International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2015
Management of cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhea: an evidence-based review with recommendations.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Oakley Gretchen M, Orlandi Richard R, Woodworth Bradford A, Batra Pete S, Alt Jeremiah A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Management strategies employed for cases of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) rhinorrhea vary widely because of limited evidence-based guidance.
METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from January 1990 through September 2014 to examine 5 endoscopic repair techniques and 8 perioperative management strategies for CSF rhinorrhea. Benefit-harm assessments, value judgments, and recommendations were made based on the available evidence. Study exclusion criteria were language other than English, pre-1990 studies, case reports, and nonrhinologic leak. All authors agreed on recommendations through an iterative process.
RESULTS: We reviewed 67 studies examining 13 practices pertinent to the management of CSF rhinorrhea, reaching a highest aggregate grade of evidence of B. The literature does not support the routine use of prophylactic antibiotics or lumbar drainage. Various endoscopic repair materials show similar success rates; however, larger defects may benefit from vascularized grafts. There were no relevant studies to address postoperative activity restrictions.
CONCLUSION: Despite relatively low levels of evidence, recommendations for the management of CSF rhinorrhea can be made based on the current literature. Higher-level studies are needed to better determine optimal clinical management approaches.
METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from January 1990 through September 2014 to examine 5 endoscopic repair techniques and 8 perioperative management strategies for CSF rhinorrhea. Benefit-harm assessments, value judgments, and recommendations were made based on the available evidence. Study exclusion criteria were language other than English, pre-1990 studies, case reports, and nonrhinologic leak. All authors agreed on recommendations through an iterative process.
RESULTS: We reviewed 67 studies examining 13 practices pertinent to the management of CSF rhinorrhea, reaching a highest aggregate grade of evidence of B. The literature does not support the routine use of prophylactic antibiotics or lumbar drainage. Various endoscopic repair materials show similar success rates; however, larger defects may benefit from vascularized grafts. There were no relevant studies to address postoperative activity restrictions.
CONCLUSION: Despite relatively low levels of evidence, recommendations for the management of CSF rhinorrhea can be made based on the current literature. Higher-level studies are needed to better determine optimal clinical management approaches.