Search

This systematic review aims to identify causes of increased risk for and location and mechanism of gastric injury at laparoscopy for gynecologic indications and determine optimal management.A prospectively registered systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42021237999) was undertaken and performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Databases searched included Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar from 1960 to 2021.All study types were included involving female patients of any age with gastric injury at laparoscopy for gynecologic indication.A total of 6294 articles were screened, from which 67 studies were selected for a full-text review. Twenty-eight articles were included, which contained 42 cases drawn from 7 observational studies, 4 case series, and 17 case reports. Of these, 93% (39/42) were at the time of laparoscopic entry, with Veress entry technique used in 79% of these cases (31/39). Eighteen cases reported an entry point, with 77% (14/18) occurring at the periumbilical entry point and 11% (2/18) occurring at Palmer's point. Of the cases with reported etiology for gastric distention or displacement, 64% (9/14) were owing to anesthetic cause. The most common sites of gastric injury were on the anterior stomach wall (n = 8) and the greater curvature (n = 5). Among patients with reported management (32/42), a similar proportion were managed conservatively (11) when compared with repair through laparotomy (13) or laparoscopy (8). All injuries were detected intraoperatively with no reported short-term sequelae.This systematic review of the literature reveals that gastric injury at laparoscopy for gynecologic indications is a rare complication predominantly occurring during laparoscopic entry, most commonly at the periumbilical entry point. When detected intraoperatively, conservative management, laparoscopic, or open repair in the appropriate patient has been performed with no short-term sequelae. The limitations of this review include paucity of cases, detail, and timeline of publications.

IntroductionElectronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use has drastically increased in recent years, particularly among adolescents. This poses several acute and chronic harms to young people, including poisonings, burns, serious lung injury and—where nicotine e-liquid is used—the potential to impact healthy brain development and precipitate future nicotine addiction. School-based prevention programmes have the potential to address this growing public health concern by reaching large numbers of young people during a critical period for intervention; however, the efficacy of such interventions has not been systematically explored. This systematic review aims to determine the existence and efficacy of school-based preventive interventions targeting e-cigarette use.Methods and analysisA systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and international clinical trials registries will be conducted from 2000 to April 2022 to identify eligible studies (randomised controlled trials, cluster randomised controlled trials and quasiexperimental studies) evaluating school-based interventions to prevent e-cigarette use among adolescents. Two reviewers will independently screen title, abstract and full text of all studies for eligibility. Both reviewers will independently extract the data and assess the risk of bias. Any discrepancies will be resolved by a third reviewer. Results will be summarised in a narrative synthesis and data will be meta-analysed if appropriate. Heterogeneity in findings will be assessed narratively, and using the I2 statistic (where meta-analysis is feasible), meta-regression will be used to explore potential factors associated with programme efficacy, where data permit.Ethics and disseminationThis research is conducted on published work and does not require ethics approval. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and used to guide the development of new school-based e-cigarette preventive interventions.Trial registration numberCRD42022323352.

Lifestyle risk behaviors often co-occur and are prevalent among adolescents. Parent-based interventions addressing risk behaviors concurrently have the potential to improve youth and parent outcomes. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy of parent-based interventions targeting multiple lifestyle risk behaviors among adolescents and parents. MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycInfo (Ovid), Scopus, CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from 2010-May 2021. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of parent-based interventions addressing 2+ risk behaviors: alcohol use, smoking, poor diet, physical inactivity, sedentary behaviors, and poor sleep. Studies directly targeting parents, and that assessed adolescent outcomes (11-18 years) were eligible. Where possible, random-effects meta-analysis was conducted. From 11,975 identified records, 46 publications of 36 RCTs (n = 28,322 youth, n = 7385 parents) were eligible. Parent-based interventions were associated with improved adolescent moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) [Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.18, 2.81; p = 0.007], and reduced screen time (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI = -0.62, -0.16, p = 0.0009) and discretionary food intake (SMD = -0.18; 95% CI = -0.30, -0.06; p = 0.002) compared to controls. However, there was some evidence that interventions increased the odds of ever using tobacco in the medium-term (OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.99, 2.18, p = 0.06) and of past month tobacco use in the long-term (OR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.12, 1.90; p = 0.005). Overall, the quality of evidence was moderate. Parent-based interventions targeting multiple risk behaviors improved adolescent MVPA, and reduced screen time discretionary food intake. Further research is needed to address sleep problems and increase intervention efficacy, particularly for alcohol and tobacco use.