MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2954420875 · doi:10.1002/uog.20389

Learning curves of open and endoscopic fetal spina bifida closure: systematic review and meta‐analysis

2019· review· en· W2954420875 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2019
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSpinal Dysraphism and Malformations
Établissements canadiensSinai Health SystemMount Sinai Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilUniversity of California, DavisWellcome TrustGreat Ormond Street Hospital CharityChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia
Mots-clésMedicineMeta-analysisFetal surgerySpina bifidaMEDLINERandomized controlled trialCochrane LibraryFetusSurgeryPregnancyInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The Management of Myelomeningocele Study (MOMS) trial demonstrated the safety and efficacy of open fetal surgery for spina bifida aperta (SBA). Recently developed alternative techniques may reduce maternal risks without compromising the fetal neuroprotective effects. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the learning curve (LC) of different fetal SBA closure techniques. METHODS: MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane databases and the gray literature were searched to identify relevant articles on fetal surgery for SBA, without language restriction, published between January 1980 and October 2018. Identified studies were reviewed systematically and those reporting all consecutive procedures and with postnatal follow-up ≥ 12 months were selected. Studies were included only if they reported outcome variables necessary to measure the LC, as defined by fetal safety and efficacy. Two authors independently retrieved data, assessed the quality of the studies and categorized observations into blocks of 30 patients. For meta-analysis, data were pooled using a random-effects model when heterogeneous. To measure the LC, we used two complementary methods. In the group-splitting method, competency was defined when the procedure provided results comparable to those in the MOMS trial for 12 outcome variables representing the immediate surgical outcome, short-term neonatal neuroprotection and long-term neuroprotection at ≥ 12 months of age. Then, when raw patient data were available, we performed cumulative sum analysis based on a composite binary outcome defining successful surgery. The composite outcome combined four clinically relevant variables for safety (absence of extreme preterm delivery < 30 weeks, absence of fetal death ≤ 7 days after surgery) and efficacy (reversal of hindbrain herniation and absence of any neonatal treatment of dehiscence or cerebrospinal fluid leakage at the closure site). RESULTS: Of 6024 search results, 17 (0.3%) studies were included, all of which had low, moderate or unclear risk of bias. Fetal SBA closure was performed using standard hysterotomy (11 studies), mini-hysterotomy (one study) or fetoscopy by either exteriorized-uterus single-layer closure (one study), percutaneous single-layer closure (three studies) or percutaneous two-layer closure (one study). Only outcomes for standard hysterotomy could be meta-analyzed. Overall, outcomes improved significantly with experience. Competency was reached after 35 consecutive cases for standard hysterotomy and was predicted to be achieved after ≥ 57 cases for mini-hysterotomy and ≥ 56 for percutaneous two-layer fetoscopy. For percutaneous and exteriorized-uterus single-layer fetoscopy, competency was not reached in the 81 and 28 cases available for analysis, respectively, and LC prediction analysis could not be performed. CONCLUSIONS: The number of cases operated is correlated with the outcome of fetal SBA closure, and the number of operated cases required to reach competency ranges from 35 for standard hysterotomy to ≥ 56-57 for minimally invasive modifications. Our observations provide important information for institutions looking to establish a new fetal center, develop a new fetal surgery technique or train their team, and inform referring clinicians, potential patients and third parties. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,021
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,917
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,021
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0080,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,068
Tête enseignante GPT0,363
Écart entre enseignants0,296 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle