Search

Simple Summary: Colorectal cancer can be associated with liver metastasis and may be treated by minimal liver surgery using laparoscopic approaches and robotic surgery. Robotic surgery is of significant use in colorectal surgery and urology. However, there is still no long-term evidence concerning overall survival, and the number of patients operated on using this method remains small. Given the numerous benefits of robotic surgery and the concomitant small number of studies, we conducted a meta-analysis of the operative and short-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted liver resection for colorectal liver metastases. The results of the meta-analysis show small differences in blood loss and conversion to open laparotomy rates in favor of robotic surgery. There were no differences in 30-day mortality, and there were also no differences in 1-year, 2-year, or 3-year mortality. The results indicate that both surgical methods are comparable in efficacy and safety. Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide, and the liver is the most common localization of metastatic disease. The incidence of minimally invasive liver surgery is increasing, and robotic surgery (RLR) is believed to overcome some limitations of a laparoscopic approach (LRL). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of operative and short-term oncologic outcomes of the laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted liver resection for colorectal liver metastases. An online search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane databases was performed. Eight studies involving 3210 patients were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. In the LRL group, a higher conversion to open rate (12.4%) was observed compared to the RLR (6.7%; p = <0.001). 30-day mortality was 0.7% for the LRL group compared to 0.5% for the RLR group (p = 0.76). Mortality in longer periods among LLR and RLR amounted to 18.2% vs. 8.0% for 1-year mortality (p = 0.07), 34.1% vs. 26.7% for 2-year mortality (p = 0.13), and 52.3% vs. 48.3% for 3-year mortality (p = 0.46). The length of hospital stay was 5.6 ± 2.5 vs. 5.8 ± 2.1 days, respectively (p = 0.47). There were no significant differences between the incidence of individual complications in the LRL and RLR groups (p = 0.78). Laparoscopic or robotic approaches for colorectal liver metastases are comparable in terms of safety and effectiveness. There are significant advantages to robotic surgery, although there is still no long-term evidence concerning overall survival, and the number of patients operated on using RLR remains small. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence and effectiveness of dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DA-CPR) in the context of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) remains an area of ambiguity and requires further elucidation. The study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the DA-CPR among pre- vs. during COVID-19 periods. Material and methods: This search was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. A systematic review of the current literature was performed to identify articles that evaluated the impact of the pandemic on DA-CPR. English-language literature was searched up to December 11, 2023, in three databases, including MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Results: Six studies with 605,354 patients (431,308 patients with OHCA from before the pandemic period and 174,046 OHCA patients from the COVID-19 pandemic period) were included. Pooled analysis showed that DA-CPR before and during the COVID-19 period varied and amounted to 61.4% vs. 62.4%, respectively (OR = 0.94; 95% CI: 0.90 to 0.99; p = 0.02). Moreover, dispatchers recognized cardiac arrest by phone in 61.8% of cases in the pre-pandemic period as well as in the pandemic period (OR = 0.98; 95%CI: 0.95 to 1.01; p = 0.17). Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis suggest the resilience and adaptability of emergency response systems in maintaining DA-CPR effectiveness despite the challenges posed by the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Video-sharing platforms have become popular and widely used sources of information today. The Internet is an accessible source for individuals, medical students, and healthcare professionals to acquire knowledge when searching for health-related information. Access to information has increased with the widespread use of the Internet today. Recognition of sudden cardiac arrest and initiating interventions according to current guidelines can be achieved through education. This study aims to assess the accuracy of BLS and CPR videos on YouTube following the 2020 AHA Resuscitation Guidelines. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study follows a cross-sectional analytical design. The YouTube website was searched using the following keywords for Turkish videos uploaded from October 21, 2020, to September 7, 2023: 'CPR, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, basic life support, CPR, advanced cardiac life support'. October 21, 2020, was chosen as the reference date since it marks the publication date of the 2020 AHA guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 265 Turkish videos were evaluated from all videos uploaded to YouTube. The analysis included 130 videos that met the inclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Turkish BLS and CPR YouTube videos violate the 2020 AHA criteria for offering basic information to the public and cannot teach healthcare workers advanced medical skills. The greater viewing of anonymous sources' videos suggests that non-experts are submitting videos on hot themes to gain viewers. Having these instructional films reviewed before releasing them to YouTube will ensure accurate, complete, and valuable health information and enhance viewing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]