Objectives To compare the performance of chest computed tomography (CT) scan versus reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as the reference standard in the initial diagnostic assessment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Design A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. A search of electronic information was conducted using the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Setting Studies that compared the diagnostic performance within the same patient cohort of chest CT scan versus RT-PCR in COVID-19 suspected patients. Participants Thirteen non-randomised studies enrolling 4092 patients were identified. Main outcome measures Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were primary outcome measures. Secondary outcomes included other test performance characteristics and discrepant findings between both investigations. Results Chest CT had a median sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 0.91 (range 0.82–0.98), 0.775 (0.25–1.00) and 0.87 (0.68–0.99), respectively, with RT-PCR as the reference. Importantly, early small, China-based studies tended to favour chest CT versus later larger, non-China studies. Conclusions A relatively high false positive rate can be expected with chest CT. It is possible it may still be useful to provide circumstantial evidence, however, in some patients with a suspicious clinical presentation of COVID-19 and negative initial Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 RT-PCR tests, but more evidence is required in this context. In acute cardiorespiratory presentations, negative CT scan and RT-PCR tests is likely to be reassuring.
Introduction and Aims: There is no consensus on the optimal tonsillectomy technique in adult patients. The study aims to identify all studies comparing the outcomes of coblation versus bipolar diathermy in adult patients undergoing tonsillectomy. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Primary outcomes were hemorrhage and postoperative pain. Secondary outcome measures included return to theatre, analgesia, intraoperative bleeding, diet, tonsillar healing, and operation time. Fixed-effects modeling was used for the analysis. Results: Six studies were identified enrolling a total of 1824 patients. There were no significant differences in terms of reactionary hemorrhage (OR = 1.81, P = .51), delayed hemorrhage (OR = 0.72, P = .20), or postoperative pain (mean difference = −0.15, P = .45); however, there is a general trend favuring coblation. For secondary outcomes, no significant differences noted in terms of intraoperative bleeding, diet, and cases returning to theatre. Analgesia administration was either insignificant or higher in the coblation group. The coblation group had longer operation time and greater healing effect on tonsillar tissue. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in outcomes for coblation and bipolar diathermy for adult tonsillectomy patients in this systematic review and meta-analysis.
Introduction There is no consensus on the most superior tonsillectomy technique in adult patients. Recent trials involving coblation technique have shown promising results. Aim The study aims to compare the outcomes of coblation versus bipolar diathermy in adult patients undergoing tonsillectomy. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and a search of electronic information was conducted to identify all Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) as well as non-randomised studies comparing the outcomes of coblation versus bipolar diathermy in adult patients undergoing tonsillectomy. Reactionary haemorrhage, delayed haemorrhage and postoperative pain were primary outcome measures. Secondary outcome measures included a return to theatre, administration of analgesia, intraoperative bleeding, diet, the effect on tonsils (degree of healing of tonsillar fossae) and operation time. Fixed effects modelling was used for the analysis. Results Four RCTs and two non-randomised studies were identified enrolling a total of 1824 patients. There were no significant differences between the coblation and bipolar groups in terms of reactionary haemorrhage (Odds Ratio [OR] = 1.81, P = 0.51), delayed haemorrhage (OR = 0.72, P = 0.20) or post-operative pain by day 7 (standardised Mean Difference [MD] = -0.15, P = 0.45). For secondary outcomes, there were no differences noted in terms of intraoperative blood loss, diet and the number of cases returned to theatre. Administration of analgesia was reported to be either insignificant between the two groups or higher in the coblation group Also, the coblation group had longer operation time and greater healing effect on tonsillar tissue. Conclusions Coblation is neither a superior or inferior option when compared to bipolar diathermy used in the current clinical practice for adult patients undergoing tonsillectomy as both techniques have similar haemorrhage rates and post-operative pain whilst also lengthening the operative time in coblation.
This study aims to identify Islamic banks' governance principles and measures the application level of these principles in Islamic banks in Kuwait. The descriptive-analytical approach was used by designing a questionnaire consisting of 29 questions, covering most of Islamic bank governance principles, and commensurate with the nature of distinguishing them from other traditional banks. The study showed that the application level of Islamic banks' governance principles is at a medium level, noting that there were deficiencies in some aspects, which is the absence of disclosure and transparency requirements for Islamic financial operations that distinguish Islamic banks from other traditional banks. In addition, the study showed that there is a lack of equity in the system of salaries and workers' wages compared to competitive banks and institutions in Kuwait.
The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) versus ultrasound therapy (UST) in plantar fasciitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. An electronic search identifying studies comparing ESWT and UST for plantar fasciitis was conducted. Primary outcomes were morning and activity pain, functional impairment, and the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scale score. Secondary outcomes included the fascial thickness, primary efficacy success rate, activity limitations, pain intensity, and satisfaction. Seven studies enrolling 369 patients were identified. No significant difference was found between ESWT and UST for functional impairment (mean difference [MD] = −2.90, P = 0.22), AOFAS scale score (MD = 35, P = 0.20), and pain in the first steps in the morning (MD = −4.72, P = 0.39). However, there was a significant improvement in pain during activity for the ESWT group (MD = −1.36, P = 0.005). For secondary outcomes, ESWT had improved results in terms of primary efficacy success rate, activity limitations, and patient satisfaction. The reduction of plantar fascia thickness showed no significant difference. Pain intensity after treatment had varied results amongst included studies. In conclusion, ESWT is superior to UST for plantar fasciitis as it improves pain activity and intensity, primary efficacy success rate, and activity limitations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.