scholarly journals Clinical usefulness of prethymectomy plasmapheresis in patients with myasthenia gravis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 867-875
Author(s):  
Tarcisio A Reis ◽  
Daniele C Cataneo ◽  
Antônio Jose Maria Cataneo
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Myasthenia Gravis ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Myasthenic Crisis ◽  
Preoperative Period ◽  
Icu Stay ◽  
Number Of Patients

Abstract OBJECTIVES Our goal was to evaluate, through a systematic review, the efficacy of plasmapheresis in the preoperative preparation of the patient for a thymectomy for the treatment of myasthenia gravis. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Scopus and CENTRAL databases were searched. The following outcomes were evaluated: myasthenic crisis, mortality, pneumonia, bleeding, use of mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay and intensive care unit (ICU) stay. RevMan 5.3 software provided by the Cochrane Collaboration was used for the meta-analysis. RESULTS The total number of patients evaluated in the 7 included studies was 360. Plasmapheresis during the preoperative period did not decrease the myasthenic crisis [risk ratio (RR) 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08–1.66; I2 = 44%; 5 studies, 243 patients]. There was also no change in the mortality rate (RR 0.7, 95% CI 0.11–4.62; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 172 patients) or pneumonia cases (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.07–1.09; I2 = 27%; 5 studies, 272 patients). Bleeding was greater in patients who underwent plasmapheresis (mean difference 34.34 ml; 95% CI 24.93–43.75; I2 = 0%). We evaluated the following outcomes: need for mechanical ventilation, hospital stay, ICU stay and mechanical ventilation, but these outcomes were not adequate to perform the meta-analysis due to the high heterogeneity among the studies. Subgroup analysis showed that plasmapheresis performed during the preoperative period in patients with severe disease (Osserman III and IV) decreased the myasthenic crisis postoperatively (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02–0.65; I2 = 63%). CONCLUSIONS Plasmapheresis may reduce the myasthenic crisis during the postoperative period in patients with severe disease but may produce little or no difference in patients with mild clinical expression of the disease.

scholarly journals Efficacy of probiotics in the prevention of VAP in critically ill ICU patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Priyam Batra ◽  
Kapil Dev Soni ◽  
Purva Mathur
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Icu Stay ◽  
Length Of Icu Stay

Abstract Introduction Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is reported as the second most common nosocomial infection among critically ill patients with the incidence ranging from 2 to 16 episodes per 1000 ventilator days. The use of probiotics has been shown to have a promising effect in many RCTs. Our systematic review and meta-analysis were thus planned to determine the effect of probiotic use in critically ill ventilated adult patients on the incidence of VAP, length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, the incidence of diarrhea, and the incidence of oropharyngeal colonization and in-hospital mortality. Methodology Systematic search of various databases (such as Embase, Cochrane, and Pubmed), published journals, clinical trials, and abstracts of the various major conferences were made to obtain the RCTs which compare probiotics with placebo for VAP prevention. The results were expressed as risk ratios or mean differences. Data synthesis was done using statistical software - Review Manager (RevMan) Version 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020). Results Nine studies met our inclusion criterion and were included in the meta-analysis. The incidence of VAP (risk ratio: 0.70, CI 0.56, 0.88; P = 0.002; I2 = 37%), duration of mechanical ventilation (mean difference −3.75, CI −6.93, −0.58; P 0.02; I2 = 96%), length of ICU stay (mean difference −4.20, CI −6.73, −1.66; P = 0.001; I2 = 84%) and in-hospital mortality (OR 0.73, CI 0.54, 0.98; P = 0.04; I2 = 0%) in the probiotic group was significantly lower than that in the control group. Probiotic administration was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in length of hospital stay (MD −1.94, CI −7.17, 3.28; P = 0.47; I2 = 88%), incidence of oro-pharyngeal colonization (OR 0.59, CI 0.33, 1.04; P = 0.07; I2 = 69%), and incidence of diarrhea (OR 0.59, CI 0.34, 1.03; P = 0.06; I2 = 38%). Discussion Our meta-analysis shows that probiotic administration has a promising role in lowering the incidence of VAP, the duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, and in-hospital mortality.

Pneumonia Is Associated with Increased Mortality in Hospitalized COPD Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Respiration ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 100 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-76
Author(s):  
Yan Yu ◽  
Wei Liu ◽  
Hong-Li Jiang ◽  
Bing Mao
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Readmission Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Icu Stay ◽  
Copd Patients ◽  
The Impact

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are at a heightened risk of pneumonia. Whether coexisting community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) can predict increased mortality in hospitalized COPD patients is still controversial. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the association between CAP and mortality and morbidity in COPD patients hospitalized for acute worsening of respiratory symptoms. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> In this review, cohort studies and case-control studies investigating the impact of CAP in hospitalized COPD patients were retrieved from 4 electronic databases from inception until December 2019. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The primary outcome was mortality. The secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, need for mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of ICU stay, and readmission rate. The Mantel-Haenszel method and inverse variance method were used to calculate pooled relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD), respectively. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 18 studies were included. The presence of CAP was associated with higher mortality (RR = 1.85; 95% CI: 1.50–2.30; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.00001), longer length of hospital stay (MD = 1.89; 95% CI: 1.19–2.59; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.00001), more need for mechanical ventilation (RR = 1.48; 95% CI: 1.32–1.67; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.00001), and more ICU admissions (RR = 1.58; 95% CI: 1.24–2.03; <i>p</i> = 0.0002) in hospitalized COPD patients. CAP was not associated with longer ICU stay (MD = 5.2; 95% CI: −2.35 to 12.74; <i>p</i> = 0.18) or higher readmission rate (RR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.96–1.09; <i>p</i> = 0.47). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Coexisting CAP may be associated with increased mortality and morbidity in hospitalized COPD patients, so radiological confirmation of CAP should be required and more attention should be paid to these patients.

scholarly journals Higher PEEP versus Lower PEEP Strategies for Patients in ICU without Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hongyu Yi ◽  
Xiaoming Li ◽  
Zhi Mao ◽  
Chao Liu ◽  
Xin Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
High Peep ◽  
Icu Patients ◽  
Icu Stay ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Duration Of Ventilation

Abstract Background: The application of high PEEP remains to be a controversial issue when it comes to ICU patients underwent ventilation. There are studies supporting the usage of high PEEP in patients with ARDS, while for those without ARDS, the conclusion is of great ambiguity. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effects of high and low level of PEEP on ICU patients without ARDS.Methods: We searched public databases (including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Clinicaltrial.gov) to find eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes included in this meta-analysis were in-hospital mortality, 28-day mortality and the duration of ventilation, ICU stay, and hospital stay. We used the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool to evaluate risk of bias. Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) was conducted. Results: We included 2307 patients from 24 trials using high and low PEEP. Although no significant difference was found between high and low PEEP applications in in-hospital mortality (risk ratio[RR] 0.98, 95% confidence interval[CI] [0.81, 1.19], P=0.87), 28-day mortality (RR 0.68, 95% CI [0.33, 1.40], P=0.30) and the duration of ventilation (mean difference[MD] -0.30, 95% CI [-0.64, 0.04], P=0.09), ICU stay (MD -0.38, 95% CI [-1.03, 0.27], P=0.25), and hospital stay (MD -0.56, 95% CI [-1.44, 0.32], P=0.22), high PEEP indeed increased the level of PaO2/FIO2 (MD 32.39, 95% CI [13.06, 51.72], P=0.001), and therefore decreased the incidences of ARDS (RR 0.57, 95% CI [0.37, 0.89], P=0.01) and hypoxaemia (RR 0.60, 95% CI [0.41, 0.88], P=0.009). In addition, although total results did not reveal the advantage of high PEEP on other secondary outcomes regarding atelectasis, barotrauma, ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP), hypotension, mean arterial pressure (MAP), SaO2 and lactate, subgroup analysis seemed to obtain different results. The TSA results suggested more RCTs were needed. Conclusion: Ventilation with high PEEP in ICU patients without ARDS may improve the level of oxygenation (PaO2/FIO2) resulting in low incidences of ARDS and hypoxaemia. Nevertheless, other clinical outcomes including in-hospital and 28-day mortality, duration of ventilation, ICU stay and hospital stay, pulmonary complications, hemodynamics and post-operative fluid balance did not show any significant difference.

scholarly journals The Efficacy and Immunomodulatory Effects of Ulinastatin and Thymosinα1 for Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Yun Wang ◽  
Bin Fang ◽  
Xin Hua Qiang ◽  
Tie Ou Yu ◽  
Jia Rong Zhong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
T Cells ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Apache Ii Score ◽  
Immunomodulatory Effects ◽  
Ventilation Time ◽  
Icu Stay ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation Time

Objective. To systematically review the efficacy and potential immunomodulatory effect of ulinastatin combined with thymosinα1 (UTI) for sepsis.Design. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Data Sources. The following databases: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central were searched to identify related clinical trials. The search terms were “ulinastatin”, “thymosin”, and “sepsis”.Results. Six RCTs, 944 septic patients in total, were included in this meta-analysis. The result shows UTI increased the 28-day survival rate of septic patients, odds ratio (OR) = 2.01, 95% CI [1.53, 2.64]. After the treatment with UTI, the APACHE II score (four studies) dropped 4.72 further, mean = −4.72, 95% CI [−6.54, −2.91] (p<0.00001). The mean time of ICU stay (four studies) in UTI group decreased 3.03 days further, mean = −3.03 [−6.99, 0.95] (p=0.14), and mechanical ventilation time (four studies) decreased 2.05 days, mean = −1.81 [−2.96, −0.66] (p=0.002). With the treatment of UTI, CD4+T cells raised 5.13%, mean = 5.13, 95% CI [2.75, 7.50] (p<0.0001); there was no significant change in CD8+T cells, mean = −0.74 [−2.93, 1.45] (p=0.51).Conclusion. According to this meta-analysis, with the treatment of UTI, the short-term survival rate of septic patients was increased and the illness severity was alleviated. ICU stay and mechanical ventilation time were effectively shortened. The beneficial effect of UTI might be due to the potential immunomodulatory effects of these two drugs.

scholarly journals Effectiveness and Safety of Chloroquine or Hydroxychloroquine as a mono-therapy or in combination with Azithromycin in the treatment of COVID-19 patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramy Mohamed Ghazy ◽  
Abdallah Almaghraby ◽  
Ramy Shaaban ◽  
Ahmed Kamal ◽  
Hatem Beshir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
In Vivo Studies ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Duration Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Clinical Worsening

Many recent studies have investigated the role of either Chloroquine (CQ) alone, Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) alone, or CQ/HCQ in combination with azithromycin (AZM) in management of the emerging coronavirus. This systematic review and meta-analysis of either published or preprint observational or interventional studies were conducted to assess the cure rate, duration of hospital stay, radiological progression, clinical worsening, need for mechanical ventilation, the occurrence of side effects, and mortality. A search of the online database through June 2020 was performed and examined the reference lists of pertinent articles for in-vivo studies only. Pooled relative risks (RRs), standard mean, of 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with the random-effects model. Results: The duration of hospital stay was shorter in the standard care in comparison with HCQ group, the standard mean of hospital stay was 0.57, 95% CI, and 0.20-0.94. Overall virological cure, or more specifically at day 4, 10, and 14 among patients exposed to HCQ did not differ significantly from the standard care [(RR=0.92, 95% CI 0.78-1.15), (RR=1.11, 95% CI 0.74-1.65), (RR=1.21, 95%CI 0.70-2.01), and (RR=0.98, 95% CI, 0.76-1.27)] respectively. Radiological improvement or clinical worsening was not statistically different between HCQ and standard care [(RR=1.11, 95% CI 0.64-1.65) and (RR=1.28, 95% CI 0.33-4.99)]. The need for mechanical ventilation (MV) was not significant between the HCQ group and the standard care (RR= 1.5, 95%CI 0.78-2.89). Side effects were more reported in the HCQ group than the standard care (RR=3.14, 95% CI 1.58- 6.24). Mortality among HCQ was not affected by receiving HCQ (RR=3.14, 95% CI 1.58-6.24), meta-regression analysis revealed that country is a strong predictor of mortality. The duration of hospital stay among the HCQ and AZM didn not differ significantly from the standard care (standard mean= 0.77, 95% CI 0.46-1.08). Despite virological cure and need for MV did not differ significantly [(RR= 3.23, 95% CI 0.70-14.97) and (RR=1.27, 95%CI 0.7-2.13)] respectively. Mortality among the HCQ+AZM was more significantly higher than among the standard care (RR= 1.8, 95% CI 1.19-2.27). Conclusion: Despite the scarcity of published data of good quality, the effectiveness and safety of either HCQ alone or in combination with AZM in treating the pandemic of COVID-19 cannot be assured. Future randomized control trials need to be carried out to verify this conclusion.

scholarly journals Effect of timing of intubation on clinical outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized cohort studies

Critical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleni Papoutsi ◽  
Vassilis G. Giannakoulis ◽  
Eleni Xourgia ◽  
Christina Routsi ◽  
Anastasia Kotanidou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Icu Admission ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Detectable Difference

Abstract Background Although several international guidelines recommend early over late intubation of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), this issue is still controversial. We aimed to investigate the effect (if any) of timing of intubation on clinical outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 by carrying out a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods PubMed and Scopus were systematically searched, while references and preprint servers were explored, for relevant articles up to December 26, 2020, to identify studies which reported on mortality and/or morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing early versus late intubation. “Early” was defined as intubation within 24 h from intensive care unit (ICU) admission, while “late” as intubation at any time after 24 h of ICU admission. All-cause mortality and duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) were the primary outcomes of the meta-analysis. Pooled risk ratio (RR), pooled mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. The meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020222147). Results A total of 12 studies, involving 8944 critically ill patients with COVID-19, were included. There was no statistically detectable difference on all-cause mortality between patients undergoing early versus late intubation (3981 deaths; 45.4% versus 39.1%; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.99–1.15, p = 0.08). This was also the case for duration of MV (1892 patients; MD − 0.58 days, 95% CI − 3.06 to 1.89 days, p = 0.65). In a sensitivity analysis using an alternate definition of early/late intubation, intubation without versus with a prior trial of high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive mechanical ventilation was still not associated with a statistically detectable difference on all-cause mortality (1128 deaths; 48.9% versus 42.5%; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.99–1.25, p = 0.08). Conclusions The synthesized evidence suggests that timing of intubation may have no effect on mortality and morbidity of critically ill patients with COVID-19. These results might justify a wait-and-see approach, which may lead to fewer intubations. Relevant guidelines may therefore need to be updated.

scholarly journals 321 Role of Antibiotics in Acute uncomplicated diverticulitis, A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
A A Tahir ◽  
K M Ali ◽  
A U Khan ◽  
S Kamal ◽  
A Hussain ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Dietary Advice ◽  
Duration Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Uncomplicated Diverticulitis ◽  
Acute Uncomplicated Diverticulitis

Abstract Introduction Diverticular disease is a common health problem with a wide clinical spectrum. About 75% of the patients would have uncomplicated diverticulitis. Cornerstones of treatment are antibiotics, analgesia, and dietary advice. Recent evidence has shown that its treatment is controversial, questioning the use of antibiotics. Aim is to assess the role of antibiotics in the treatment of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis. Method This is a systematic review and Meta-analysis. Literature review of the available studies was conducted using search engines like Pubmed, Medline, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases. Statistical analysis was conducted using RevMan5.4. Results Out of 1754 records 1324 were duplicates, 430 studies were screened. 395 were further excluded.35 full text articles were assessed and in the final review 10 studies were included. PRISMA guidelines were used. Pooled OR for recurrence = 0.92 (95% CI = 0.74 to 1.13). Pooled OR for Hospital stay= -0.66 (95% CI= -1.12 to -0.21). Pooled OR for complications = 1.06 (95% CI = 0.69 to 1.64). Pooled OR for treatment failure= 1.24 (95% CI = 0.90-1.69). Conclusions We conclude that from the available evidence antibiotics have no role in reducing recurrence, complications, treatment failure, and duration of hospital stay in acute uncomplicated diverticulitis.

scholarly journals Serum albumin concentrations are associated with disease severity and outcomes in coronavirus 19 disease (COVID-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panagiotis Paliogiannis ◽  
Arduino Aleksander Mangoni ◽  
Michela Cangemi ◽  
Alessandro Giuseppe Fois ◽  
Ciriaco Carru ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Serum Albumin ◽  
Disease Severity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Geographic Area ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Poor Outcome ◽  
Standard Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Regression Analysis

AbstractCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is responsible for the most threatening pandemic in modern history. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the associations between serum albumin concentrations and COVID-19 disease severity and adverse outcomes. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, from inception to October 30, 2020. Sixty-seven studies in 19,760 COVID-19 patients (6141 with severe disease or poor outcome) were selected for analysis. Pooled results showed that serum albumin concentrations were significantly lower in patients with severe disease or poor outcome (standard mean difference, SMD: − 0.99 g/L; 95% CI, − 1.11 to − 0.88, p < 0.001). In multivariate meta-regression analysis, age (t =  − 2.13, p = 0.043), publication geographic area (t = 2.16, p = 0.040), white blood cell count (t =  − 2.77, p = 0.008) and C-reactive protein (t =  − 2.43, p = 0.019) were significant contributors of between-study variance. Therefore, lower serum albumin concentrations are significantly associated with disease severity and adverse outcomes in COVID-19 patients. The assessment of serum albumin concentrations might assist with early risk stratification and selection of appropriate care pathways in this group.

scholarly journals Renin-angiotensin system blocker and outcomes of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Thorax ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. thoraxjnl-2020-215322
Author(s):  
Hyun Woo Lee ◽  
Chang-Hwan Yoon ◽  
Eun Jin Jang ◽  
Chang-Hoon Lee
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Renin Angiotensin System ◽  
Angiotensin Ii Receptor ◽  
Angiotensin System ◽  
Risk Of Mortality ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Receptor Blockers

BackgroundThe association of ACE inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) with disease severity of patients with COVID-19 is still unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate if ACEI/ARB use is associated with the risk of mortality and severe disease in patients with COVID-19.MethodsWe searched all available clinical studies that included patients with confirmed COVID-19 who could be classified into an ACEI/ARB group and a non-ACEI/ARB group up until 4 May 2020. A meta-analysis was performed, and primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and severe disease.ResultsACEI/ARB use did not increase the risk of all-cause mortality both in meta-analysis for 11 studies with 12 601 patients reporting ORs (OR=0.52 (95% CI=0.37 to 0.72), moderate certainty of evidence) and in 2 studies with 8577 patients presenting HRs. For 12 848 patients in 13 studies, ACEI/ARB use was not related to an increased risk of severe disease in COVID-19 (OR=0.68 (95% CI=0.44 to 1.07); I2=95%, low certainty of evidence).ConclusionsACEI/ARB therapy was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality or severe manifestations in patients with COVID-19. ACEI/ARB therapy can be continued without concern of drug-related worsening in patients with COVID-19.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document