We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Percutaneous needle aspiration versus catheter drainage in the management of liver abscess: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of percutaneous needle aspiration (PNA) and percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) in the management of liver abscess.
METHODS: Electronic searches (Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCIE) were conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PNA and PCD. A meta-analysis was subsequently performed.
RESULTS: A total of five RCTs covering 306 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that outcomes in patients treated with PCD were superior to those in patients treated with PNA in terms of success rate [relative risk (RR): 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-0.99; P = 0.04], clinical improvement [standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.73, 95% CI 0.36-1.11; P = 0.0001] and days to achieve a 50% reduction in abscess cavity size (SMD: -1.08, 95% CI 0.64-1.53; P < 0.00001). No significant differences were found in duration of hospitalization (mean difference: -0.17, 95% CI -2.10 to 1.75; P = 0.86) or procedure-related complications (RR: 0.50, 95% CI 0.10-2.63; P = 0.41). Days to achieve the total or near total resolution of the abscess cavity and mortality were not calculated because data in the RCTs in the meta-analysis were insufficient.
CONCLUSIONS: Both PNA and PCD are safe methods of draining liver abscesses. However, PCD is more effective than PNA because it facilitates a higher success rate, reduces the time required to achieve clinical relief and supports a 50% reduction in abscess cavity size. However, among successfully treated patients, the outcomes of PNA are comparable with those of PCD.
METHODS: Electronic searches (Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCIE) were conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PNA and PCD. A meta-analysis was subsequently performed.
RESULTS: A total of five RCTs covering 306 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that outcomes in patients treated with PCD were superior to those in patients treated with PNA in terms of success rate [relative risk (RR): 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-0.99; P = 0.04], clinical improvement [standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.73, 95% CI 0.36-1.11; P = 0.0001] and days to achieve a 50% reduction in abscess cavity size (SMD: -1.08, 95% CI 0.64-1.53; P < 0.00001). No significant differences were found in duration of hospitalization (mean difference: -0.17, 95% CI -2.10 to 1.75; P = 0.86) or procedure-related complications (RR: 0.50, 95% CI 0.10-2.63; P = 0.41). Days to achieve the total or near total resolution of the abscess cavity and mortality were not calculated because data in the RCTs in the meta-analysis were insufficient.
CONCLUSIONS: Both PNA and PCD are safe methods of draining liver abscesses. However, PCD is more effective than PNA because it facilitates a higher success rate, reduces the time required to achieve clinical relief and supports a 50% reduction in abscess cavity size. However, among successfully treated patients, the outcomes of PNA are comparable with those of PCD.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app