Purpose This systematic review and meta-analysis directly compares joint replacement (JR) and trapeziectomy techniques to provide an update as to which surgical intervention is superior for first carpometacarpal (CMC-1) joint osteoarthritis. Methods In August 2020, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies that compared these two techniques for the treatment of CMC-1 joint osteoarthritis (PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42020189728). Primary outcomes included the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), QuickDASH (QDASH) and pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. Secondary outcomes, such as total complication, dislocation and revision surgery rates, were also measured. Results From 1909 studies identified, 14 studies (1005 patients) were eligible. Our meta-analysis found that post-operative QDASH scores were lower for patients in the JR group (five studies, p = 0.0004). Similarly, significantly better postoperative key pinch strength in favour of JR was noted (three studies, p = 0.001). However, pain (VAS) scores were similar between the two groups (five studies, p = 0.21). Moreover, JR techniques had significantly greater odds of overall complications (12 studies; OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.13–3.96, p = 0.02) and significantly greater odds of revision surgery (9 studies; OR 5.14; 95% CI 2.06–12.81, p = 0.0004). Conclusion Overall, based on very low- to moderate-quality evidence, JR treatments may result in better function with less disability with comparable pain (VAS) scores; however, JR has greater odds of complications and greater odds of requiring revision surgery. More robust RCTs that compare JR and TRAP with standardised outcome measures and long-term follow-up would add to the overall quality of evidence.

No abstract

Aim The challenge of managing first carpometacarpal (CMC-1) joint osteoarthritis is the lack of guidance on which surgical intervention is superior. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares joint replacement (JR) and trapeziectomy techniques to provide an update. Method In August 2020, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies that compared these two techniques for the treatment of CMC-1 joint osteoarthritis (PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42020189728). Primary outcomes included the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), QuickDASH and pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. Secondary outcomes, such as total complication, dislocation, and revision surgery rates, were also measured. Results From 1909 studies identified, 14 studies (1005 patients) were eligible. Our meta-analysis found that post-operative QuickDASH score was lower for patients in the JR group, indicating decreased disability following this technique (5 studies, p = 0.0002). However, pain VAS scores were similar between the two groups (5 studies, p = 0.22). Interestingly, JR techniques had significantly greater odds of overall complications (12 studies; OR 2.27; 95% CI 1.17-4.40, p = 0.02) and significantly greater odds of revision surgery (9 studies; OR 5.14; 95% CI 2.06-12.81, p = 0.0004). Conclusions Overall, based on low to moderate quality evidence, we found that JR treatments may result in better function with less disability with comparable pain (VAS) scores; however, JR has greater odds of complications and greater odds of requiring revision surgery. More robust RCTs that compare JR and TRAP with standardised outcome measures and long-term follow-up would add to the overall quality of evidence.

Introduction: Radical cystectomy (RC) is historically considered the gold standard treatment for muscle invasive and high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.However, this technique leaves the majority of patients of both sexes with poor sexual and urinary function. Organ-sparing cystectomy (OSC) techniques are emerging as an alternative to the standard procedure to preserve these functions, without compromising the oncological outcomes. We present a systematic review and metaanalysis of the published literature.Methods: MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched for eligible studies on 6 April 2021. Primary outcomes studied were both oncological outcomes, specifically overall recurrence, and functional outcomes, specifically sexual function, and daytime and nighttime continence. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. The PROSPERO registration reference number was CRD42018118897.Results: From 13 894 identified abstracts, 19 studies (1886 male and 305 female patients) were eligible for inclusion in this review. These studies included patients who underwent either whole prostate, prostate capsule, seminal vesicle, nerve, uterus, ovary, vagina and fallopian tube sparing techniques. Four studies included only female patients.Thirteen studies reported oncological outcomes, and overall recurrence rate was similar between the two groups (five studies; OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.38-1.40, p = 0.34).Thirteen studies reported on male sexual function. In men, OSC had significantly