P-P39 Perioperative Interventions to Reduce Pancreatic Fistula following Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract Background Many studies evaluate interventions to reduce POPF following PD, but often report conflicting results. Previous meta-analyses have generally included non-randomised trials and not considered novel interventions. Aim To evaluate interventions to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) with level 1 data. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis assessed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions to reduce All-POPF or clinically relevant (CR)-POPF after PD. A post-hoc analysis of negative RCTs assessed whether these had appropriate levels of statistical power. Results Among 22 interventions (n = 7,512 patients, 55 studies), 12 were assessed by multiple studies, and subject to meta-analysis. Of these, external pancreatic duct drainage was the only intervention found to be associated with significantly reduced rates of CR- and all-POPF. In addition, Ulinastatin was associated with significantly reduced rates of CR-POPF, whilst invagination (vs duct to mucosa) pancreatojejunostomy was associated with significantly reduced rates of all-POPF. Review of negative RCTs found the majority to be underpowered, with post-hoc power calculations indicating that interventions would need to reduce the POPF rate to ≤ 1% in order to achieve 80% power in 16/34 (All-POPF) and 19/25 (CR-POPF) studies, respectively. Conclusions Meta-analysis supports a role for several interventions to reduce POPF after PD, although data is often inconsistent and/or based on small trials. Systematic review identifies other interventions which may benefit from further study. However, underpowered trials appear to be a fundamental problem, inherently more so with CR-POPF. Larger trials, or new directions for research are required to further understanding in this field.

Download Full-text

Comparative efficacy and safety of interventions for treating head lice: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

BMJ Paediatrics Open ◽

10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001129 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. e001129

Author(s):

Bill Stevenson ◽

Wubshet Tesfaye ◽

Julia Christenson ◽

Cynthia Mathew ◽

Solomon Abrha ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Head Lice ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

BackgroundHead lice infestation is a major public health problem around the globe. Its treatment is challenging due to product failures resulting from rapidly emerging resistance to existing treatments, incorrect treatment applications and misdiagnosis. Various head lice treatments with different mechanism of action have been developed and explored over the years, with limited report on systematic assessments of their efficacy and safety. This work aims to present a robust evidence summarising the interventions used in head lice.MethodThis is a systematic review and network meta-analysis which will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement for network meta-analyses. Selected databases, including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched for randomised controlled trials exploring head lice treatments. Searches will be limited to trials published in English from database inception till 2021. Grey literature will be identified through Open Grey, AHRQ, Grey Literature Report, Grey Matters, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry. Additional studies will be sought from reference lists of included studies. Study screening, selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will be undertaken by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved via a third reviewer. The primary outcome measure is the relative risk of cure at 7 and 14 days postinitial treatment. Secondary outcome measures may include adverse drug events, ovicidal activity, treatment compliance and acceptability, and reinfestation. Information from direct and indirect evidence will be used to generate the effect sizes (relative risk) to compare the efficacy and safety of individual head lice treatments against a common comparator (placebo and/or permethrin). Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations guideline for network meta-analysis. All quantitative analyses will be conducted using STATA V.16.DiscussionThe evidence generated from this systematic review and meta-analysis is intended for use in evidence-driven treatment of head lice infestations and will be instrumental in informing health professionals, public health practitioners and policy-makers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017073375.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and safety of instantaneous wave-free ratio in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017868 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 7 (9) ◽

pp. e017868

Author(s):

Joey S.W. Kwong ◽

Sheyu Li ◽

Wan-Jie Gu ◽

Hao Chen ◽

Chao Zhang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Adverse Outcomes ◽

Coronary Revascularisation ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Registration Number ◽

Collection Form ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

IntroductionEffective selection of coronary lesions for revascularisation is pivotal in the management of symptoms and adverse outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease. Recently, instantaneous ‘wave-free’ ratio (iFR) has been proposed as a new diagnostic index for assessing the severity of coronary stenoses without the need of pharmacological vasodilation. Evidence of the effectiveness of iFR-guided revascularisation is emerging and a systematic review is warranted.Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a systematic review of randomised controlled trials and controlled observational studies. Electronic sources including MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase, Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov will be searched for potentially eligible studies investigating the effects of iFR-guided strategy in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation. Studies will be selected against transparent eligibility criteria and data will be extracted using a prestandardised data collection form by two independent authors. Risk of bias in included studies and overall quality of evidence will be assessed using validated methodological tools. Meta-analysis will be performed using the Review Manager software. Our systematic review will be performed according to the guidance from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required. Results of the systematic review will be disseminated as conference proceedings and peer-reviewed journal publication.Trial registration numberThis protocol is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42017065460.

Download Full-text

Natriuretic peptide-guided treatment for heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ evidence-based medicine ◽

10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111208 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 25 (1) ◽

pp. 33-37 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Julie McLellan ◽

Clare R Bankhead ◽

Jason L Oke ◽

F D Richard Hobbs ◽

Clare J Taylor ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Heart Failure ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Natriuretic Peptide ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Individual Outcomes ◽

All Cause Mortality ◽

Registration Number ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

BackgroundGUIDE-IT, the largest trial to date, published in August 2017, evaluating the effectiveness of natriuretic peptide (NP)-guided treatment of heart failure (HF), was stopped early for futility on a composite outcome. However, the reported effect sizes on individual outcomes of all-cause mortality and HF admissions are potentially clinically relevant.ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aims to combine all available trial level evidence to determine if NP-guided treatment of HF reduces all-cause mortality and HF admissions in patients with HF.Study selectionEight databases, no language restrictions, up to November 2017 were searched for all randomised controlled trials comparing NP-guided treatment versus clinical assessment alone in adult patients with HF. No language restrictions were applied. Publications were independently double screened and extracted. Fixed-effect meta-analyses were conducted.Findings89 papers were included, reporting 19 trials (4554 participants), average ages 62–80 years. Pooled risk ratio estimates for all-cause mortality (16 trials, 4063 participants) were 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.99 and 0.80, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.89 for HF admissions (11 trials, 2822 participants). Sensitivity analyses, restricted to low risk of bias, produced similar estimates, but were no longer statistically significant.ConclusionsConsidering all the evidence to date, the pooled effects suggest that NP-guided treatment is beneficial in reducing HF admissions and all-cause mortality. However, there is still insufficient high-quality evidence to make definitive recommendations on the use of NP-guided treatment in clinical practice.Trial registration numberSystematic Review Cochrane Database Number: CD008966.

Download Full-text

Simultaneous compared to interval administration of mifepristone and misoprostol for medical abortion up to 10+0 weeks' gestation: a systematic review with meta-analyses

BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health ◽

10.1136/bmjsrh-2019-200448 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. bmjsrh-2019-200448

Author(s):

Mia Schmidt-Hansen ◽

Jonathan Lord ◽

Elise Hasler ◽

Sharon Cameron

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Collaboration ◽

Medical Abortion ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Published Data ◽

Study Results ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

BackgroundMedical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol usually involves an interval of 36–48 hours between administering these drugs; however, it is possible that the clinical efficacy at early gestations may be maintained when the drugs are taken simultaneously. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the safety and effectiveness of simultaneous compared with interval administration of mifepristone and misoprostol for abortion up to 10+0 weeks’ gestation.MethodsWe searched Embase Classic, Embase; Ovid MEDLINE(R) including Daily, and Epub Ahead-of-Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations; and Cochrane Library on 11 December 2019. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), published in English from 1985, comparing simultaneous to interval administration of mifepristone and misoprostol for early abortion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration checklist for RCTs. Meta-analysis of risk ratios (RRs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method were performed. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.ResultsMeta-analyses of three RCTs (n=1280) showed no differences in ‘ongoing pregnancy’ (RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.38 to 8.36), ‘haemorrhage requiring transfusion or ≥500 mL blood loss’ (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.03) and ‘incomplete abortion with the need for surgical intervention’ (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.25) between the interventions. Individual study results showed no difference in patient satisfaction, or ‘need for repeat misoprostol’, although ‘time to onset of bleeding or cramping’ was longer after simultaneous than interval administration. The quality of evidence was very low to moderate.ConclusionThe published data support the use of simultaneous mifepristone and misoprostol for medical abortion up to 9+0 weeks in women who prefer this method of administration.

Download Full-text

Mood Disorders and Gluten: It’s Not All in Your Mind! A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Nutrients ◽

10.3390/nu10111708 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 10 (11) ◽

pp. 1708 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Eleanor Busby ◽

Justine Bold ◽

Lindsey Fellows ◽

Kamran Rostami

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Mood Disorders ◽

Prospective Studies ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Future Research ◽

One Year ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

The Relationship

Gluten elimination may represent an effective treatment strategy for mood disorders in individuals with gluten-related disorders. However, the directionality of the relationship remains unclear. We performed a systematic review of prospective studies for effects of gluten on mood symptoms in patients with or without gluten-related disorders. Six electronic databases (CINAHL, PsycINFO, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Library) were searched, from inception to 8 August 2018, for prospective studies published in English. Meta-analyses with random-effects were performed. Three randomised-controlled trials and 10 longitudinal studies comprising 1139 participants fit the inclusion criteria. A gluten-free diet (GFD) significantly improved pooled depressive symptom scores in GFD-treated patients (Standardised Mean Difference (SMD) −0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.55 to −0.20; p < 0.0001), with no difference in mean scores between patients and healthy controls after one year (SMD 0.01, 95% CI −0.18 to 0.20, p = 0.94). There was a tendency towards worsening symptoms for non-coeliac gluten sensitive patients during a blinded gluten challenge vs. placebo (SMD 0.21, 95% CI −0.58 to 0.15; p = 0.25). Our review supports the association between mood disorders and gluten intake in susceptible individuals. The effects of a GFD on mood in subjects without gluten-related disorders should be considered in future research.

Download Full-text

Buteyko method for people with asthma: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049213 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (10) ◽

pp. e049213

Author(s):

Karla Morganna Pereira Pinto de Mendonça ◽

Sean Collins ◽

Tácito ZM Santos ◽

Gabriela Chaves ◽

Sarah Leite ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Plain Language ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

IntroductionButeyko method is recommended as a non-pharmacological treatment for people with asthma. Although the worldwide interest in the Buteyko method, there is a paucity of studies gathering evidence to support its use. Therefore, we aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of the Buteyko method in children and adults with asthma.Methods and analysisWe will search on Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for studies focusing on the Buteyko method for children and adults with asthma. The searches will be carried out in September 2021 from database’s inception to the present. We will include randomised controlled trials comparing Buteyko method alone with asthma education or inactive control intervention. There will be no restriction on language. Primary outcomes include quality of life, asthma symptoms and adverse events/side effects. Two review authors will independently screen the studies for inclusion and extract data. We will assess the quality of the included studies using the ‘Risk of Bias’ tool. The certainty of the evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach. Data synthesis will be conducted using Review Manager software. Reporting of the review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Ethics and disseminationThis study will assess and provide evidence for the use of the Buteyko method in people with asthma. We will analyse secondary data and this does not require ethics approval. The findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, at relevant conferences and will be shared in plain language in social media. Moreover, the findings of this review could guide the direction of healthcare practice and research.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020193132.

Download Full-text

Comparison of splint and conventional cast for treating wrist torus fractures in children (systematic review)

Advanced Emergency Medicine ◽

10.18686/aem.v6.107 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 6 (4) ◽

Author(s):

Abdulrahman Alsawadi ◽

Mustafa Abbas

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Easy Access ◽

Fractures In Children ◽

Cost Effective Treatment ◽

Electronic Database Search ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

<span>Wrist torus fractures in children are common. Although it might be simple and straightforward, the management of these injuries remains controversial and depends on the personal experience and preference of the treating physician. The consensus agreement, however, is that these fractures are inherently stable. Some authors argue that splints should replace the traditional method of cast immobilisation. The splints are viewed as easier to use, more convenient and do not require follow up clinics for removal. It has also been argued that splints are more cost-effective than casts. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of removable splints versus casts in the treatment of torus wrist fractures of children in the current literature. This review followed the Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement for reporting. Comprehensive electronic database search and handsearch were conducted. Studies were considered for review if they were randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trial and compared removable splints and casts for treating torus fractures of distal radius and/or ulna in children. Four papers identified by two reviewers as potentially eligible for inclusion were appraised and two identified for inclusion were further assessed for any risk of bias. Data were narratively presented and discussed as meta-analysis would not have been possible for the identified studies. The limited available data favours the use of splint as a clinically effective and more cost-effective method of immobilisation. However, the findings of the systematic review are limited by the quality of the identified studies. It has been viewed that explanation to patients and parents and involving them in the decision, plus implementation of safety protocol to avoid under-treatment of misdiagnosed fractures and allow easy access of patients to the clinic, is an alternative way to provide safe, convenient and cost-effective treatment. </span>

Download Full-text

M89. PHARMACOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS FOR SMOKING CESSATION AMONG PEOPLE WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Schizophrenia Bulletin ◽

10.1093/schbul/sbaa030.401 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S168-S168

Author(s):

Dan Siskind ◽

Brian Wu ◽

Tommy Wong ◽

Steve Kisely

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Smoking Abstinence ◽

Pharmacological Interventions ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

Abstract Background People living with schizophrenia are 3 times more likely to smoke than the general population, and have fewer and less successful quitting attempts. In concert with psychosocial quit interventions, there is a need for evidence based pharmacological interventions to assist people living with schizophrenia achieve smoking abstinence. Methods We systematically searched PubMed, PsycInfo, EMBASE and Cochrane for randomised controlled trials of pharmacological interventions for reducing smoking among people living with schizophrenia. We conducted pairwise and network meta-analyses of effectiveness of interventions for achieving abstinence and reduction in smoking. We also examined psychiatric and physical adverse events of interventions. Results Nineteen studies were included in the systematic review. Data was available for buproprion, varenicline and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Buproprion (RR 3.4, 95%CI 1.6–7.3, p=0.002), varenicline (RR 3.8, 95%CI 2.0–7.2, p<0.001) and NRT (RR 4.3, 95%CI 1.7–10.7, p=0.002) were all associated with increased rates of abstinence in pairwise meta-analyses. In a network meta-analysis varenicline was superior to buproprion (RR 2.0, 95%CI 1.0–3.9), however there was no statistically significant difference between varenicline and NRT or buproprion and NRT. Varenicline was associated with higher rates of nausea than placebo. Discussion Buproprion, varenicline and NRT were all superior to placebo for achieving abstinence. Varenicline appears to be superior to buproprion for achieving abstinence, however varenicline is associated with higher rates of nausea.

Download Full-text

Physical activity interventions for adults who are visually impaired: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034036 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

pp. e034036

Author(s):

Joanna Sweeting ◽

Dafna Merom ◽

Putu Ayu Swandewi Astuti ◽

Michael Antoun ◽

Kate Edwards ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Physical Activity ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Visual Impairment ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Tai Chi ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Physical Activity Interventions ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

ObjectivesCompared with sighted individuals, people with visual impairment have a higher prevalence of chronic conditions and lower levels of physical activity. This review aims to systematically review physical activity interventions for those with a visual impairment and to assess their effectiveness.DesignA systematic review of articles reporting physical activity interventions in visually impaired individuals was conducted. Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, SPORTDiscus and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database were searched in August 2018. Meta-analyses were conducted on randomised controlled trials with the same outcome measure.SettingMost interventions were conducted in a group setting, with some including an at-home, self-directed component.ParticipantsFollowing identification of a recent systematic review of physical activity interventions in children, our review focused on adults aged 18 years and older with a visual impairment.Primary and secondary outcome measuresOutcomes included measures of balance, mobility, mental well-being (eg, quality of life), number of falls, muscle strength, flexibility and gait.ResultsEighteen papers from 17 studies met inclusion criteria. Physical activity components include falls prevention and/or balance-based activities, walking, tai chi, Alexander Technique, Yoga, dance, aerobics and core stability training. Significant results in favour of the intervention were reported most commonly in measures of functional capacity (9/17 studies) and in falls/balance-related outcomes (7/13 studies). The studies identified were generally small and diverse in study design, and risk of bias was high across several categories for most studies. Meta-analyses indicated non-significant effects of the included interventions on the Timed Up and Go, Chair Sit Test and Berg Balance Scale.ConclusionsPhysical activity interventions in individuals with visual impairment incorporating activities such as tai chi, Yoga and dance can have positive results, particularly in physical measures such as mobility and balance. However, when performing a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, the evidence for effectiveness is less clear. More studies with larger sample sizes, stronger designs and longer follow-up periods are needed.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018103638.

Download Full-text

Pooling resources to enhance rigour in psychophysiological research: Insights from open science approaches to meta-analysis

10.31234/osf.io/sh8mn ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Blair Saunders ◽

Michael Inzlicht

Keyword(s):

Statistical Power ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Open Science ◽

Quantitative Review ◽

Primary Literature ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Post Hoc ◽

Traditional Approaches ◽

Behavioural Sciences ◽

Sufficient Statistical Power

Recent years have witnessed calls for increased rigour and credibility in the cognitive and behavioural sciences, including psychophysiology. Many procedures exist to increase rigour, and among the most important is the need to increase statistical power. Achieving sufficient statistical power, however, is a considerable challenge for resource intensive methodologies, particularly for between-subjects designs. Meta-analysis is one potential solution; yet, the validity of such quantitative review is limited by potential bias in both the primary literature and in meta-analysis itself. Here, we provide a non-technical overview and evaluation of open science methods that could be adopted to increase the transparency of novel meta-analyses. We also contrast post hoc statistical procedures that can be used to correct for publication bias in the primary literature. We suggest that traditional meta-analyses, as applied in ERP research, are exploratory in nature, providing a range of plausible effect sizes without necessarily having the ability to confirm (or disconfirm) existing hypotheses. To complement traditional approaches, we detail how prospective meta-analyses, combined with multisite collaboration, could be used to conduct statistically powerful, confirmatory ERP research.

Download Full-text