RESUMO
Shockwaves are thought to activate regenerative and angiogenic pathways, providing a possible therapeutic benefit for patients with erectile dysfunction. This study aimed to analyze the effectiveness of low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy energy density and pulse frequency. In May 2022, a systematic search of online databases was performed to identify randomized clinical trials related to low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy in erectile dysfunction. Eligible articles compared low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy to controls or sham procedures. A Bayesian framework with 200,000 Markov chains was performed. We included a total of 1272 patients from 18 studies. The energy flux density measured in joules included 0.09 mJ/mm2 (mean difference 3.2 IIEF [95% CrI 2.8, 3.6]), 0.15 mJ/mm2 (mean difference 4.9 IIEF [95% CrI 2.8, 7.2]) and 0.20 mJ/mm2 (mean difference 1.2 IIEF [95% CrI 0.11, 2.3]). Of these, 0.15 mJ/mm2 had the greatest ranking (SUCRA = 0.983) compared with placebo. When analyzed by pulse frequency, significant increases were found in 500 pulses/session (mean difference 2.5 IIEF [CrI 1.9, 3.2]), 1500 pulses/session (mean difference 4.6 IIEF [95% CrI 3.9, 5.4]) and > 3000 pulses/session (mean difference 3.1 IIEF [95% CrI 2.1, 4.2]). Of these, 1500 pulses/session had the highest SUCRA, at 0.996. Our network meta-analysis suggests that low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy is an effective intervention for erectile dysfunction, as measured by increases in the IIEF-EF. Sessions featuring 1500 pulses and an energy flux density of 0.15 mJ/mm2 appear to be the most effective.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a significant cause of oncologic mortality worldwide. Liver transplantation represents a curative option for patients with significant liver dysfunction and absence of metastases. However, this therapeutic option is associated with significant blood loss and frequently requires various transfusions and intraoperative blood salvage for autotransfusion (IBS-AT) with or without a leukocyte reduction filter. This study aimed to analyze available evidence on long-term oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing liver transplantation for HCC with and without IBS-AT. METHODS: Per PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of keywords "Blood Salvage," "Auto-transfusion," "Hepatocellular carcinoma," and "Liver-transplant" was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS. Studies comparing operative and postoperative outcomes were screened and analyzed for review. RESULTS: Twelve studies totaling 1704 participants were included for analysis. Length of stay, recurrence rates, and overall survival were not different between IBS-AT group and non IBS-AT group. CONCLUSION: IBS-AT use is not associated with increased risk of recurrence in liver transplant for HCC even without leukocyte filtration. Both operative and postoperative outcomes are similar between groups. Comparison of analyzed studies suggest that IBS-AT is safe for use during liver transplant for HCC.