The Laryngoscope · 2023
Tracheal Replacement Techniques and Associated Mortality: A Systematic Review.
Систематический обзорСтатьяНазвание 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.
Tseng Wen-Hui, Liu En-Wei, Cheng Kai-Yuan, Wee Shyun-Jing, Lee Jian-Jr, Chen Hung-Chi
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Tracheal replacement is a crucial operation to enhance the quality of life for patients with extensive tracheal lesions. The most suitable surgical techniques for different clinical conditions remain a topic of debate. Through a reviewing of the relevant literature, this study investigated the association between surgical techniques and mortality rate.
DATA SOURCES: Studies were collected from PubMed, Embase, the Web of Science, the Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
METHODS: This systematic review encompassed literature from the inception of each database to May 10, 2023, focusing on tracheal replacement for patients who underwent circumferential resection of the trachea or partial resection with preservation of the posterior membranous wall. Non-human and non-clinical studies were excluded.
RESULTS: About 31 studies were included in the assessment comprising a combination of case reports and case series, and 118 patients underwent tracheal replacement through four underlying methodologies, including tracheal allotransplantation, autologous tissue reconstruction, bioprosthetic reconstruction, or tissue engineering surgery. Each modality exhibits unique advantages and disadvantages, leading to variable outcomes in clinical application.
CONCLUSION: Tracheal replacement is challenging due to the absence of an ideal substitution or graft material. Despite limited clinical successes observed across various modalities, we believe autologous tissue reconstruction for tracheal replacement has the advantage of broadest indications, low rejection rate, and avoidance of immunosuppressive agents. Future research should focus on achieving tracheal replacement that preserves mucociliary clearance, lateral rigidity, and longitudinal flexibility.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 134:1517-1522, 2024.
DATA SOURCES: Studies were collected from PubMed, Embase, the Web of Science, the Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
METHODS: This systematic review encompassed literature from the inception of each database to May 10, 2023, focusing on tracheal replacement for patients who underwent circumferential resection of the trachea or partial resection with preservation of the posterior membranous wall. Non-human and non-clinical studies were excluded.
RESULTS: About 31 studies were included in the assessment comprising a combination of case reports and case series, and 118 patients underwent tracheal replacement through four underlying methodologies, including tracheal allotransplantation, autologous tissue reconstruction, bioprosthetic reconstruction, or tissue engineering surgery. Each modality exhibits unique advantages and disadvantages, leading to variable outcomes in clinical application.
CONCLUSION: Tracheal replacement is challenging due to the absence of an ideal substitution or graft material. Despite limited clinical successes observed across various modalities, we believe autologous tissue reconstruction for tracheal replacement has the advantage of broadest indications, low rejection rate, and avoidance of immunosuppressive agents. Future research should focus on achieving tracheal replacement that preserves mucociliary clearance, lateral rigidity, and longitudinal flexibility.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 134:1517-1522, 2024.