scholarly journals What is the best catheter lock solution in preventing catheter-related blood infections? A protocol for a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e030019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fangping Dang ◽  
Huiju Li ◽  
Jinhui Tian ◽  
Ruijuan Wang ◽  
Jingjie Ren
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Major Complication ◽  
Venous Catheter ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Exit Site Infection ◽  
Safety Considerations ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionCatheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) is a major complication after central venous catheter insertion, which is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and additional medical costs. Many lock solutions for CRBSI have been evaluated. However, using traditional pairwise meta-analyses to summarise the evidence does not allow the inclusion of data from treatments that have not been compared head to head, which could impact the precision of pooled estimates in a meta-analysis. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of the different lock solutions for CRBSI through a network meta-analysis.Methods and analysisThe primary outcome of this network meta-analysis is the CRBSI. The secondary outcomes are exit-site infection and catheter-related thrombosis. We will search the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library databases for recent relevant meta-analysis and their reference lists to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared lock solutions for CRBSI prevention. Two individuals will independently extract data from each included RCT according to a predesigned Excel spreadsheet and will assess the methodological quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We will analyse the data using WinBUGS (V.1.4.3) and Stata (V.15.0). We will also estimate the pooled direct and indirect effects for all lock solutions using the network meta-analysis.Ethics and disseminationAs the present meta-analysis is performed based on previous published studies, no ethical approval and patient safety considerations are required. This study commenced on 18 January 2019, and its expected completion date is 1 December 2019. We will disseminate the results of our network meta-analysis through an international peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019121089.

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

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.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of omalizumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e047344
Author(s):  
Qingwu Wu ◽  
Lianxiong Yuan ◽  
Huijun Qiu ◽  
Xinyue Wang ◽  
Xuekun Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Chronic Rhinosinusitis ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Nasal Polyps ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy and safety of omalizumab for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) and to identify evidence gaps that will guide future research on omalizumab for CRSwNP.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesA comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library on 13 October 2020.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing omalizumab with placebo, given for at least 16 weeks in adult patients with CRSwNP.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent authors screened search results, extracted data and assessed studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data were pooled using the inverse-variance method and expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed by the χ2 test and the I2 statistic.ResultsA total of four RCTs involving 303 participants were identified. When comparing omalizumab to placebo, there was a significant difference in Nasal Polyps Score (MD=−1.20; 95% CI −1.48 to −0.92), Nasal Congestion Score (MD=−0.67; 95% CI −0.86 to −0.48), Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (MD=−15.62; 95% CI −19.79 to −11.45), Total Nasal Symptom Score (MD=−1.84; 95% CI −2.43 to −1.25) and reduced need for surgery (risk ratio (RR)=5.61; 95% CI 1.99 to 15.81). Furthermore, there was no difference in the risk of serious adverse events ((RR=1.40; 95% CI 0.29 to 6.80), adverse events (RR=0.83; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.15) and rescue systemic corticosteroid (RR=0.52; 95% CI 0.17 to 1.61).ConclusionsThis was the first meta-analysis that identified omalizumab significantly improved endoscopic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes in adults with moderate to severe CRSwNP and it was safe and well tolerated.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020207639.

scholarly journals Impact of PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies on circulating hs-CRP levels: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. e022348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ye-Xuan Cao ◽  
Sha Li ◽  
Hui-Hui Liu ◽  
Jian-Jun Li
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Treatment Duration ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Familial Hypercholesterolaemia ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Participant Characteristics ◽  
Hs Crp ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveTo evaluate the potential effects of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 monoclonal antibody (PCSK9-mAb) on high-sensitivity C reactive protein (hs-CRP) concentrations.DesignA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sourcesPubMed, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library databases, ClinicalTrials.gov and recent conferences were searched from inception to May 2018.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesAll randomised controlled trials that reported changes of hs-CRP were included.ResultsTen studies involving 4198 participants were identified. PCSK9-mAbs showed a slight efficacy in reducing hs-CRP (−0.04 mg/L, 95% CI: −0.17 to 0.01) which was not statistically different. The results did not altered when subgroup analyses were performed including PCSK9-mAb types (alirocumab: 0.12 mg/L, 95% CI: −0.18 to 0.43; evolocumab: 0.00 mg/L, 95% CI: −0.07 to 0.07; LY3015014: −0.48 mg/L, 95% CI: −1.28 to 0.32; RG7652: 0.35 mg/L, 95% CI: −0.26 to 0.96), treatment duration (≤12w: 0.00 mg/L, 95% CI: −0.07 to 0.07; >12w: −0.11 mg/L, 95% CI: −0.45 to −0.23), participant characteristics (familial hypercholesterolaemia: 0.00 mg/L, 95% CI: −0.07 to 0.07; non-familial hypercholesterolaemia: 0.07 mg/L, 95% CI: −0.12 to 0.26; mix: −0.48 mg/L, 95% CI: −1.28 to 0.32) and treatment methods (monotherapy: 0.00 mg/L, −0.08 to 0.07; combination therapy: −0.08 mg/L, −0.37 to 0.21). Meta-regression analyses suggested no significant linear correlation between baseline age (p=0.673), sex (p=0.645) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction (p=0.339).ConclusionsOur updated meta-analysis suggested that PCSK9-mAbs had no significant impact on circulating hs-CRP levels irrespective of PCSK9-mAb types, participant characteristics and treatment duration or methods.

Therapeutic effect of resveratrol supplementation on oxidative stress: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 96 (1134) ◽  
pp. 197-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehdi Koushki ◽  
Mostafa Lakzaei ◽  
Hadi Khodabandehloo ◽  
Hossein Hosseini ◽  
Reza Meshkani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oxidative Stress ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Oxidative Markers ◽  
Markers Of Oxidative Stress ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BackgroundResveratrol is a naturally occurring polyphenol compound mainly found in grapes and red wine. The evidence has suggested that resveratrol has an antioxidant effect. However, the results are inconsistent and inconclusive. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of resveratrol supplementation on markers of oxidative stress.MethodsWe searched PubMed, ISI Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus and the Cochrane library up to December 2018 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing resveratrol supplementation effects on oxidative markers. Heterogeneity, publication bias, risk of bias and subgroup analysis were analysed. This meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Preferred ReportingItems for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA).ResultsMeta-analysis of data from 12 RCTs did not support significant effect of resveratrol supplementation on circulating levels of superoxide dismutase (SOD) (standardized mean difference (SMD) (1.12), (95% CI −0.91 to 3.1), p=0.28), catalase (CAT) (SMD (−0.07), (95% CI −1.4 to 1.3), p=0.92) and glutathione peroxidase (GPx) (SMD (−0.76), (95% CI −2.56 to 1.04), p=0.40). Although, resveratrol supplementation increased significantly circulating total antioxidant capacity (TAC) concentrations (SMD (0.52), (95% CI −0.02 to 1.07), p=0.05). Severe heterogeneity was observed between studies, and no obvious publication bias was observed in included RCTs.ConclusionCollectively, our findings of available RCTs did no show any benefit of resveratrol supplementation on SOD, CAT and GPx except for TAC. Well-designed RCTs are necessary to confirm these results.

scholarly journals Total extraperitoneal endoscopic hernioplasty (TEP) versus Lichtenstein hernioplasty: a systematic review by updated traditional and cumulative meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials

Hernia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 1093-1103 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Gavriilidis ◽  
R. J. Davies ◽  
J. Wheeler ◽  
N. de’Angelis ◽  
S. Di Saverio
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Vascular Injuries ◽  
Lichtenstein Hernioplasty ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Haematoma Formation ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Background–purpose Totally extraperitoneal (TEP) endoscopic hernioplasty and Lichtenstein hernioplasty are the most commonly used approaches for inguinal hernia repair. However, current evidence on which is the preferred approach is inconclusive. This updated meta-analysis was conducted to track the accumulation of evidence over time. Methods Studies were identified by a systematic literature search of the EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. Fixed- and random-effects models were used to cumulatively assess the accumulation of evidence over time. Results The TEP cohort showed significantly higher rates of recurrences and vascular injuries compared to the Lichtenstein cohort; [Peto Odds ratio (OR) = 1.58 (1.22, 2.04), p = 0.005], [Peto OR = 2.49 (1.05, 5.88), p = 0.04], respectively. In contrast, haematoma formation rate, time to return to usual activities, and local paraesthesia were significantly lower in the TEP cohort compared to the Lichtenstein cohort; [Peto OR = 0.26 (0.16, 0.41), p ≤ 0.001], [mean difference = − 6.32 (− 8.17, − 4.48), p ≤ 0.001], [Peto OR = 0.26 (0.17, 0.40), p ≤ 0.001], respectively. Conclusions This study, which is based on randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of high quality, showed significantly higher rates of recurrences and vascular injuries in the TEP cohort than in the Lichtenstein cohort. In contrast, rate of postoperative haematoma formation, local paraesthesia, and time to return to usual activities were significantly lower in the TEP cohort than in the Lichtenstein cohort. Future multicentre RCTs with strict adherence to the standards recommended in the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines will shed further light on the topic.

scholarly journals Surgical interventions for women with stress urinary incontinence: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l1842 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mari Imamura ◽  
Jemma Hudson ◽  
Sheila A Wallace ◽  
Graeme MacLennan ◽  
Michal Shimonovich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Urinary Incontinence ◽  
Stress Urinary Incontinence ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Surgical Interventions ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Objectives To compare the effectiveness and safety of surgical interventions for women with stress urinary incontinence. Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials evaluating surgical interventions for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women. Methods Identification of relevant randomised controlled trials from Cochrane reviews and the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register (searched May 2017), which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline, Medline In-Process, Medline Epub Ahead of Print, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP. The reference lists of relevant articles were also searched. Primary outcomes were “cure” and “improvement” at 12 months, analysed by means of network meta-analyses, with results presented as the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Adverse events were analysed using pairwise meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The quality of evidence for network meta-analysis was assessed using the GRADE approach. Results 175 randomised controlled trials assessing a total of 21 598 women were included. Most studies had high or unclear risk across all risk of bias domains. Network meta-analyses were based on data from 105 trials that reported cure and 120 trials that reported improvement of incontinence symptoms. Results showed that the interventions with highest cure rates were traditional sling, retropubic midurethral sling (MUS), open colposuspension, and transobturator MUS, with rankings of 89.4%, 89.1%, 76.7%, and 64.1%, respectively. Compared with retropubic MUS, the odds ratio of cure for traditional sling was 1.06 (95% credible interval 0.62 to 1.85), for open colposuspension was 0.85 (0.54 to 1.33), and for transobtrurator MUS was 0.74 (0.59 to 0.92). Women were also more likely to experience an improvement in their incontinence symptoms after receiving retropubic MUS or transobturator MUS compared with other surgical procedures. In particular, compared with retropubic MUS, the odds ratio of improvement for transobturator MUS was 0.76 (95% credible interval 0.59 to 0.98), for traditional sling was 0.69 (0.39 to 1.26), and for open colposuspension was 0.65 (0.41 to 1.02). Quality of evidence was moderate for retropubic MUS versus transobturator MUS and low or very low for retropubic MUS versus the other two interventions. Data on adverse events were available mainly for mesh procedures, indicating a higher rate of repeat surgery and groin pain but a lower rate of suprapubic pain, vascular complications, bladder or urethral perforation, and voiding difficulties after transobturator MUS compared with retropubic MUS. Data on adverse events for non-MUS procedures were sparse and showed wide confidence intervals. Long term data were limited. Conclusions Retropubic MUS, transobturator MUS, traditional sling, and open colposuspension are more effective than other procedures for stress urinary incontinence in the short to medium term. Data on long term effectiveness and adverse events are, however, limited, especially around the comparative adverse events profiles of MUS and non-MUS procedures. A better understanding of complications after surgery for stress urinary incontinence is imperative. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42016049339.

scholarly journals The effect of l-arginine supplementation on lipid profile: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 122 (9) ◽  
pp. 1021-1032
Author(s):  
Amir Hadi ◽  
Arman Arab ◽  
Sajjad Moradi ◽  
Ana Pantovic ◽  
Cain C. T. Clark ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lipid Profile ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Inconsistency Index ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Arginine Supplementation

AbstractA number of clinical trials have examined the effect of l-arginine on lipid profile in recent years; however, the results remain equivocal. Therefore, the present study aims to summarise and quantitatively examine the available evidence on the effectiveness l-arginine supplementation on lipid parameters using a systematic review and meta-analytic approach. Online databases including PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched up to April 2019 for randomised controlled trials that examined the effect of l-arginine supplementation on lipid profile in adults. Treatment effects were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and the corresponding standard error in concentrations of serum lipids. To estimate the overall effect of l-arginine supplementation, we used the random-effects model. In total, twelve studies were included in the systematic review. The meta-analysis revealed that l-arginine supplementation did not significantly change the concentrations of total cholesterol (WMD: –5·03 mg/dl; 95 % CI –10·78, 0·73; P = 0·08; inconsistency index (I2) = 39·0 %), LDL (WMD: –0·47 mg/dl; 95 % CI –3·61, 2·66; P = 0·76; I2 = 0·0 %), or HDL (WMD: 0·57 mg/dl; 95 % CI –1·28, 2·43; P = 0·54; I2 = 68·4 %). A significant reduction was observed only in serum TAG levels (WMD: –7·04 mg/dl; 95 % CI –11·42, –2·67; P < 0·001; I2 = 0·0 %). This meta-analysis concludes that l-arginine supplementation can significantly reduce blood TAG levels; however, there is insufficient evidence to support its hypocholesterolaemic effects. To draw straightforward conclusions regarding generalised recommendations for l-arginine supplementation for improving lipid profile, there is a need for more well-controlled trials targeting exclusively patients with dyslipidaemia.

scholarly journals Effect of water, sanitation and hygiene interventions alone and combined with nutrition on child growth in low and middle income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. e034812 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tolesa Bekele ◽  
Patrick Rawstorne ◽  
Bayzidur Rahman
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Child Growth ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Z Score ◽  
Growth Outcomes ◽  
Sanitation And Hygiene ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveThis study aimed to provide clarification on the benefits of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) alone separately and combined with nutrition in improving child growth outcomes.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Science Direct were searched in May 2018 and last updated in April 2019. We included studies that reported WASH interventions alone separately or combined with nutrition. Fixed and random-effects models were used to estimate pooled effect in mean difference (MD). Heterogeneity and publication bias statistics were performed.ResultsA total of 18 studies were included: 13 cluster randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 non-randomised controlled trials (non-RCTs). Non-RCTs showed effect of WASH interventions alone on height-for-age z-score (HAZ) (MD=0.14; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.21) but RCTs did not. WASH alone of non-RCTs and RCTs that were delivered over 18–60 months indicated an effect on HAZ (MD=0.04; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.08). RCTs showed an effect for children <2 years (MD=0.07; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.13). Non-RCTs of WASH alone and those that included at least two components, improved HAZ (MD=0.15; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.23) but RCTs did not. WASH alone of non-RCTs and RCTs separately or together showed no effect on weight-for-age z-score (WAZ) and weight-for-height z-score (WHZ). Combined WASH with nutrition showed an effect on HAZ (MD=0.13; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.17) and on WAZ (MD=0.09; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.13) and was borderline on WHZ.ConclusionsWASH interventions alone improved HAZ when delivered over 18–60 months and for children <2 years. Combined WASH with nutrition showed a strong effect on HAZ and WAZ and a borderline effect on WHZ. Integrated WASH with nutrition interventions may be effective inimproving child growth outcomes.

scholarly journals Risk of serious infections during rituximab, abatacept and anakinra treatments for rheumatoid arthritis: meta-analyses of randomised placebo-controlled trials

2008 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Salliot ◽  
M Dougados ◽  
L Gossec
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Biological Agents ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Serious Infection ◽  
Serious Infections ◽  
High Doses ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background:Tumour necrosis factor α blockers in rheumatoid arthritis are known to increase the risk of serious infections defined as life-threatening, requiring hospitalisation or intravenous antibiotics. Recently, new biological agents have become available. Their safety is an important issue.Purpose:To assess if biological agents, ie rituximab, abatacept and anakinra increase the risk of serious infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in published randomised controlled trials.Data source:A systematic review of the literature using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane library and abstracts databases (American College of Rheumatology and European League Against Rheumatism annual meetings) was performed up to October 2007. This search was completed with data from the Food and Drug Administration, the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products and manufacturers.Data extraction:Three fixed-effect meta-analyses were performed to compare serious infection rates between each biological agent and placebo. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were calculated, using the Mantel–Haenszel method with a continuity correction.Data synthesis:Twelve randomised controlled trials with data concerning serious infections were analysed (three for rituximab, five for abatacept and four for anakinra). They included 745 patients, 1960 patients, 2062 patients and 2112 patients treated by rituximab, abatacept, anakinra and placebo respectively. The overall pooled ORs did not reveal a statistically significant increased risk of serious infection for abatacept and rituximab; this risk was increased for high doses of anakinra (⩾100 mg daily) versus low dose and placebo (ORs = 9.63 (95% CI, 1.31 to 70.91) and 3.40 (95% CI, 1.11 to 10.46) respectively).Conclusions:These meta-analyses did not reveal a significant increase in the risk of serious infections during rituximab or abatacept treatments in patients with rheumatoid arthritis; however, high doses of anakinra may increase this risk, especially when patients have comorbidity factors. Large studies must be performed to confirm this safety profile in daily practice.

scholarly journals Effect of oat intake on glycaemic control and insulin sensitivity: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2014 ◽  
Vol 112 (3) ◽  
pp. 457-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Bao ◽  
Xiaxia Cai ◽  
Meihong Xu ◽  
Yong Li
Keyword(s):  
Insulin Sensitivity ◽  
Glycaemic Control ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Fasting Glucose ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Model Assessment ◽  
Fasting Insulin ◽  
Randomised Controlled

The present meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCT) aimed to investigate the effect of oat intake on glycaemic control and insulin sensitivity. A literature search was carried out in PubMed, ScienceDirect Online and The Cochrane Library (up to October 2013) for RCT that assessed the effect of oat intake on glucose control and insulin sensitivity. A total of fifteen articles with 673 subjects met the inclusion criteria. A random-effects model was used when the overall pooled studies exhibited significant heterogeneity. Otherwise, a fixed-effects model was used. Compared with controls, oat intake significantly reduced the concentrations of fasting insulin by − 6·29 (95 % CI − 12·32, − 0·27) pmol/l (P= 0·04) and the values of glucose AUC (GAUC; 0–120 min) by − 30·23 (95 % CI − 43·65, − 16·81) min × mmol/l (P< 0·0001). There was a slight decrease in fasting glucose concentrations, glycated Hb concentrations and homeostatic model assessment-insulin resistance values in subjects who consumed oats, but the difference was not significant. In conclusion, oat intake significantly lowers fasting insulin concentrations and GAUC values. To further investigate the effect of oat intake on fasting glucose concentrations, additional long-term and high-quality RCT with a parallel design are required.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document