期刊导航

论文摘要

高压氧治疗放射性颌骨骨坏死效果的系统评价

Evaluation of hyperbaric oxygen therapy for the osteoradionecrosis of the jaws: Meta-analysis

作者:殷荫, 曾维, 敬伟, 汤炜, 郭维华

Author:Yin Yin, Zeng Wei, Jing Wei, Tang Wei, Guo Weihua

收稿日期:2020-12-04          年卷(期)页码:2021,39(6):690-690-697

期刊名称:华西口腔医学杂志

Journal Name:West China Journal of Stomatology

关键字:高压氧治疗,放射性颌骨骨坏死,Meta分析,恶性肿瘤,手术,药物治疗,

Key words:hyperbaric oxygen therapy,osteoradionecrosis of the jaws,Meta-analysis,malignant tumor,surgery,drug therapy,

基金项目:四川省科技计划项目(2019YFS0362)

中文摘要

目的系统评价高压氧及其相关疗法治疗放射性颌骨骨坏死的疗效。方法按预先设定的纳入排除标准筛选高压氧治疗放射性颌骨骨坏死的随机对照试验和队列研究,计算机检索Pubmed、Embase、Cochrane Library等外文数据库;中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、维普数据库(VIP)、万方数据库和中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)等中文数据库,检索时间为数据库建库至2020年9月,并手工检索相关文献,全面收集高压氧及其相关疗法治疗放射性颌骨骨坏死的疗效的所有文献,由2名研究者按照预先设置的纳入排除标准对论文进行选择、收集资料和偏倚风险评价。提取高压氧及其相关疗法治疗放射性颌骨骨坏死的疗效的相关数据资料,采用Revman5.4软件进行Meta系统分析,如遇异质性大时,则采用敏感性分析。最后通过漏斗图定性判断可能存在的发表偏倚。结果最终Meta分析纳入4个随机对照试验,7个队列研究。Meta分析显示:高压氧结合手术抗菌药物治疗和单纯手术抗菌药物治疗放射性颌骨骨坏死有效率比较差异无统计学意义(RR=1.16,95%CI:0.86~1.58,P>0.05);高压氧和抗菌药物治疗放射性颌骨骨坏死有效率比较差异无统计学意义(RR=0.83,95%CI:0.63~1.09,P>0.05);高压氧和抗纤维化药物治疗放射性颌骨骨坏死有效率比较差异无统计学意义(RR=0.07,95%CI:0.00~155.86,P>0.05);高压氧疗法单用或复合使用与其他治疗方法有效率比较差异无统计学意义(RR=0.89,95%CI:0.67~1.19,P>0.05)。结论当前证据表明,高压氧治疗不能代替手术抗菌药物治疗,作为辅助疗法不能增加其疗效,单独应用高压氧疗法不优于抗菌药物和抗纤维化药物甚至安慰剂,但抗纤维化药物的有益作用值得进一步探索。

英文摘要

ObjectiveThis study was performed to investigate the effects of hyperbaric oxygen and other approaches for treating the osteoradionecrosis of the jaws (ORNJ) systematically.

MethodsAccording to the preset inclusion and exclusion criteria, randomized controlled trials and cohort studies on hyperbaric oxygen in the treatment of ORNJ were screened, and foreign language databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library were searched via a computer; Chinese databases such as CNKI, VIP, Wanfang data, and CBM were searched from the established database to September 2020. Relevant books were searched manually to collect all literatures on the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen and its related therapies in ORNJ treatment. Two researchers were independent and mutually blind, the papers were selected, data were collected, and the bias risk was evaluated. If any difference was detected, it would be decided by discussion or arbitrated by a third party. The data related to the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen and its related therapy in the treatment of the ORNJ were extracted, and the Revman5.4 software was used for Meta-analysis. In case of large heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis was performed. A funnel chart was used to evaluate possible publication bias qualitatively.

ResultsFour randomized controlled trials and seven cohort studies were included in Meta-analyses. In ORNJ treatment, no significant differences between the group subjected to hyperbaric oxygen and both surgery and antibiotics and the group that underwent both surgery and antibiotics (RR=1.16, 95%CI: 0.86~1.58,P>0.05); between the group with hyperbaric oxygen and the group with antibiotics (RR=0.83, 95%CI: 0.63~1.09,P>0.05); between the group with hyperbaric oxygen and the group with antifibrotic drugs (RR=0.07, 95%CI: 0.00~155.86,P>0.05); between the group with single or combined use of HBO and the group with other intervention methods (RR=0.89, 95%CI: 0.67~1.19,P>0.05).

ConclusionHyperbaric oxygen therapy cannot replace surgery and antibiotic therapy. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy is not superior to antibiotics and antifibrotic drugs, but the benefits of antifibrotic drugs should be further explored.

关闭

Copyright © 2020四川大学期刊社 版权所有.

地址:成都市一环路南一段24号

邮编:610065