scholarly journals P-P08 Towards effective analgesia in acute pancreatitis: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Navamayooran Thavanesan ◽  
Sophie White ◽  
Shiela Lee ◽  
Bathiya Ratnayake ◽  
John Leeds ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Acute Pancreatitis ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Local Anaesthetics ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Epidural Administration ◽  
Global Improvement ◽  
Pain Scores

Abstract Background The optimal analgesic strategy for patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) remains unknown. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of several analgesic modalities trialled in AP. Methods A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted up until June 2021, according to PRISMA Guidelines to identify all randomised control trials (RCTs) comparing analgesic modalities in AP.  The primary outcome measure was improvement in pain scores as reported on visual analogue scale (VAS) on day 0, day 1 and day 2. Results Twelve RCTs were identified including 542 patients. Seven trial drugs were compared: opiates, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs), placebo, local anaesthetic, epidural, paracetamol and metamizole. A weighted single-arm effects estimate showed global improvement in VAS across all modalities from baseline to day 2. On visual inspection, epidural analgesia appears to provide the greatest improvement in pain scores within the first 24hrs, however at 48hrs it was comparable to opiates. Within the first 24hrs, NSAIDs offered similar pain-relief to opiates, while placebo also showed equivalence to other modalities but then plateaued. Local anaesthetics demonstrated least overall efficacy. VAS scores for opiate and non-opiate analgesics were comparable at baseline and day 1. The identified RCTs demonstrated significant heterogeneity in pain-relief reporting with relatively small datasets per study. Conclusions Given the incidence of AP there is remarkable paucity of level 1 evidence to guide pain management. Epidural administration is most effective analgesic modality within the first 24hrs of AP. NSAIDs are an effective opiate sparing alternative during the first 24hrs.

scholarly journals Sitagliptin and Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 45-50
Author(s):  
Hyder Osman Mirghani ◽  
Salem Ahmed S. Shaman S. Shaman ◽  
Ibrahim Mahmoud Hussain Aljwah
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Acute Pancreatitis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
P Value ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Peptidase Inhibitor ◽  
Relationship Of

Background and Objectives: Sitagliptin is a dipepidyl peptidase inhibitor (DPP-4i) with gentle antidiabetic effects with a lower risk of hypoglycemia. The association with acute pancreatitis is controversial. The current meta-analysis aimed to assess the relationship of sitagliptin and acute pancreatitis. Methods: The literature in PubMed and Google Scholar was searched for relevant articles published in the last ten years up to September 2021. The keywords sitagliptins, DPP-4i, acute pancreatitis were used with the protean AND or OR. Among the 204 articles retrieved, 24 full-texts were assessed for eligibility and only five studies (Three from the USA, one from Asia, and one from Canada) met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. The author name, year of publication, country, type of study, number of patients, and the duration of the study were reported. Results: There were five studies. The total number of patients were 729808 with 6459 events. The studies showed no increased rate of acute pancreatitis following sitagliptin use, odd ratio, 0.79, 95% CI, 0.29-2.15, a significant heterogeneity was observer, I2 for heterogeneity=98%, P-value, <001, the P-value for overall effect was 0.65 and the chi-square, 160.15. Interpretation and Conclusion: Sitagliptin use is not associated with acute pancreatitis.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Platelet-rich Plasma for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 81 (06) ◽  
pp. 529-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhaopeng Xuan ◽  
Wenjun Yu ◽  
Yichen Dou ◽  
Tao Wang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Control Intervention

Abstract Background Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) may be beneficial for patients with low back pain. However, the results remain controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the efficacy of PRP for low back pain. Methods PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of PRP on low back pain were included. Two investigators independently searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcome was pain scores within 8 weeks. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model. Results Three RCTs involving 131 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control intervention for low back pain, PRP injection was found to reduce pain scores significantly (mean difference: − 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], − 2.12 to − 0.81; p < 0.0001), improve the number of patients with > 50% pain relief at 3 months (risk ratio [RR]: 4.14; 95% CI, 2.22–7.74; p < 0.00001), and offer relatively good patient satisfaction (RR: 1.91; 95% CI, 1.04–3.53; p = 0.04). No increase in adverse events was reported after PRP injection (RR: 1.92; 95% CI, 0.94-3.91; p = 0.07). Conclusions Compared with control intervention for low back pain, PRP injection was found to improve pain relief and patient satisfaction significantly with no increase in adverse events.

scholarly journals Postoperative Pain Relief after Pancreatic Resection: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Analgesic Modalities

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nasreen Akter ◽  
Bathiya Ratnayake ◽  
Daniel B. Joh ◽  
Sara-Jane Chan ◽  
Emily Bonner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Delayed Gastric Emptying ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bile Leak ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Respiratory Morbidity ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Pain Scores

Abstract Background This systematic review explored the efficacy of different pain relief modalities used in the management of postoperative pain following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP) and impact on perioperative outcomes. Methods MEDLINE (OVID), Embase, Pubmed, Web of Science and CENTRAL databases were searched using PRISMA framework. Primary outcomes included pain on postoperative day 2 and 4 and respiratory morbidity. Secondary outcomes included operation time, bile leak, delayed gastric emptying, postoperative pancreatic fistula, length of stay, and opioid use. Results Five randomized controlled trials and seven retrospective cohort studies (1313 patients) were included in the systematic review. Studies compared epidural analgesia (EDA) (n = 845), patient controlled analgesia (PCA) (n = 425) and transabdominal wound catheters (TAWC) (n = 43). EDA versus PCA following PD was compared in eight studies (1004 patients) in the quantitative meta-analysis. Pain scores on day 2 (p = 0.19) and 4 (p = 0.18) and respiratory morbidity (p = 0.42) were comparable between EDA and PCA. Operative times, bile leak, delayed gastric emptying, pancreatic fistula, opioid use, and length of stay also were comparable between EDA and PCA. Pain scores and perioperative outcomes were comparable between EDA and PCA following DP and EDA and TAWC following PD. Conclusions EDA, PCA and TAWC are the most frequently used analgesic modalities in pancreatic surgery. Pain relief and other perioperative outcomes are comparable between them. Further larger randomized controlled trials are warranted to explore the relative merits of each analgesic modality on postoperative outcomes with emphasis on postoperative complications.

scholarly journals Efficacy of ibuprofen in musculoskeletal post-traumatic pain in children: A systematic review

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. e0243314
Author(s):  
Niccolò Parri ◽  
Simone Lazzeri
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Drug Of Choice ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Study Designs ◽  
Initial Drug

Musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries are one of the most frequent reason for pain-related evaluation in the emergency department (ED) in children. There is still no consensus as to what constitutes the best analgesic for MSK pain in children. However, ibuprofen is reported to be the most commonly prescribed analgesic and is considered the standard first-line treatment for MSK injury pain in children, even if it is argued that it provides inadequate relief for many patients. The purpose of this study was to review the most recent literature to assess the efficacy of ibuprofen for pain relief in MSK injuries in children evaluated in the ED. We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials on pharmacological interventions in children and adolescents under 19 years of age with MSK injuries according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The primary outcome was the risk ratio for successful reduction in pain scores. Six studies met the inclusion criteria and provided data on 1028 children. A meta-analysis was not performed since studies were not comparable due to the different analgesic treatment used. No significant difference in term of main pain score reduction between all the analgesics used in the included studies was noted. Patients who received oral opioids had side effects more frequently when compared to children who received ibuprofen. The combination of effect on pain relief and tolerability would suggest ibuprofen as the initial drug of choice in providing relief from mild-to-moderate MSK pain in children in the ED. The results obtained in this review and current research suggest that there’s no straightforward statistically significant evidence of the optimal analgesic agent to be used. However, ibuprofen may be preferable as the initial drug of choice in providing relief from MSK pain due to the favorable combination of effectiveness and safety profile. In fact, despite the non-significant pain reduction as compared to children who received opioids, there are less side effect associated to ibuprofen within studies. The wide range of primary outcomes measured in respect of pain scores and timing of recorded measures warrants a future standardization of study designs.

Chasing the Anchor: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Perceptual Anchoring Deficits in Developmental Dyslexia

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurt D Shulver ◽  
Nicholas A Badcock
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Reading Ability ◽  
English Language ◽  
Prediction Interval ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Visual Assessment ◽  
Individual Performance ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Eligibility Criteria

We report the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the relationship between perceptual anchoring and dyslexia. Our goal was to assess the direction and degree of effect between perceptual anchoring and reading ability in typical and atypical (dyslexic) readers. We performed a literature search of experiments explicitly assessing perceptual anchoring and reading ability using PsycInfo (Ovid, 1860 to 2020), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1860 to 2019), EMBASE (Ovid, 1883 to 2019), and PubMed for all available years up to June (2020). Our eligibility criteria consisted of English-language articles and, at minimum, one experimental group identified as dyslexic - either by reading assessment at the time, or by previous diagnosis. We assessed for risk of bias using an adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Six studies were included in this review, but only five (n = 280 participants) were included in the meta-analysis (we were unable to access the necessary data for one study).The overall effect was negative, large and statistically significant; g = -0.87, 95% CI [-1.47, 0.27]: a negative effect size indicating less perceptual anchoring in dyslexic versus non-dyslexic groups. Visual assessment of funnel plot and Egger’s test suggest minimal bias but with significant heterogeneity; Q (4) = 9.70, PI (prediction interval) [-2.32, -0.58]. The primary limitation of the current review is the small number of included studies. We discuss methodological limitations, such as limited power, and how future research may redress these concerns. The variability of effect sizes appears consistent with the inherent variability within subtypes of dyslexia. This level of dispersion seems indicative of the how we define cut-off thresholds between typical reading and dyslexia populations, but also the methodological tools we use to investigate individual performance.

scholarly journals The high risk of malarial recurrence in patients with Plasmodium-mixed infection after treatment with antimalarial drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aongart Mahittikorn ◽  
Frederick Ramirez Masangkay ◽  
Kwuntida Uthaisar Kotepui ◽  
Giovanni De Jesus Milanez ◽  
Manas Kotepui
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Infection ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Initial Treatment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Antimalarial Drugs ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Malaria mixed infections are often unrecognized by microscopists in the hospitals, and a delay or failure to treat Plasmodium-mixed infection may lead to aggravated morbidity and increased mortality. The present study aimed to quantify the pooled proportion and risk of malarial recurrences after the treatment of Plasmodium-mixed infection. The results of the study may provide benefits in the management of Plasmodium-mixed infection in co-endemic regions. Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis searched the international Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; ID = CRD42020199709), MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus for potentially relevant studies in any language published between January 1, 1936, and July 20, 2020, assessing drug efficacy in patients with Plasmodium-mixed infection. The primary outcome was the pooled prevalence of Plasmodium parasitemia after initiating antimalarial treatment for Plasmodium-mixed infection. The secondary outcome was the pooled risk ratio (RR) of malarial recurrence in Plasmodium-mixed infection compared with those in Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax mono-infection. The pooled analyses were calculated by random-effects meta-analysis. After the initial treatment in different days of recurrences (≤ 28 days or > 28 days), the risk of Plasmodium parasitemia was compared in subgroup analysis. Results Out of 5217 screened studies, 11 were included in the meta-analysis, including 4390 patients from six countries. The pooled prevalence of all recurrences of Plasmodium-mixed parasitemia was 30% (95% confidence interval (CI) 16–43; I2: 99.2%; 11 studies). The RR of malarial recurrence within 28 days after the initial treatment (clinical treatment failure) of Plasmodium-mixed parasitemia compared with the treatment of P. falciparum was 1.22 (p: 0.029; 95% CI 1.02–1.47; Cochran Q: 0.93; I2: 0%; six studies), while there was no significant difference in the risk of recurrence 28 days after initial treatment compared with the treatment of P. falciparum (p: 0.696, RR: 1.14; 95% CI 0.59–2.18; Cochran Q < 0.05; I2: 98.2%; four studies). The subgroup analysis of antimalarial drugs showed that significant malarial recurrence within 28 days was observed in patients treated with artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) with no significant heterogeneity (p: 0.028, RR: 1.31; 95% CI 1.03–1.66; Cochran Q: 0.834; I2: 0%). Conclusions The present findings showed a high prevalence of malarial recurrence after the initial treatment of Plasmodium-mixed infection. Moreover, significant malaria recurrence of mixed infection occurred within 28 days after treatment with ACTs. Graphic Abstract

scholarly journals Occupational Asbestos Exposure and Kidney Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cohort Studies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris C Y Pang ◽  
Kevin Phan ◽  
Md Nazmul Karim ◽  
Afsana Afroz ◽  
Matthew Winter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Kidney Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Asbestos Exposure ◽  
International Agency ◽  
Standardized Mortality Ratio ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Incidence Studies ◽  
Incident Cases

Abstract Objectives An estimated 125 million workers are exposed to asbestos worldwide. Asbestos is classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a Group 1 carcinogen. The association between occupational asbestos exposure and kidney cancer is not well established however. This study aimed to determine the mortality and incidence of kidney cancer in workers who have been exposed to asbestos. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association between occupational asbestos exposure and kidney cancer. Methods Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for articles on occupational asbestos exposure and kidney cancer. The studies reported the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) or standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of kidney cancer in workers exposed to asbestos. SMRs or SIRs with its 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled using a fixed-effect model. Results Forty-nine cohort studies involving 335 492 workers were selected for analysis. These studies included 468 kidney cancer deaths and 160 incident cases. The overall pooled-SMR of kidney cancer was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.86–1.05), with no significant heterogeneity (PQ = 0.09, I2 = 24.87%). The overall pooled-SIR of kidney cancer was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.79–1.11), with no significant heterogeneity (PQ = 0.68, I2 = 0.00%). Subgroup analysis did not find any increased association with occupational asbestos exposure. There was no evidence of publication bias with Egger’s test P values of 0.08 for mortality studies and 0.99 for incidence studies. Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis did not show evidence of association between occupational asbestos exposure and kidney cancer mortality or incidence.

The analgesic efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine compared with bupivacaine hydrochloride for the prevention of postoperative pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. rapm-2020-102427
Author(s):  
Hanns-Christian Dinges ◽  
Thomas Wiesmann ◽  
Berit Otremba ◽  
Hinnerk Wulf ◽  
Leopold H Eberhart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
End Points ◽  
Liposomal Bupivacaine ◽  
Bupivacaine Hydrochloride ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Score Difference ◽  
The Mean

Background/ImportanceLiposomal bupivacaine (LB) is a prolonged release formulation of conventional bupivacaine designed for prolonging local or peripheral regional single injection anesthesia. To this day, the benefit of the new substance on relevant end points is discussed controversial.ObjectiveThe objective was to determine whether there is a difference in postoperative pain scores and morphine consumption between patients treated with LB and bupivacaine hydrochloride in a systematic review and meta-analysis.Evidence reviewRandomized controlled trials (RCT) were identified in Embase, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Web of Science up to May 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane methodology. Primary end points were the mean pain score difference and the relative morphine equivalent (MEQ) consumption expressed as the ratio of means (ROM) 24 and 72 hours postoperatively.Findings23 RCTs including 1867 patients were eligible for meta-analysis. The mean pain score difference at 24 hours postoperatively was significantly lower in the LB group, at −0.37 (95% CI −0.56 to −0.19). The relative MEQ consumption after 24 hours was also significantly lower in the LB group, at 0.85 (0.82 to 0.89). At 72 hours, the pain score difference was not significant at −0.25 (−0.71 to 0.20) and the MEQ ratio was 0.85 (0.77 to 0.95).ConclusionThe beneficial effect on pain scores and opioid consumption was small but not clinically relevant, despite statistical significance. The effect was stable among all studies, indicating that it is independent of the application modality.

scholarly journals Prevalence of Type 2 Diabetes in South Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (11) ◽  
pp. 5868
Author(s):  
Carmen Pheiffer ◽  
Victoria Pillay-van Wyk ◽  
Eunice Turawa ◽  
Naomi Levitt ◽  
Andre P. Kengne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Health Planning ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Population Group ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Prevalence Data

Synthesis of existing prevalence data using rigorous systematic review methods is considered an effective strategy to generate representative and robust prevalence figures to inform health planning and policy. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify, collate, and synthesise all studies reporting the prevalence of total and newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2DM), impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), and impaired fasting glucose (IFG) in South Africa. Four databases, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and African Index Medicus were searched for articles published between January 1997 and June 2020. A total of 1886 articles were identified, of which 11 were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence in individuals 25 years and older was 15.25% (11.07–19.95%) for T2DM, 9.59% (5.82–14.17%) for IGT, 3.55% (0.38–9.61%) for IFG, and 8.29% (4.97–12.34%) for newly diagnosed T2DM. Although our pooled estimate may be imprecise due to significant heterogeneity across studies with regard to population group, age, gender, setting, diagnostic test, and study design, we provide evidence that the burden of glucose intolerance in South Africa is high. These factors contribute to the paucity of representative T2DM prevalence data. There is a need for well-designed epidemiological studies that use best-practice and standardised methods to assess prevalence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document