检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:王熠昕 张润东 曹蒙 张国强[3] 王焱 WANG Yi-xin;ZHANG Run-dong;CAO Meng;ZHANG Guo-qiang;WANG Yan(Department of Dermatological Surgery,Hospital for Skin Diseases,Institute of Dermatology,Chinese Academy of Medical Science,Peking Union Medical College,Jiangsu Province,Nanjing 210042,China;Department of Cosmetic Laser Surgery,Hospital for Skin Diseases,Institute of Dermatology,Chinese Academy of Medical Science,Peking Union Medical College,Jiangsu Province,Nanjing 210042,China;Department of Dermatology,the First Hospital of Hebei Medical University,Shijiazhuang 050031,China)
机构地区:[1]中国医学科学院北京协和医学院皮肤病医院皮肤外科,江苏南京210042 [2]中国医学科学院北京协和医学院皮肤病医院激光科,江苏南京210042 [3]河北医科大学第一医院皮肤科,河北石家庄050031
出 处:《河北医科大学学报》2023年第8期945-951,共7页Journal of Hebei Medical University
基 金:国家自然科学基金(81872216);国家重点研发计划“常见多发病防治研究”重点专项项目(2022YFC2504700)。
摘 要:目的通过Meta分析系统评估吲哚菁绿(indocyaninegreen,ICG)和^(99)Tc^(m)在黑色素瘤前哨淋巴结(sentinel lymph node,SLN)识别率的差异,为临床选择淋巴示踪方法提供循证参考。方法系统检索中英文数据库,筛选出所有符合纳入标准的文献。绘制森林图并以I^(2)和Q检验为指标分析异质性,采用相应的模型分析合并效应量。使用Egger检验评估发表偏移,并用敏感性分析评估结果是否稳定可靠。结果共纳入15项研究,最终结果显示ICG和^(99)Tc^(m)在黑色素瘤SLN识别率方面差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),敏感性分析表明结果稳定可靠,Egger检验表明不存在发表偏倚。结论ICG和^(99)Tc^(m)在黑色素瘤SLN识别率方面差异无统计学意义,但ICG无放射性,操作更安全简便,有望替代^(99)Tc^(m)成为识别黑色素瘤SLN的重要手段。Objective To systematically assess the differences between indocyanine green(ICG)and ^(99)Tc^(m) in identification rates of sentinel lymph node(SLN)in melanoma by meta-analysis,and to provide an evidence-based reference for the clinical selection of lymphatic tracing methods.Methods A systematic search of Chinese and English databases was performed to screen out all articles that met the inclusion criteria.Forest plots were drawn and heterogeneity was analyzed using I^(2)and Q test as indicators,and the corresponding model was used to analyze pooled effect sizes.Publication bias was assessed using Egger′s test,and sensitivity analysis was used to assess whether the results were stable and reliable.Results A total of 15 studies were included.The final results showed that there was no significant difference in SLN identification rate between ICG and ^(99)Tc^(m) in melanoma(P>0.05).Sensitivity analysis showed that the results were stable and reliable.Egger′s test showed that there was no publication bias.Conclusion There is no significant difference between ICG and ^(99)Tc^(m) in identifying SLN in melanoma,but ICG is non-radioactive,which is safer and easier to perform.Therefore,it is expected to replace ^(99)Tc^(m) as an important means of identifying SLN in melanoma.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.30