Helicobacter pyloriEradication in Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic Purpura: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Objective.Several recent reviews of published studies have shown that the eradication ofH. pyloriinfection in patients with ITP improved thrombocytopenia in about half of the cases. However, most included studies were observational case series. We performed the first meta-analysis of randomized trials to gain a better insight into the effect ofH. pylorieradication in ITP patients.Methods.A systematic computerized search of the electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library (up to December 2017) was conducted.Results.From six studies, a total of 241 patients (125 in eradication group and 116 in control group) were included in the meta-analysis. Patients in the eradication group showed significantly higher overall platelet response rate than those in the control group (odds ratio = 1.93, 95% confidence interval: 1.01–3.71,P=0.05). In the subgroup analysis, however, children in the eradication group failed to show statistically better response rate than those in the noneradication group (odds ratio = 1.80, 95% confidence interval: 0.88–3.65,P=0.11).Conclusions.This meta-analysis indicates thatH. pylorieradication has a significant therapeutic effect in patients with ITP. Considering the intrinsic limits in the design and sample size of the included studies, however, large randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate the therapeutic impact ofH. pylorieradication in adults as well as children with ITP.

Download Full-text

The effectiveness of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen in reduce the risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis? A meta-analysis

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-020-71813-1 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Min Cheol Chang ◽

Sang Gyu Kwak ◽

Jin-Sung Park ◽

Donghwi Park

Keyword(s):

Confidence Interval ◽

Odds Ratio ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Convincing Evidence ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Inclusion Criteria ◽

Control Groups ◽

Significant Difference ◽

And Control

Abstract To test the hypothesis that aspirin, non-aspirin nonsteroidal anti-infammatory drugs (NA-NSAIDs), or acetaminophen can reduce the risk of ALS, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of related previous studies. A comprehensive search was conducted on the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and SCOPUS databases. It included studies published up to 29 February 2020 that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Aspirin, acetaminophen and NA-NSAIDs use information, between the ALS and control groups, was collected for the meta-analysis. Rates of aspirin, NA-NSAID, and acetaminophen use in ALS group, compared with control group were investigated. In the results, only three studies that relate the risk of ALS to aspirin, NA-NSAIDs and acetaminophen use satisfied the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. Regarding aspirin, the studies did not show any statistically significant difference in aspirin use between the ALS and control groups (Odds ratio, 1.04 [95% confidence interval, 0.90–1.21]). NA-NSAIDs and acetaminophen use, however, did show up statistically significant differences in between the ALS and control groups. (Odds ratio, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.73–0.91]) and (Odds ratio, 0.80 [95% confidence interval, 0.69–0.93]). However, our study has some limitations. Firstly, we only included a small number of studies. Secondly, the included studies did not control for past medical history, which may have confounded their results, and in turn, could have caused bias in our study. Thirdly, in this meta-analysis, the ALS patients were not subdivided into sporadic or familial type. Lastly, the studies also did not consider the types of NSAIDs and dosages used of each drug. For more convincing evidence regarding the effectiveness of aspirin, NA-NSAIDs and acetaminophen to reduce the risk of ALS occurrence, more qualified prospective studies are required. In conclusion, the use of NA-NSAIDs and acetaminophen is associated with a decreased risk for the development of ALS. In contrast, aspirin did not have any effect on the reduction of the risk of ALS occurrence.

Download Full-text

Impact of interstitial lung disease on mortality in ANCA-associated vasculitis: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Chronic Respiratory Disease ◽

10.1177/1479973121994562 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 ◽

pp. 147997312199456

Author(s):

Peining Zhou ◽

Jing Ma ◽

Guangfa Wang

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Interstitial Lung Disease ◽

Confidence Interval ◽

Lung Disease ◽

Mortality Risk ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Anca Associated Vasculitis ◽

Retrospective Cohort Studies

Several retrospectivee described the association of interstitial lung disease (ILD) and ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV). However, the relationship between the ILD and mortality in AAV patients have not been established so far. This study aims to estimate the relevance of AAV-associated-ILD (AAV-ILD) and mortality risk by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.A comprehensive systematic review was conducted in accordance with the guidelines of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses). PubMed, Embase.com and the Cochrane Library (Wiley) were searched for original observational studies. Summary estimates were derived with a random-effects model and reported as risk ratio (RR), tested for publication bias and heterogeneity. Ten retrospective cohort studies were included, comprising 526 AAV-ILD patients enrolled from 1974 to 2018. Meta-analysis yielded a pooled RR of 2.90 (95% confidence interval 1.77–4.74) for death among those with AAV-ILD compared to control group. UIP pattern was associated with an even poorer prognosis in comparison to non-UIP pattern (RR 4.36, 95% confidence interval 1.14–16.78). Sensitivity analysis suggested that the meta-RR result was not skewed by a single dominant study. ILD might be associated with a higher mortality risk in AAV patients.

Download Full-text

Intravenous dexmedetomidine during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

Journal of International Medical Research ◽

10.1177/0300060517708945 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 45 (3) ◽

pp. 924-932 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Zeqing Bao ◽

Chengmao Zhou ◽

Xianxue Wang ◽

Yu Zhu

Keyword(s):

Caesarean Section ◽

Spinal Anaesthesia ◽

Randomized Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Relevant Literature ◽

Nausea And Vomiting ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

The Cochrane Library

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of spinal anaesthesia using dexmedetomidine for caesarean section. Methods PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and CNKI were searched for relevant literature. Results The incidence of nausea and vomiting in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that in the control group (OR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.12–0.35, P < 0.00001). No difference was found in the incidence of pruritus between the two groups (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.36–4.09, P = 0.76).The dexmedetomidine group had a higher incidence of bradycardia than did the control group (OR = 2.20, 95% CI: 1.02–4.77, P = 0.05). The incidence of shivering in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that in the control group (OR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.13–0.32, P < 0.00001). The incidence of hypotension was not different between the two groups (OR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.49–1.56, P = 0.65). Conclusion Dexmedetomidine can decrease the incidence of nausea, vomiting, bradycardia, and shivering with spinal anaesthesia during caesarean section.

Download Full-text

Do low-dose corticosteroids improve survival or shock reversal from septic shock in adults? Meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

Journal of International Medical Research ◽

10.1177/0300060518774985 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 46 (7) ◽

pp. 2513-2524 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Rui Xu ◽

Qian Wang ◽

Yan Huang ◽

Ling Wu ◽

Qi Liu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Septic Shock ◽

Relative Risk ◽

Confidence Interval ◽

Sequential Analysis ◽

Low Dose ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Trial Sequential Analysis ◽

Control Group ◽

Shock Reversal

Objective This meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to determine whether low-dose corticosteroids (LDCs) can improve survival or shock reversal from septic shock in adults. Methods A literature search was performed using several databases (Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Chinese Biological Medical Database) until 23 October 2017. The systematic review was registered in PROSPERO. Results Nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 1182) were included. LDC intervention improved 7-day shock reversal compared with the control group (relative risk, 1.36; TSA-adjusted 95% confidence interval, 1.20–1.54). LDCs had no statistically significant effects on gastrointestinal bleeding or superinfection. LDCs did not reduce 28-day mortality from septic shock (relative risk, 0.96; TSA-adjusted 95% confidence interval, 0.74–1.24). The TSA indicated that RCTs of about 3000 patients would be needed to draw definitive conclusions; similar results were obtained in a subgroup analysis of nonresponders. Conclusions LDCs improve 7-day shock reversal. However, whether LDCs improve 28-day survival from septic shock in adults remains unclear. The results of well-designed larger RCTs are needed.

Download Full-text

The Safety and Efficacy of the Interleukin-1 Antagonist Anakinra in Severe Cases of COVID-19- A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

10.21203/rs.3.rs-111495/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Manoj Kumar Reddy Somagutta ◽

Maria Kezia Lourdes Pormento ◽

Pousette Hamid ◽

Alaa Hamdan ◽

Muhammad Adnan Khan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

Interleukin 1 ◽

Intervention Group ◽

Case Series ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Safety And Efficacy ◽

Liver Transaminases ◽

The Difference ◽

Enzyme Elevation

Abstract This study aims to assess anakinra's safety and efficacy for treating severe coronavirus disease in 2019 (COVID-19). PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, medRxiv, and bioRxiv were searched. Three retrospective studies and five case series involving 3,274 adult patients with severe COVID-19 were included, 621 treated with anakinra (whether administered alone or in combination with other drugs) and 1,565 in the control group arm. All-cause mortality of severe COVID-19 patients among the anakinra group was 20% (16/81), which was lower than that in the control group (65%; 39/60). The difference was statistically significant [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06–0.29, I2= 0%]. The mechanical ventilation requirement with OR 0.57 (0.11-2.84, I2=87%) was not significantly better compared to the control group. For the safety of anakinra, we evaluated thromboembolism risk and liver enzyme elevation. Thromboembolism risk with OR: 1.48 (0.55- 3.99, I2=0%) and elevation in liver transaminases with OR 0.67 (0.11-3.93, I2=66%) were not statistically significant over the control group. However, these non-significant differences between the anakinra and control groups may have been the result of baseline characteristics of the intervention group, and further studies are essential in evaluating anakinra's safety profile.

Download Full-text

Repurposing of drugs for Covid-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

10.1101/2020.06.07.20124677 ◽

2020 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Pinky Kotecha ◽

Alexander Light ◽

Enrico Checcucci ◽

Daniele Amparore ◽

Cristian Fiori ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Clinical Improvement ◽

Case Reports ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Series ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Significant Difference

AbstractObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the data currently available regarding the repurposing of different drugs for Covid-19 treatment. Participants with suspected or diagnosed Covid-19 will be included. The interventions being considered are drugs being repurposed, and comparators will include standard of care treatment or placebo.MethodsWe searched Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, clinical trial registration site in the UK(NIHR), Europe (clinicaltrialsregister.eu), US (ClinicalTrials.gov) and internationally (isrctn.com), and reviewed the reference lists of articles for eligible articles published up to April 22, 2020. All studies in English that evaluated the efficacy of the listed drugs were included. Cochrane RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tool were used to assess study quality. This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines. The protocol is available at PROSPERO (CRD42020180915).ResultsFrom 708 identified studies or clinical trials, 16 studies and 16 case reports met our eligibility criteria. Of these, 6 were randomized controlled trials (763 patients), 7 cohort studies (321 patients) and 3 case series (191 patients). Chloroquine (CQ) had a 100% discharge rate compared to 50% with lopinavir-ritonavir at day 14, however a trial has recommended against a high dosage due to cardiotoxic events. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has shown no significant improvement in negative seroconversion rate which is also seen in our meta-analysis (p=0.68). Adverse events with HCQ have a significant difference compared to the control group (p=0.001). Lopinavir-ritonavir has shown no improvement in time to clinical improvement which is seen in our meta-analyses (p=0.1). Remdesivir has shown no significant improvement in time to clinical improvement but this trial had insufficient power.DiscussionDue to the paucity in evidence, it is difficult to establish the efficacy of these drugs in the treatment of Covid-19 as currently there is no significant clinical effectiveness of the repurposed drugs. Further large clinical trials are required to achieve more reliable findings. A risk-benefit analysis is required on an individual basis to weigh out the potential improvement in clinical outcome and viral load reduction compared to the risks of the adverse events. (1-16)

Download Full-text

Steroid Treatment of Laryngotracheitis: A Meta-Analysis of the Evidence From Randomized Trials

PEDIATRICS ◽

10.1542/peds.83.5.683 ◽

1989 ◽

Vol 83 (5) ◽

pp. 683-693 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Steven W. Kairys ◽

Elaine Marsh Olmstead ◽

Gerald T. O'Connor

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Confidence Interval ◽

Randomized Clinical Trial ◽

Clinical Improvement ◽

Endotracheal Intubation ◽

Odds Ratio ◽

Randomized Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Steroid Treatment ◽

Reliable Estimate

The use of adrenocorticoids to reduce the morbidity associated with laryngotracheitis (croup) remains controversial despite ten published reports of randomized trials involving 1,286 patients. To determine whether, viewed in aggregate, these studies demonstrate a significant benefit of steroid treatment for this disorder, a meta-analysis of the nine methodologically satisfactory trials was performed. Clinical improvement 12 and 24 hours posttreatment and incidence of endotracheal intubation were evaluated. For each end point, an estimate of the overall effect was obtained by calculating a typical odds ratio and 95% confidence interval. This analysis indicates that the use of steroids in children hospitalized with croup is associated with a significantly increased proportion of patients showing clinical improvement 12 hours (odds ratio = 2.25, 95% confidence interval = 1.66, 3.06) and 24 hours (odds ratio = 3.19, 95% confidence interval = 1.70, 5.99) posttreatment and a significantly reduced incidence of endotracheal intubation (odds ratio = 0.21, 95% confidence interval = 0.05, 0.84). Higher initial doses of steroid (≥125 mg of cortisone or ≥100 mg of hydrocortisone) were associated with a larger proportion of patients improved 12 hours posttreatment than was seen with lower doses. These results support the use of steroids in the treatment of hospitalized children with croup and, in the absence of a randomized clinical trial of sufficient size, provide the most reliable estimate of the impact of steroid therapy on the morbidity associated with croup. In addition, the results of this meta-analysis may be used to estimate the number of subjects who would be required to conduct a randomized clinical trial of steroids for the treatment of croup.

Download Full-text

Helicobacter pylori Eradication Therapy for Functional Dyspepsia: A Meta-Analysis by Region and H. pylori Prevalence

Journal of Clinical Medicine ◽

10.3390/jcm8091324 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (9) ◽

pp. 1324 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Seung Joo Kang ◽

Boram Park ◽

Cheol Min Shin

Keyword(s):

Helicobacter Pylori ◽

Functional Dyspepsia ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Eradication Therapy ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Number Needed To Treat ◽

Helicobacter Pylori Eradication ◽

Dyspeptic Symptoms ◽

H Pylori

Background: Previous studies on the effect of Helicobacter pylori eradication on functional dyspepsia (FD) are conflicting. We performed a comprehensive meta-analysis on this issue according to region and prevalence of H. pylori. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of eradication of H. pylori on functional dyspepsia up to December 2018 were searched through PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Subgroup analyses by the outcome measure, region, and prevalence of H. pylori were performed. All data were analyzed with Review Manager 5.3. Results: Eighteen RCTs were included in our meta-analysis. Overall, the H. pylori eradication group showed significant improvement of symptoms compared with the control group (risk ratio (RR) = 1.18; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.07–1.30, p < 0.01). There was moderate heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 34%) and the number needed to treat (NNT) was 15.0. Helicobacter pylori eradication improved dyspeptic symptoms both in low (<50%) and high (≥50%) H. pylori prevalence regions (RR = 1.21 and 1.17; 95% CI: 1.02–1.44 and 1.06–1.29, I2 = 49% and 5%, respectively.) In the analysis of studies from Asia, however, the effect of eradication on improvement of dyspepsia was not significant (RR = 1.14; 95% CI: 0.99–1.33, p = 0.08, I2 = 37%). Conclusion: Overall, H. pylori eradication provides significant improvement of symptoms in functional dyspepsia patients regardless of H. pylori prevalence. However, in the analysis of studies from Asia, the eradication did not significantly improve dyspeptic symptoms. In this region, eradication for dyspepsia can be individualized.

Download Full-text

The Influence of Oral Dydrogesterone and Vaginal Progesterone on Threatened Abortion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BioMed Research International ◽

10.1155/2017/3616875 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 2017 ◽

pp. 1-10 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Hee Joong Lee ◽

Tae Chul Park ◽

Jae Hoon Kim ◽

Errol Norwitz ◽

Banghyun Lee

Keyword(s):

Pregnant Women ◽

Odds Ratio ◽

Selection Criteria ◽

Literature Search ◽

Randomized Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Control Group ◽

Systematic Literature Search ◽

Vaginal Progesterone ◽

Threatened Abortion

Objective. To conduct systematic analyses to evaluate the efficacy of progesterone therapy for the prevention of miscarriages in pregnant women experiencing threatened abortion. Methods. In November 2016, we performed a systematic literature search and identified 51 articles in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. We identified nine randomized trials that included 913 pregnant women (including 322 treated with oral dydrogesterone, 213 treated with vaginal progesterone, and 378 control subjects) who met the selection criteria. Results. The incidence of miscarriage was significantly lower in the total progesterone group than in the control group (13.0% versus 21.7%; odds ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.36 to 0.78; P=0.001; I2, 0%). Moreover, the incidence of miscarriage was significantly lower in the oral dydrogesterone group than in the control group (11.7% versus 22.6%; odds ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.71; P=0.001; I2, 0%) and was lower in the vaginal progesterone group than in the control group, although this difference was nonsignificant (15.4% versus 20.3%; odds ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.34; P=0.30; I2, 0%). However, the incidence of miscarriage was not different between the oral dydrogesterone and vaginal progesterone groups. Conclusion. Progesterone therapy, especially oral dydrogesterone, can effectively prevent miscarriage in pregnant women experiencing threatened abortion.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of Transparent vs. Pressure Dressing in Prevention of Post-Cardiac Catheterization Pain, Discomfort and Hematoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of RCTs

Journal of Caring Sciences ◽

10.34172/jcs.2021.019 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

pp. 103-110

Author(s):

Suresh K Sharma ◽

Kalpana Thakur ◽

Shiv K Mudgal ◽

Barun Kumar

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Confidence Interval ◽

Cardiac Catheterization ◽

Odds Ratio ◽

English Language ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Pressure Dressing

ABSTRACT Introduction: There is lack consensus on superiority of transparent vs. pressure dressing for prevention of post-cardiac catheterization pain, discomfort and hematoma. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis of available RCTs on this subject. Methods: We performed a systematic search of RCTs published between in 2000-2019 in English language using databases including PubMed Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ERMED Journals, Clinical trials database, DELNET, Google Scholar and Discovery Search. Studies conducted on adult patients with femoral dressing after cardiac catheterization measuring pain, discomfort, hematoma as intended outcomes have been included. Data extraction, critical appraisal, assessment of risk bias was done and decisions on quality were made on mutual consensus. Mantel-Haenszel (MH) and odds ratio for dichotomous variables was calculated by Review Manager 5.3 software. Results: Out of all identified studies, only 5 studies comprising 664 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and met the quality assessment. Incidence of discomfort (25, 333) were significantly less in transparent dressing group as compared to pressure dressing group (149, 331); odds ratio 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.15; I2 = 0%, P= 0.00. Four studies reported significantly lower number of pain cases in transparent dressing (17, 203) as compared to pressure dressing (57, 201); odds ratio 0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03-0.59; I2 = 47%, P= 0.01). However, incidence of hematoma did not reveal any significant difference between two groups. Conclusion: Transparent dressing is a better option in patients with femoral/groin dressing after cardiac catheterization as it is more effective in prevention of pain and discomfort.

Download Full-text