of forearm motion, functional scores, and new bone formation, as well as postoperative complications, such as delayed union, local recurrence and metastasis. The ranges of functional outcomes were reviewed and the pooled prevalence rates of complication and their respective 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were computed.
In a total of 12 studies, 90 patients (51.1% males, 84.8% had Campanacci grade III tumors) underwent five different reconstruction techniques. As compared to the normal side, the mean grip strength in the affected side ranged between 59 and 71%. The average union time was 1-8 months, while delayed union was reported in 50% (95% CI, 15.35 to 84.65) of patients whom their grafts were fixed with Steinmann pins. The shortest union time, the highest forearm supination and pronation degrees, new bone formation at the ulnar stump, and the highest functional scores were reported following a modified distal radius plate technique. Using a dynamic compression plate and a clover leaf plate provided lower, but considerable, functional outcomes.
Ulnar translocation following GCT en-bloc resection warrants additional investigation in large cohorts and well-designed studies to corroborate the promising outcomes presented in this review.

The reconstruction after en-bloc resection of giant cell tumors at the distal radius: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the ulnar transposition reconstruction technique.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread worldwide. Integrated Chinese and Western medicine have had some successes in treating COVID-19.
This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of three traditional Chinese medicine drugs and three herbal formulas (3-drugs-3-formulas) in patients with COVID-19.
Relevant studies were identified from 12 electronic databases searched from their establishment to April 7, 2022.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and cohort studies that evaluated the effects of 3-drugs-3-formulas for COVID-19. The treatment group was treated with one of the 3-drugs-3-formulas plus conventional treatment. The control group was treated with conventional treatment.
Two evaluators screened and selected literature independently, then extracted basic information and assessed risk of bias. The treatment outcome measures were duration of main symptoms, hospitalization time, aggravation rate and mortality. RevMan 5.4 was used to analyze the pooled results reported as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous data and risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI for dichotomous data.
Forty-one studies with a total of 13,260 participants were identified. Our analysis suggests that compared with conventional treatment, the combination of 3-drugs-3-formulas might shorten duration of fever (MD = -1.39; 95% CI: -2.19 to -0.59; P < 0.05), cough (MD = -1.57; 95% CI: -2.16 to -0.98; P < 0.05) and fatigue (MD = -1.36; 95% CI: -2.21 to -0.51; P < 0.05), decrease length of hospital stay (MD = -2.62; 95% CI -3.52 to -1.72; P < 0.05), the time for nucleic acid conversion (MD = -2.92; 95% CI: -4.26 to -1.59; P < 0.05), aggravation rate (RR = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.64; P < 0.05) and mortality (RR = 0.34; 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.62; P < 0.05), and increase the recovery rate of chest computerized tomography manifestations (RR = 1.22; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.3; P < 0.05) and total effectiveness (RR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.42; P < 0.05).
The 3-drugs-3-formulas can play an active role in treating all stages of COVID-19. No severe adverse events related to 3-drugs-3-formulas were observed. Hence, 3-drugs-3-formulas combined with conventional therapies have effective therapeutic value for COVID-19 patients. Further long-term high-quality studies are essential to demonstrate the clinical benefits of each formula. Please cite this article as: You LZ, Dai QQ, Zhong XY, Yu DD, Cui HR, Kong YF, Zhao MZ, Zhang XY, Xu QQ, Guan ZY, Wei XX, Zhang XC, Han SJ, Liu WJ, Chen Z, Zhang XY, Zhao C, Jin YH, Shang HC. Clinical evidence of three traditional Chinese medicine drugs and three herbal formulas for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Chinese population. J Integr Med. 2023; 21(5): 441-454.

Clinical evidence of three traditional Chinese medicine drugs and three herbal formulas for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Chinese population.

Papers