98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: No evidence-based guidelines exist for the imaging of patients with positional plagiocephaly.
Objective: The objective of this systematic review and evidence-based guideline is to answer the question, Is imaging necessary for infants with positional plagiocephaly to make a diagnosis?
Methods: The National Library of Medicine Medline database and the Cochrane Library were queried with the use of MeSH headings and key words relevant to imaging as a means to diagnose plagiocephaly. Abstracts were reviewed, and an evidentiary table was assembled summarizing the studies and the quality of evidence (Classes I-III). Based on the quality of the literature, a recommendation was rendered (Level I, II, or III).
Results: A total of 42 full-text articles were selected for review. Of these, 10 were eliminated; thus, 32 full-text were manuscripts selected. There was no Class I evidence, but 2 Class II and 30 Class III studies were included. Three-dimensional cranial topographical imaging, ultrasound, skull x-rays, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging were investigated.
Conclusion: Clinical examination is most often sufficient to diagnose plagiocephaly (quality, Class III; strength, Level III). Within the limits of this systematic review, the evidence suggests that imaging is rarely necessary and should be reserved for cases in which the clinical examination is equivocal. Many of the imaging studies were not designed to address the diagnostic utility of the imaging modality, and authors were actually assessing the utility of the imaging in longitudinal follow-up, not initial diagnosis. For this reason, some of the studies reviewed were downgraded in Level of Evidence. When needed, 3-dimensional cranial topographical photo, skull x-rays, or ultrasound imaging is almost always sufficient for definitive diagnosis. Computed tomography scanning should not be used to diagnose plagiocephaly, but it may be necessary to rule out craniosynostosis. The full guidelines document can be located at https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-management-patients-positional-plagiocephaly/Chapter_2.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000001427 | DOI Listing |
Wounds
August 2025
Department of Nursing, Federal University of Ceará, Ceará, Brazil.
Background: To estimate the prevalence of biofilms in chronic wounds.
Methods: The authors performed a systematic review of prevalence studies and meta-analysis, structured according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Articles were searched in Scopus (Elsevier), Web of Science (Clarivate), MEDLINE/PubMed (National Institutes of Health), and Embase (Elsevier) databases.
J Neurol
September 2025
Department of General Practice, The First People's Hospital of Lin'an District, Hangzhou, Lin'an People's Hospital Affiliated to Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, 310000, Zhejiang Province, China.
Anti-mGluR1 encephalitis is a rare autoimmune disorder manifesting with cerebellar syndrome with varying levels of severity. However, limited data exist regarding the clinical features and treatment strategies for patients suffering from encephalitis associated with anti-mGluR1 antibodies. Herein, we comprehensively review and discuss clinical features of anti-mGluR1 encephalitis to enhance our understanding of this rare disorder.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInt J Colorectal Dis
September 2025
University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, AB24 2ZD, Scotland, UK.
Background: The optimal management of synchronous rectal cancer (RC) and prostate cancer (PC) remains unclear. This systematic review evaluates treatment strategies and reports postoperative, oncological, and quality-of-life outcomes in patients treated with curative intent.
Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024598049).
Surg Endosc
September 2025
Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Background: The implementation of minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) for perihilar (PHC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC) remains limited and a systematic review including only comparative studies of MILS versus the open approach is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery in patients with hilar and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas.
Methods: Systematic review in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for original studies comparing at least five patients undergoing MILS with open liver surgery for PHC and IHC.
Surg Endosc
September 2025
Division of Biliary Tract Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Background: Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is used more commonly, but this surge is mostly based on observational data. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the short-term outcomes between MIPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) using data collected from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases for RCTs comparing MIPD and OPD published before December 10, 2024.