A b s t r a c tIntroduction: There is an academic debate over surgical treatments of liver hydatid cyst disease. In this study, a systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out in order to evaluate the pros and cons of both PAIR (Puncture, Aspiration, Injection, Respiration) and laparoscopic techniques by considering the outcomes of liver hydatid cysts. Material and methods: We designed descriptive Boolean queries to search two databases, PubMed and Scopus, to derive the articles published in the period of January 2000 to December 2016 in order to evaluate the outcomes of these research articles. The outcomes of laparoscopic and PAIR procedures include the rates of cure, postoperative complications, recurrences, and mortality, which were extracted, assessed, and used as their corresponding effect sizes. Results: Fifty-seven studies including a total of 2832 patients (PAIR group n = 1650 and laparoscopic group = 1182) were analyzed. In this meta-analysis study, a random effect model of correlations of outcomes (postoperative complications, mortalities, recurrences, and cure rates) of PAIR and laparoscopy procedures was used. The meta-analysis and the forest plots of the two procedures show that the PAIR approach is superior in terms of cure, complication, and mortality rates compared with the laparoscopy technique. However, the recurrence rate is low in laparoscopic approaches. Moreover, Egger's tests for determining publication bias and heterogeneity tests were also performed. Conclusions: This study shows promising trends toward an advantage of PAIR procedures in treatment of liver hydatid cyst in comparison with laparoscopic procedures. The PAIR procedure is superior to laparoscopy due to having a higher cure rate and lower complication and mortality rates; however, the latter has a lower recurrence rate.

No abstract

As an unexplained respiratory disease epidemic, which is similar to respiratory syndrome coronavirus SARS-CoV, it rapidly spread all over the world. The study aims to compare several parameters of COVID-19 and SARS-CoV infectious diseases in terms of incidence, mortality, and recovery rates. The publicly available dataset Worldometer (extracted on April 5, 2020) confirmed by WHO report was available for meta-analysis purposes using the Meta-MUMS tool. And, the reported outcomes of the analysis used a random-effects model to evaluate the event rate, and risk ratios thorough subgroup analysis forest plots. Seventeen countries for COVID-19 and eight countries of SARS infections, including COVID-19 group n 5 1124243, and SARS-CoV group n 5 8346, were analyzed. In this meta-analysis, a random effect model of relations of incidence, mortality, and recovery rates of COVID-19 and SARS world infections were determined. The meta-analysis and forest plots of two viral world infections showed that the incidence rate of COVID-19 infection is more than SARS infections, while recovery and mortality event rates of SARS-CoV are more than COVID-19 infection. And subgroup analysis showed that the mortality and recovery rates were higher in both SARS-CoV wand COVID-19 in comparison to incidence and mortality rates, respectively. In conclusion, the meta-analysis approach on the abovementioned dataset revealed the epidemiological and statistical analyses for comparing COVID-19 and SARS-CoV outbreaks. Ó 2020 IMSS. Published by Elsevier Inc.

No abstract

Introduction The optimal treatment of empyema thoracis is still debatable between academics and surgeons. This study reviews advantages and disadvantages of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and open thoracotomy decortication (OTD) considering outcomes of empyema thoracis. Materials and methods A descriptive Boolean query was used for searching three databases to extract the published studies up to 27 March 2017. The outcomes of VATS and OTD were extracted and assessed by random-effects model of meta-analysis. The Egger’s test and trim-and-fill method were used for analyzing publication bias, and, meta-regression and subgroup analyses were done for determining heterogeneity. Results A total of 2219 patients, from 13 studies, meeting the inclusion criteria were selected and subjected to further analyses. Of 2219 patients, 1120 were treated by VATS and the remaining were subjected to OTD. During VATS, 252 patients were converted to OTD. Forest plots showed that VATS was far superior in terms of incidence of duration of hospital stay and operative time (SMDs = 1.189, 1.565; p < 0.001, < 0.001) compared to OTD. Mortality, prolonged air leakage, wound infection, and recurrence rates (ORs = 1.234, 2.564, 1.363, 1.962; p = 0.576, 0.077, 0.0692, 0.4) had no advantages for both procedures while failure or conversion rate (OR = 0.198, p < 0.001) of VATS was more than those of OTD. Conclusions The results of the current research suggest no trends of superior outcomes with VATS in the treatment of empyema thoracis. Hence, VATS and OTD could be recommended as treatments for empyema thoracis.