Search

Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS) is persistent pain and disability following lumbar laminectomy which is associated with decreased quality of life and disability and has been reported in up to 40% of the patients undergoing lumbar laminectomy. Several approaches have been introduced to reduce the rate of the FBSS. Among these, applying anti-adhesive barrier gels have been studied with interest with controversial results. The aim of the current study was to determine the effects of anti-adhesive barrier gels on functional outcome and recurrence of patients undergoing lumbar disc surgery. We searched databases including EMBASE, PUBMED, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and scholar databases until November 2019. To assess the heterogeneity across included studies was used Cochran's Q and I-square (I2) statistics. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI between were used to estimate pooled effect sizes. Out of 4507, 10 clinical trials found to be appropriate for current meta-analysis. The pooled results of included clinical trials indicated that adhesion barrier gel significantly decreased leg pain (LP) (SMD = −0.31; 95% CI, −0.60, −0.03; P = 0.032; I2: 59.2%) among patients with lumbar disc herniation surgery. Back pain (BP) (SMD = −0.03; 95% CI, −0.23, 0.16; P = 0.734; I2: 40.2%), and Oswestry disability index (ODI) (SMD = −0.11; 95% CI, −0.27, 0.05; P = 0.178; I2: 0.0%), were not significantly affected following adhesion barrier gel application. Application of adhesion barrier gel in single level lumbar disc surgery is associated with deceased leg pain. However, its application does not affect the low back pain, disability and gate. Further, larger randomized clinical trials are required., Adhesion barrier gel; Functional outcome; Lumbar disc surgery; Meta-analysis.

Mondello, Stefania/0000-0002-8587-3614; Alizada, Orkhan/0000-0003-0942-9906; Ghorbani, Mohammad/0000-0002-7709-3095; Abedi, Vida/0000-0001-7689-933X WOS:000575454600010 PubMed ID: 32818804 Background: There is an increased attention to stroke following SARS-CoV-2. The goal of this study was to better depict the short-term risk of stroke and its associated factors among SARS-CoV-2 hospitalized patients. Methods: This multicentre, multinational observational study includes hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients from North and South America (United States, Canada, and Brazil), Europe (Greece, Italy, Finland, and Turkey), Asia (Lebanon, Iran, and India), and Oceania (New Zealand). The outcome was the risk of subsequent stroke. Centres were included by non-probability sampling. The counts and clinical characteristics including laboratory findings and imaging of the patients with and without a subsequent stroke were recorded according to a predefined protocol. Quality, risk of bias, and heterogeneity assessments were conducted according to ROBINS-E and Cochrane Q-test. The risk of subsequent stroke was estimated through meta-analyses with random effect models. Bivariate logistic regression was used to determine the parameters with predictive outcome value. The study was reported according to the STROBE, MOOSE, and EQUATOR guidelines. Findings: We received data from 26,175 hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients from 99 tertiary centres in 65 regions of 11 countries until May 1st, 2020. A total of 17,799 patients were included in meta-analyses. Among them, 156(0.9%) patients had a stroke-123(79%) ischaemic stroke, 27(17%) intracerebral/subarachnoid hemorrhage, and 6(4%) cerebral sinus thrombosis. Subsequent stroke risks calculated with meta-analyses, under low to moderate heterogeneity, were 0.5% among all centres in all countries, and 0.7% among countries with higher health expenditures. The need for mechanical ventilation (OR: 1.9, 95% CI:1.1-3.5, p = 0.03) and the presence of ischaemic heart disease (OR: 2.5, 95% CI:1.4-4.7, p = 0.006) were predictive of stroke. Interpretation: The results of this multi-national study on hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection indicated an overall stroke risk of 0.5%(pooled risk: 0.9%). The need for mechanical ventilation and the history of ischaemic heart disease are the independent predictors of stroke among SARS-CoV-2 patients. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.