A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes After Acute Limb Ischemia in Patients with Cancer

Author(s):  
Nicholas Govsyeyev ◽  
Rafael D. Malgor ◽  
Clayton Hoffman ◽  
Nikolai Harroun ◽  
Erin Sturman ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 264-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tariq H. Enezate ◽  
Jad Omran ◽  
Ehtisham Mahmud ◽  
Mitul Patel ◽  
Mazen S. Abu-Fadel ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 66 (15) ◽  
pp. B325-B326
Author(s):  
Jad Omran ◽  
Obai Abdullah ◽  
Belal Firwana ◽  
Beau Hawkins ◽  
Mazen Abu-Fadel ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 654-668.e3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emile B. Veenstra ◽  
Maarten J. van der Laan ◽  
Clark J. Zeebregts ◽  
Erik-Jan de Heide ◽  
Matthijs Kater ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 153857442110129
Author(s):  
Yujun Hao ◽  
Weitao Han ◽  
Detang Mou ◽  
Jintao Wang

Objective: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in patients with PAD for the first time. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library database for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted for PAD. Results: Three trials which contained 14873 patients were included for final meta-analysis. The results showed patients with rivaroxaban was associated with reduction in primary efficacy outcome (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.76 to 0.90; p < 0.001). The RR was 0.85 (0.71 to 1.01) for patients with rivaroxaban alone and 0.81 (0.74 to 0.89) for those with rivaroxaban plus aspirin (p for heterogeneity between groups = 0.65). Patients with rivaroxaban showed a lower rate of acute limb ischemia (0.56; 0.47 to 0.66; p < 0.001). There was a trend toward a reduction in the rate of major amputation for vascular causes in the rivaroxaban arm (0.81; 0.63 to 1.03; p = 0.08). Compared with control, rivaroxaban therapy did not reduce the risks of myocardial infarction (0.87, 0.73 to 1.04, p = 0.12), ischemic stroke (0.85, CI 0.68 to 1.06, p = 0.15), death from cardiovascular causes (0.99, 0.85 to 1.15, p = 0.91) or death from any cause (1.00, 0.90 to 1.12, p = 0.98). Rivaroxaban therapy was associated with a 1.57-fold higher major bleeding rate as compared with those with aspirin or warfarin alone. Conclusions: Overall, the risks of the primary efficacy outcomes or adverse limb events were significantly lower with rivaroxaban than with aspirin or warfarin alone in patients with PAD. It also points out the significant major bleeding that occur because of such therapies.


VASA ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Di Pilla ◽  
Stefano Barco ◽  
Clara Sacco ◽  
Giovanni Barosi ◽  
Corrado Lodigiani

Summary: A 49-year-old man was diagnosed with pre-fibrotic myelofibrosis after acute left lower-limb ischemia requiring amputation and portal vein thrombosis. After surgery he developed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) with venous thromboembolism, successfully treated with argatroban followed by dabigatran. Our systematic review of the literature supports the use of dabigatran for suspected HIT.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1938476
Author(s):  
Defeng Kong ◽  
Wen Zhang ◽  
Zhenrong Yang ◽  
Guoliang Li ◽  
Shujun Cheng ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjspcare-2021-003065
Author(s):  
Lewis Thomas Hughes ◽  
David Raftery ◽  
Paul Coulter ◽  
Barry Laird ◽  
Marie Fallon

PurposeOpioids are recommended for moderate-to-severe cancer pain; however, in patients with cancer, impaired hepatic function can affect opioid metabolism. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence for the use of opioids in patients with cancer with hepatic impairment.MethodsA systematic review was conducted and the following databases searched: AMED (−2021), MEDLINE (−2021), EMBASECLASSIC + EMBASE (−2021) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (−2021). Eligible studies met the following criteria: patients with cancer-related pain, taking an opioid (as defined by the WHO Guidelines for the pharmacological and radiotherapeutic management of cancer pain in adults and adolescents); >18 years of age; patients with hepatic impairment defined using recognised or study-defined definitions; clinical outcome hepatic impairment related; and primary studies. All eligible studies were appraised using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.ResultsThree studies (n=95) were eligible but heterogeneity meant meta-analysis was not possible. Each individual study focused on only one each of oxycodone±hydrocotarnine, oxycodone/naloxone and morphine. No recommendations could be formulated on the preferred opioid in patients with hepatic impairment.ConclusionsMorphine is the preferred opioid in hepatic impairment owing to clinical experience and pharmacokinetics. This review, however, found little clinical evidence to support this. Dose adjustments of morphine and the oxycodone formulations reviewed remain necessary in the absence of quality evidence. Overall, the quality of existing evidence on opioid treatments in cancer pain and hepatic impairment is low and there remains a need for high-quality clinical studies examining this.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document