Efficacy and Safety of Antifibrinolytic Drugs in Pediatric Surgery: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (05) ◽  
pp. 538-568
Author(s):  
Nadia Thrane Hovgesen ◽  
Julie Brogaard Larsen ◽  
Christian Fenger-Eriksen ◽  
Anne Kirkeby Hansen ◽  
Anne-Mette Hvas
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Pediatric Surgery ◽  
Noncardiac Surgery ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Dosing Regimen ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Optimal Dosing ◽  
Antifibrinolytic Drugs

AbstractAntifibrinolytic drugs are used to reduce blood loss and subsequent transfusions during surgery and following trauma, but the optimal dosing regimen in the pediatric population is still unresolved. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate efficacy and safety of antifibrinolytic drugs in pediatric surgery and trauma to determine the optimal dosing regimen. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science on May 3, 2020. We included randomized controlled studies investigating the effect of tranexamic acid (TXA), aprotinin, and epsilon-aminocaproic acid, in terms of reducing blood loss, blood transfusions, reoperations, and rebleeds in pediatric patients aged 0 to 18 years undergoing cardiac surgery, noncardiac surgery, or trauma. Fifty randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included; 28 RCTs investigated cardiac surgery and 22 investigated noncardiac surgery. No RCTs regarding trauma met the inclusion criteria. All antifibrinolytic drugs reduced postoperative blood loss and transfusions when used in pediatric surgery. The dosing regimen varied between studies, but similar effect sizes were found in terms of reduced blood loss regardless of the cumulative dose used. Few studies found adverse events, and no difference in incidence or type of adverse events was seen between the antifibrinolytic and the placebo group. In conclusion, use of antifibrinolytics is efficient and safe in children undergoing surgery. We propose TXA as the drug of choice based on its level of evidence and safety profile; we recommend a dosing regimen composed of a loading dose of 10 to 15 mg/kg prior to surgery followed by 1 to 5 mg/kg/h as continuous infusion throughout surgery.

scholarly journals The efficacy and safety of prophylactic corticosteroids for the prevention of adverse outcomes in patients undergoing heart surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 620-627 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ka Ting Ng ◽  
Judith Van Paassen ◽  
Clare Langan ◽  
Deep Pramod Sarode ◽  
M Sesmu Arbous ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Cardiopulmonary Bypass ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract Corticosteroids are often administered prophylactically to attenuate the inflammatory response associated with cardiac surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). However, the efficacy and safety profile of corticosteroids remain uncertain. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of corticosteroids on mortality in adult cardiac surgery using CPB. Secondary aims were to examine the effect of corticosteroids on myocardial adverse events, pulmonary adverse events, atrial fibrillation, surgical site infection, gastrointestinal bleeding and duration of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were systematically searched in electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL and Web of Science) from their inception until March 2019. Observational studies, case reports, case series and literature reviews were excluded. Sixty-two studies (n = 16 457 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in mortality between the corticosteroid and placebo groups [odds ratio (OR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81–1.14; P = 0.65, participants = 14 693, studies = 24, evidence of certainty: moderate]. Compared to those receiving a placebo, patients who were given corticosteroids had a significantly higher incidence of myocardial adverse events (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03–1.33; P = 0.01, participants = 14 512, studies = 23) and a lower incidence of pulmonary adverse events (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75–0.98; P = 0.02, participants = 13 426, studies = 17). The incidences of atrial fibrillation (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81–0.94; P < 0.001, participants = 14 148, studies = 24) and surgical site infection (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73–0.90; P < 0.001, participants = 13 946; studies = 22) were all lower in patients who were given corticosteroids. In the present meta-analysis of 62 RCTs (16 457 patients), including the 2 major RCTs (SIRS and DECS trials: 12 001 patients), we found that prophylactic corticosteroids in cardiac surgery did not reduce mortality. The clinical significance of an increase in myocardial adverse events remains unclear as the definition of a relevant myocardial end point following cardiac surgery varied greatly between RCTs.

scholarly journals Posterolateral Fusion Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110164
Author(s):  
Elsayed Said ◽  
Mohamed E. Abdel-Wanis ◽  
Mohamed Ameen ◽  
Ali A. Sayed ◽  
Khaled H. Mosallam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Revision Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: Arthrodesis has been a valid treatment option for spinal diseases, including spondylolisthesis and lumbar spinal stenosis. Posterolateral and posterior lumbar interbody fusion are amongst the most used fusion techniques. Previous reports comparing both methods have been contradictory. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to establish substantial evidence on which fusion method would achieve better outcomes. Methods: Major databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes of interest between posterolateral fusion (PLF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). We extracted data on clinical outcome, complication rate, revision rate, fusion rate, operation time, and blood loss. We calculated the mean differences (MDs) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome and the odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for binary outcomes. P < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: We retrieved 8 studies meeting our inclusion criteria, with a total of 616 patients (308 PLF, 308 PLIF). The results of our analysis revealed that patients who underwent PLIF had significantly higher fusion rates. No statistically significant difference was identified in terms of clinical outcomes, complication rates, revision rates, operation time or blood loss. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide a comparison between PLF and PLIF based on RCTs. Although PLIF had higher fusion rates, both fusion methods achieve similar clinical outcomes with equal complication rate, revision rate, operation time and blood loss at 1-year minimum follow-up.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulins for the treatment of viral encephalitis: a systematic literature review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith N. Wagner ◽  
Annette Leibetseder ◽  
Anna Troescher ◽  
Juergen Panholzer ◽  
Tim J. von Oertzen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Viral Encephalitis ◽  
Viral Infections ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Ivig Therapy ◽  
Intravenous Immunoglobulins ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Optimal Dosing ◽  
Cochrane Database

Abstract Background For most viral encephalitides, therapy is merely supportive. Intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) have been used as a prophylactic and therapeutic approach. We conduct a systematic review on the safety and efficacy of IVIG in viral encephalitis. Methods We conducted a systematic review assessing PubMed, Cochrane Database, Biosis Previews and the ClinicalTrials.gov website to identify all reports on patients with viral encephalitis treated with IVIG as of May 31, 2019. The main outcomes assessed were therapeutic efficacy and safety. For an increased homogeneity of the population, atypical viral infections were excluded, as were reports on prophylactic IVIG use, intrathecal application of immunoglobulins, or use of antibody-enriched IVIG-preparations. Data were extracted from published studies. Descriptive statistics were used. Results We included a total of 44 studies (39 case reports). The case reports cover a total of 53 patients. Our search retrieved two prospective and three retrospective studies. These show heterogeneous results as to the efficacy of IVIG therapy. Only one study reports a significant association between IVIG-use and death (odds ratio 0.032; 95% confidence interval 0.0033–0.3024; p = 0.0027). None of the studies report significant differences in the number of serious adverse events. Conclusion Data on the efficacy of IVIG-therapy is heterogeneous. While it seems generally safe, evident superiority compared to supportive treatment has not been demonstrated so far. Future trials should also investigate the optimal dosing and timing of IVIG and their benefit in the immunosuppressed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document