Erectile Dysfunction Predicts Cardiovascular Events as an Independent Risk Factor: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. 1005-1017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Binghao Zhao ◽  
Zhengdong Hong ◽  
Yiping Wei ◽  
Dongliang Yu ◽  
Jianjun Xu ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 122-129
Author(s):  
Ahmed Adam ◽  
Jared McDowall ◽  
Sunday Joseph Aigbodion ◽  
Callistus Enyuma ◽  
Sean Buchanan ◽  
...  

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) occurs as a manifestation of coronary atherosclerotic disease. The occurrence of erectile dysfunction (ED) following AMI is well documented and this association and pathophysiology is often interrelated. Few studies have objectively assessed the diagnostic value of ED as a risk factor for AMI, in general. In this review, we aimed to better outline the diagnostic predictability of ED as a precursor for ‘first/new onset' AMI. This review was performed using selective search terms, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. The Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched (September 2018). Selected studies were further assessed for relevance and quality (Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool-Oxford). Four studies [573 participants; mean 143 (SD ± 76.3604) and median 141 participants] were eligible for analysis. Meta-analysis of the studies resulted in a pooled sensitivity of 51.36% (95% CI: 47.37-55.33%). For the single study which reported true negative and false positive cases, a specificity of 76.53% (95% CI: 68.57-83.00%) was calculated. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that a history of ED should be used as a risk factor for new onset AMI.


2012 ◽  
Vol 59 (13) ◽  
pp. E2074 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charalambos Vlachopoulos ◽  
Dimitrios Terentes-Printzios ◽  
Nikolaos Ioakeimidis ◽  
Konstantinos Aznaouridis ◽  
Konstantinos Rokkas ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antony Raharja ◽  
Alice Tamara ◽  
Li Teng Kok

Background: Multiple reports suggested disproportionate impact of Covid-19 on ethnic minorities. Whether ethnicity is an independent risk factor for severe Covid-19 illness is unclear. Purpose: Review the association between ethnicity and poor Covid-19 outcomes including all-cause mortality, hospitalisation, critical care admission, respiratory and kidney failure. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database up to 15/06/2020, and preprint servers. No language restriction. Study Selection: All studies providing ethnicity-aggregated data on the pre-specified outcomes, except case reports or interventional trials Data Extraction: Pairs of investigators independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias using Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS), and rated certainty of evidence following GRADE framework. Data Synthesis: Seventy-two articles (59 cohort studies with 17,950,989 participants; 13 ecological studies; 54 US-based and 15 UK-based; 41 peer-reviewed) were included for systematic review and 45 for meta-analyses. Risk of bias was low, with median NOS of 7 (interquartile range 6-8). In the unadjusted analyses, compared to white ethnicity, all-cause mortality risk was similar in Black (RR:0.96 [95%CI: 0.83-1.08]), Asian (RR:0.99 [0.85-1.16]) but reduced in Hispanic ethnicity (RR:0.69 [0.57-0.84]). Age and sex-adjusted-risks were significantly elevated for Black (HR:1.38 [1.09-1.75]) and Asian (HR:1.42 [1.15-1.75]), but not for Hispanic (RR:1.14 [0.93-1.40]). Further adjusting for comorbidities attenuated these association to non-significance; Black (HR:0.95 [0.72-1.25]); Asian (HR:1.17 [0.84-1.63]); Hispanic (HR:0.94 [0.63-1.44]). Similar results were observed for other outcomes. In subgroup analysis, there is a trend towards greater disparity in outcomes for UK ethnic minorities, especially hospitalisation risks. Limitations: Paucity of evidence on native ethnic groups, and studies outside US and UK. Conclusions: Currently available evidence cannot confirm ethnicity as an independent risk factor for severe Covid-19 illness, but indicates that disparity may be partially attributed to greater burden of comorbidities. Registration: PROSPERO, CRD42020188421 Funding source: none


2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abby Hunter ◽  
Rachael Murray ◽  
Laura Asher ◽  
Jo Leonardi-Bee

Abstract Background The association between cigarette smoking and schizophrenia is well established. However, up to 90% of people with schizophrenia begin smoking before the onset of their illness; thus, smoking could be an independent risk factor for schizophrenia. Prenatal exposure to maternal cigarette smoke is also associated with psychiatric problems in adolescence. Therefore, our aim was to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the effect of smoking, and prenatal smoke exposure, on risk of schizophrenia. Method We systematically searched Medline, EMBASE, PsychInfo, Maternity and Infant Care, and Web of Science (from inception to February 2018) to identify comparative observational studies of the risk of schizophrenia in relation to smoking status. Measures of relative risk (RR) were pooled in a meta-analysis with 95% confidence intervals (CI), using random effects model. Results Twelve studies (9 cohort, 3 case-control) were included. Odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) were pooled together to estimate pooled relative risks and estimates combined in a meta-analysis on an assumption of constant risk over time. Smokers had a significantly increased risk of schizophrenia compared with nonsmokers (RR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.10% to 3.61%, I2 = 97%, 5 studies). Exposure to prenatal smoke increased the risk of schizophrenia by 29% (95% CI = 1.10% to 1.51%, I2 = 71%, 7 studies). Sensitivity analyses identified no significant differences between the results from studies reporting OR and hazard ratio. Conclusions Our findings suggest smoking, and prenatal smoke exposure, may be an independent risk factor for schizophrenia. Care should be taken when inferring causation, given the observational nature of the studies. Implications In this meta-analysis of 12 studies, smokers had a significantly increased risk of schizophrenia compared with nonsmokers. Exposure to prenatal tobacco smoke also increased the risk of schizophrenia by 29% compared with those with no exposure to prenatal tobacco smoke. Our findings suggest that smoking, and prenatal tobacco smoke exposure, may be independent risk factors for schizophrenia. These results may have important public health implications for decreasing the incidence of schizophrenia. The possibility of a causal link between smoking and schizophrenia warrants further investigation.


Author(s):  
Jian Xie ◽  
Lang Li

Dear Editor: We have read with a great interest the article by Gupta et al. [1] who performed a meta-analysis exploring the association between chronic mechanical irritation and oral squamous cell carcinoma. The conclusion of the meta-analysis is that chronic oral mucosa irritation has a significant association with oral squamous cell carcinoma, and the nature of association could be that of a potential co-factor (dependent risk factor) rather than an independent risk factor. Read more in PDF.


2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. P5151-P5151 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Terentes-Printzios ◽  
C. Vlachopoulos ◽  
N. Ioakeimidis ◽  
K. Aznaouridis ◽  
C. Stefanadis

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document