| Literature DB >> 34282698 |
Gilmar Felisberto1, Antônio José Maria Cataneo2, Daniele Cristina Cataneo2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Primary hyperhidrosis is a disorder that involves excessive sweat production, which has a negative impact on the quality of life.Entities:
Keywords: Hyperhidrosis; axilla; sympathectomy; systematic review; video-assisted thoracic surgery
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34282698 PMCID: PMC8293952 DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2021.1953126
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Med ISSN: 0785-3890 Impact factor: 4.709
Figure 1.Flowchart of literature search.
Characteristics of selected studies.
| Author | Origin | Period | Number of participants | Sex (M, F) | Follow-up (months) | Sympathectomy level | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boscardim et al. [ | Brazil | 2003/2007 | 118 | 26 | 92 | 12 | T4/T5 |
| Chou [ | Taiwan | – | 28 | 8 | 20 | 35.3 | T5 |
| Raposio et al. [ | Italy | – | 9 | – | – | 15 months | T4 |
| Hsu et al. [ | Taiwan | 1996/2000 | 171 | 37 | 134 | 22.5 | T3/T4_T4_T4/T5 |
| Lin [ | Taiwan | 1997/1998 | 26 | 10 | 16 | 31.3 | T3/T4 |
| Lin et al. [ | Taiwan | 1993/2000 | 480 | – | – | 51.7 | T3/T4 |
| Munia et al. [ | Brazil | – | 64 | 14 | 50 | 12 | T3/T4_T4 |
| Rex et al. [ | Sweden | 1989/1996 | 93 | – | – | 26 | T2/T4 |
| Ribas Milanez de Campos et al. [ | Brazil | 2000/2005 | 276 | 106 | 170 | 21.6 | T3/T4_T4 |
| Schmidt et al. [ | Germany | 2000/2003 | 85 | 23 | 62 | 24 | T2/T4_T3/T5 |
| Sciuchetti et al. [ | Italy | 2003/2006 | 51 | – | – | 13 | T3/T4 |
| Leao et al. [ | Brazil | 1999/2003 | 21 | – | – | 36 | T2/T4 |
| Zacherl et al. [ | Austria | 1965/1996 | 41 | – | – | 16.1 (years) | T1/T4 |
M: male F: female.
Newcastle–Ottawa scale.
| Selection | Comparability | Outcomes | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study | Representativeness | Selection of non-exposed group | Investigation | Outcome absent at the beginning | Comparability | Evaluation results | Segment duration | Adequacy of follow-up | Total |
| Boscardim et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Chou [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Hsu et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Lin [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Lin et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Munia et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Raposio et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Rex et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Ribas Milanez de Campos et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Schmidt et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Sciuchetti et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
| Leao et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | 5 | |||
| Zacherl et al. [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | ||
*Presence of the dominion evaluated.
Figure 2.Results of the overall satisfaction outcome. The overall satisfaction rate was 92% (95% CI = 88–95%, I2=47.5%).
Figure 3.Results of the outcome total control of symptoms. The rate of symptom control was 96% (95% CI = 93–99%, I2=48.2%).
Analysis of the outcome satisfaction according to the level of sympathectomy.
| Resection level | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | Low | ||||||
| Author | Level | Author | Level | ||||
| S | I | S | I | ||||
| Lin | T3/T4 | 24 | 2 | Boscardim | T4/T5 | 109 | 9 |
| Rex | T2/T4 | 83 | 10 | Chou | T5 | 28 | 0 |
| Ribas Milanez de Campos | T3/T4_T3 | 256 | 20 | Fox | T4 | 9 | 0 |
| Zacherl | T1/T4 | 33 | 8 | ||||
| Total | 396 | 40 | 146 | 9 | |||
N: total number of patients; S: satisfied patients; I: dissatisfied patients.
Figure 4.Forest plot of the outcome satisfaction in high resection levels (A) satisfaction rate 89% (95% CI = 84–95%, I2=47.7%) and low (B) satisfaction rate 96% (95% CI = 89–100%, I2=45.9%).
Figure 5.Interpretation of meta-analysis of the outcome satisfaction. The overlap of the confidence intervals indicates that there were no differences between the groups.
Analysis of the outcome control of symptoms according to the level of sympathectomy.
| Resection level | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | Low | ||||||||
| Author | Level | Author | Level | ||||||
| P | A | P | A | ||||||
| Schmidt | T2/T4_T3/T5 | 79 | 4 | Boscardim | T4/T5 | 112 | 6 | ||
| Sciuchetti | T3/T4 | 51 | 0 | Chou | T5 | 28 | 0 | ||
| Zacherl | T1/T4 | 39 | 2 | ||||||
| Total | 169 | 6 | 140 | 6 | |||||
N: total number of patients; P: patients with controlled symptoms; A: patients with uncontrolled symptoms.
Figure 6.Forest plot of the outcome control of symptoms in high resections (A) control rate 96% (95% CI = 89–99%, I2=65.9%) and low (B) 97% control rate (95% CI = 90–100%, I2=46.3%).
Figure 7.Interpretation of meta-analysis of the outcome control of symptoms. The overlap between confidence intervals shows that there were no differences between the groups.
Analysis of the outcome compensatory sweating as per the level of sympathectomy.
| Resection level | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High | Low | ||||||
| Author | Level | Author | Level | ||||
| A | P | A | P | ||||
| Lin | T3/T4 | 25 | 1 | Boscardim | T4/T5 | 96 | 22 |
| Lin | T3/T4 | 288 | 192 | Chou | T5 | 28 | 0 |
| Munia | T3/T4 | 2 | 29 | Munia | T4 | 19 | 14 |
| Ribas Milanez de Campos | T3/T4_T3 | 137 | 139 | ||||
| Leao | T2/T4 | 18 | 3 | ||||
| Total | 470 | 364 | 143 | 36 | |||
N: total number of patients; A: patients without compensatory sweating; P: patients with compensatory sweating.
Quality of evidence for the outcomes satisfaction and control of symptoms in video-assisted thoracoscopic sympathectomy for treating pure axillary hyperhidrosis.
| Outcome | Study design | Risk of bias | Inconsistency | Indirect evidence | Imprecision | Events | No of participants (studies) | Proportion effect (95% CI) | Quality of evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Satisfaction | Observational | Seriousa | Very seriousb | Low | Not seriousc | 542 | 591 (7) | 0.92 (0.88–0.95) | ⨁◯◯◯ very low |
| Symptom control | Observational | Seriousa | Very seriousb | Low | Not seriousc | 309 | 323 (5) | 0.96 (0.93–0.99) | ⨁◯◯◯ very low |
CI: confidence interval.
Very low quality: any estimate of the effect of the intervention is very uncertain.
Risk inherent to the nature of the included studies, subject to biases of interviewer, memory, performance and confusion.
High risk of inconsistencies due to high levels of heterogeneity.
The confidence intervals were relatively narrow.