Pectoralis Major Onlay vs Interpositional Reconstruction Fistulation After Salvage Total Laryngectomy: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective To evaluate the difference in pharygocutaneous fistula (PCF) development between pectoralis major flap onlay and interpositional reconstructions after salvage total laryngectomy (STL). Data Sources Medline, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Review Methods A systematic review was performed during January 2020. English articles were included that described minor and major PCF rates after STL reconstructed with pectoralis major onlay or interposition. PCFs were classified as major when conservative therapy was unsuccessful and/or revision surgery was needed. Articles describing total laryngopharyngectomies were excluded. Meta-analyses of the resulting data were performed. Results Twenty-four articles met final criteria amassing 1304 patients. Three articles compared onlay with interposition, and 18 compared onlay with primary closure. Pectoralis interposition demonstrated elevated odds ratio (OR) of PCF formation as compared with onlay (OR, 2.34; P < .001). Onlay reconstruction reduced overall (OR, 0.32; P < .001) and major (OR, 0.21; P < .001) PCF development as compared with primary pharyngeal closure alone. Data were insufficient to compare interposition against primary closure. Conclusions This research shows evidence that pectoralis onlay after STL diminishes the odds of total and major PCF development. Pectoralis interposition reconstruction showed elevated odds of PCF formation as compared with pectoralis onlay.

Download Full-text

Prevalence of and risk factors for Plasmodium spp. co-infection with hepatitis B virus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Malaria Journal ◽

10.1186/s12936-020-03428-w ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Kwuntida Uthaisar Kotepui ◽

Manas Kotepui

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Hepatitis B Virus ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Infection Group ◽

Pooled Prevalence ◽

B Virus ◽

The Difference ◽

Meta Analyses

Abstract Background Plasmodium spp. and hepatitis B virus (HBV) are among the most common infectious diseases in underdeveloped countries. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of Plasmodium spp. and HBV co-infection in people living in endemic areas of both diseases and to assess the risk factors related to this co-infection. Methods The PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched. Observational cross-sectional studies and retrospective studies assessing the prevalence of Plasmodium species and HBV co-infection were examined. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), a tool for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses, and heterogeneity among the included studies was assessed with Cochran's Q test and the I2 (inconsistency) statistic. The pooled prevalence of the co-infection and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated using the random-effects model, depending on the amount of heterogeneity there was among the included studies. The pooled odds ratio (OR) represented the difference in qualitative variables, whereas the pooled mean difference (MD) represented the difference in quantitative variables. Meta-analyses of the potential risk factors for Plasmodium spp. and HBV co-infection, including patient age and gender, were identified and represented as pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% CIs. Publication bias among the included studies was assessed by visual inspection of a funnel plot to search for asymmetry. Results Twenty-two studies were included in the present systematic review and meta-analysis. Overall, the pooled prevalence estimate of Plasmodium spp. and HBV co-infection was 6% (95% CI 4–7%, Cochran's Q statistic < 0.001, I2: 95.8%), with prevalences of 10% in Gambia (95% CI: 8–12%, weight: 4.95%), 8% in Italy (95% CI 5–12%, weight: 3.8%), 7% in Nigeria (95% CI 4–10%, weight: 53.5%), and 4% in Brazil (95% CI 2–5%, weight: 19.9%). The pooled prevalence estimate of Plasmodium spp. and HBV co-infection was higher in studies published before 2015 (7%, 95% CI 4–9%, Cochran's Q statistic < 0.001, I2: 96%) than in those published since 2015 (3%, 95% CI 1–5%, Cochran's Q statistic < 0.001, I2: 81.3%). No difference in age and risk of Plasmodium spp. and HBV co-infection group was found between the Plasmodium spp. and HBV co-infection and the Plasmodium monoinfection group (p: 0.48, OR: 1.33, 95% CI 0.60–2.96). No difference in gender and risk of Plasmodium spp. and HBV co-infection group was found between the Plasmodium spp. and HBV co-infection and HBV co-infection group and the Plasmodium monoinfection group (p: 0.09, OR: 2.79, 95% CI 0.86–9.10). No differences in mean aspartate aminotransferase (AST), mean alanine aminotransferase (ALT), or mean total bilirubin levels were found (p > 0.05) between the Plasmodium spp. and HBV co-infection group and the Plasmodium monoinfection group. Conclusions The present study revealed the prevalence of Plasmodium spp. and HBV co-infection, which will help in understanding co-infection and designing treatment strategies. Future studies assessing the interaction between Plasmodium spp. and HBV are recommended.

Download Full-text

Central venous pressure monitoring via peripherally or centrally inserted central catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The Journal of Vascular Access ◽

10.5301/jva.5000749 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 18 (4) ◽

pp. 273-278 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Filippo Sanfilippo ◽

Alberto Noto ◽

Gennaro Martucci ◽

Marco Farbo ◽

Gaetano Burgio ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Central Venous Pressure ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Venous Pressure ◽

Central Venous ◽

Clinical Criteria ◽

Number Of Patients ◽

The Difference ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Central Catheters

Introduction The central venous pressure (CVP) is the most commonly used static marker of preload for guiding fluid therapy in critically ill patients, though its usefulness remains controversial. Centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs) are the gold-standard devices for CVP monitoring but peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) may represent a valid alternative. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis with the aim to investigate whether the difference between PICC- and CICC-measured CVP is not significant. Methods We searched for clinical studies published in PubMed and EMBASE databases from inception until December 21st 2016. We included studies providing data on paired and simultaneous CVP measurement from PICCs and CICCs. We conducted two analyses on the values of CVP, the first one according to the total number of CVP assessments, the second one considering the number of patients recruited. Results Four studies matched the inclusion criteria, but only three of them provided data for the meta-analyses. Both analyses showed non-significant differences between PICC-measured and CICC-measured CVP: 1489 paired simultaneous CVP assessments (MD 0.16, 95%CI −0.14, 0.45, p = 0.30) on a total of 57 patients (MD 0.22, 95%CI −1.46, 1.91, p = 0.80). Both analyses showed no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). Conclusions Available evidence supports that CVP monitoring with PICCs is accurate and reproduces similar values to those obtained from CICCs. The possibility to monitor CVP should not be used among clinical criteria for preferring a CICC over a PICC line.

Download Full-text

Comparison of 3-Factor Versus 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate For Emergent Warfarin Reversal: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis

10.21203/rs.3.rs-547756/v2 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

David Margraf ◽

Sarah J Brown ◽

Heather L Blue ◽

Tamara L Bezdicek ◽

Julian Wolfson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Hospital Stay ◽

Prothrombin Complex Concentrate ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Primary Objective ◽

Newcastle Ottawa Scale ◽

The Difference ◽

Warfarin Reversal ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Analysis Models

Abstract Background: Patients requiring emergent warfarin reversal (EWR) have been prescribed three-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC3) and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC4) to reverse the anticoagulant effects of warfarin. There is no existing systematic review and meta-analysis of studies directly comparing PCC3 and PCC4. Methods: The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effectiveness of achieving study defined target INR goal after PCC3 or PCC4 administration. Secondary objectives were to determine the difference in safety endpoints, thromboembolic events (TE), and survival during the patients’ hospital stay. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to estimate the odds ratios (OR), and heterogeneity associated with the outcomes. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess study quality, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Results: Ten full-text manuscripts and 5 abstracts provided data for the primary and secondary outcomes. Patients requiring emergent warfarin reversal had more than three times the odds of reversal to goal INR when they were given PCC4 compared to PCC3 (OR = 3.61, 95% CI: 1.97-6.60, p < 0.001). There was no meaningful clinical association or statistically significant result between PCC4 and PCC3 groups in TE (OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 0.83-2.91, p = 0.17), or survival during hospital stay (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 0.81-2.23, p = 0.25). Conclusion: PCC4 is more effective than PCC3 in meeting specific predefined INR goals, and has similar safety profiles in patients requiring emergent reversal of the anticoagulant effects of warfarin.

Download Full-text

Comparison of 3-Factor Versus 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Emergent Warfarin Reversal: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

10.21203/rs.3.rs-547756/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

David Margraf ◽

Sarah J Brown ◽

Heather L Blue ◽

Tamara L Bezdicek ◽

Julian Wolfson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Hospital Stay ◽

Prothrombin Complex Concentrate ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Primary Objective ◽

Newcastle Ottawa Scale ◽

The Difference ◽

Warfarin Reversal ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Analysis Models

Download Full-text

Dental caries and preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018556 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (3) ◽

pp. e018556 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Madhu Wagle ◽

Francesco D’Antonio ◽

Eirik Reierth ◽

Purusotam Basnet ◽

Tordis A Trovik ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Preterm Birth ◽

Dental Caries ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Random Effect ◽

Primary Objective ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

The Difference ◽

Mean Differences ◽

Meta Analyses

ObjectivesThe primary objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the association between dental caries and preterm birth (PTB). The secondary objective was ascertaining the difference between women with dental caries who experienced PTB and those who did not with regard to decayed, missing and filled teeth (DMFT), and decayed, missing and filled surfaces (DMFS) indices.MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane databases were searched initially in November 2015 and repeated in December 2016. We included observational cohort and case–control studies. Only studies reporting the risk of PTB in women affected compared with those not affected by dental caries in pregnancy were included. Random-effect meta-analyses were used to compute the summary OR of PTB among women with caries versus women without caries, and the mean difference in either DMFT or DMFS indices between women experiencing PTB and those without PTB.ResultsNine observational studies (4826 pregnancies) were included. Women affected by dental caries during pregnancy did not show a significantly higher risk of PTB (OR: 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.49, P=0.25, I2=35%). Also, the women with PTB did not show significantly higher DMFT or DMFS indices (summary mean differences: 1.56, P=0.10; I2=92% and −0.15, P=0.9, I2=89%, respectively).ConclusionDental caries does not appear to be a substantial risk factor for PTB.Trial registration numberNCT01675180; Pre-results.

Download Full-text

Sex Differences in the Association Between Obesity and Hypertension: A Systematic Review

Sciential - McMaster Undergraduate Science Journal ◽

10.15173/sciential.vi6.2720 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 2-3

Author(s):

Ava Oliaei

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Sex Differences ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Small Sample ◽

Obese Women ◽

Life Years ◽

Health Related ◽

The Difference ◽

Small Sample Sizes ◽

Meta Analyses

Introduction: Obesity is associated with multiple health-related complications, which together can decrease quality of life, disability-adjusted life years and life expectancy.1 Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have demonstrated that sex can influence the association between obesity and health complications, such as rheumatoid arthritis and many types of cancer.2-4 However, no systematic review or meta-analysis has been conducted to review the effect of sex on the association between obesity and hypertension, thus far. Knowing whether or not sex influences this relationship can help tailor the prevention, prediction, and care of this condition towards each sex. Objectives: To evaluate current studies on the association between sex, obesity, and hypertension, so as to obtain an overall estimate of the effect of sex on the prevalence of hypertension in obese individuals. Methods: A systematic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed was conducted. Search terms, such as “obesity,” “sex differences,” and “hypertension,” were used to filter results. After reviewing 406 articles, eight articles were included. Results: Four articles showed that obese women were at a greater risk of developing hypertension than obese men.5-8 Conversely, the results of two studies found that obese men are at a greater risk of developing hypertension.9,10 The remaining two studies showed that the difference between the sexes was insignificant.11,12 Discussion/Limitations: Stronger evidence shows that obese women are at a greater risk of developing hypertension than obese men. The two studies that had contradictory conclusions had small sample sizes relative to the other studies. Additionally, the two studies that concluded that both sexes are at a similar risk highlighted that most other studies have determined that obese women are at a greater risk and that their limitations may have caused this discrepancy. Limitations of this review include the limited ethnicity of participants and the use of BMI to classify obesity, which can sometimes lead to misclassification due to varying muscle to fat ratios. These factors limit the generalizability of the results. Conclusion: Obese women are seemingly at a greater risk of developing hypertension than obese men. However, this conclusion remains statistically inconclusive. Therefore, it would be beneficial to complete a meta-analysis in order to conclusively determine which sex is statistically more at risk of developing hypertension, when obese.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Lopinavir/Ritonavir for Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

10.1101/2020.06.16.20133298 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Mansour Tobaiqy ◽

Saad Alhumaid ◽

Abbas Al Mutair

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Mean Difference ◽

Lung Damage ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Radiological Progression ◽

Global Pandemic ◽

N 93 ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

English Articles

AbstractBackgroundSince the emergence of COVID-19, the world has been desperate to find effective therapeutics and vaccinations to treat hundreds of thousands of affected patients and to suppress the spread of this global pandemic. Lopinavir-ritonavir (LPV/RTV) is an HIV antiviral combination that has been considered for treatment of this disease.Aim of the studyThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir in COVID-19 patients in the extant published research. A systematic review protocol was developed based on PRISMA-P and the PRISMA statement. Published English and non-English articles written since December 1, 2019 were selected for review from 8 electronic databases.Readily accessible full articles (cohort studies and clinical trials) which specifically mentioned lopinavir/ritonavir and patients with lab-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 or COVOID-19 of any age were included. Three researchers separately evaluated the bias in the reported articles. We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis with the objective of evaluation of the safety and efficacy of LPV/RTV alone or in combination with other drugs with regard to time to becoming PCR negative, time to body temperature normalization and cough relief, radiological progression, and safety. Review Manager (RevMan) was used to conduct all statistical analyses and generate the forest plots. Meta-analyses were performed using the Mantel Hazel method or the inverse variance method for dichotomous data and continuous data respectively.ResultsNon-duplicate articles (n=76) were evaluated for possible inclusion. A consensus was reached to select 29 articles for full-text screening, only 11 articles comprised 1,192 patients were included in this study, and six of which were included for meta-analysis.In terms of virological cure (PCR negative), three studies reported less time in days to achieve a virological cure for LPV/RTV arm relative to no antiviral therapy (conventional) (mean difference = −0.81 day; 95% CI, −4.44 to 2.81; P = 0.007, I2 = 80%). However, the overall effect was not significant (P = 0.66). When comparing LPV/RTV arm to umifenovir arm, a favorable affect was observed for umifenovir arm, but not statically significant (mean difference = 0.95 day; 95% CI, −1.11 to 3.01; P = 0.09, I2 = 58%).In terms of time to body normalization and cough relief (clinical cure), two studies reported on time to temperature normalization with no significant effect of LPV/RTV (n = 93) versus umifenovir (n = 71) arm), (OR = 0.87 day; 95% CI, 0.42 to 1.78; (P = 0.70), I2 = 0%), or alleviation of cough duration (p = 0.69).In terms of CT evidence of radiological progression of pneumonia/lung damage, treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir resulted in no significant decrease in the radiological progression (OR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.42 to 1.54; P = 0.59, I2 = 81%), In terms of safety, a greater number of adverse events were reported for lopinavir/ritonavir (n=45) relative to the umifenovir arm (n=14) and conventional treatments (n=10), P = 0.004, 0,0007, respectivelyConclusionsThe small number of studies included in this systematic review and meta-analysis study did not reveal any statistically significant advantage in efficacy of lopinavir-ritonavir in COVID-19 patients, over conventional or other antiviral treatments. This result might not reflect the actual evidence.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of conservative therapy in older people with nonspecific low back pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis and GRADE recommendations

Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics ◽

10.1016/j.archger.2020.104177 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 90 ◽

pp. 104177 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Lorena K.B. Amaral ◽

Mateus B. Souza ◽

Mariana G.M. Campos ◽

Vanessa A. Mendonça ◽

Alessandra Bastone ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Low Back Pain ◽

Back Pain ◽

Older People ◽

Conservative Therapy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Low Back

Download Full-text

Impact of Chemotherapy in the Adjuvant Setting of Early Stage Uterine Leiomyosarcoma: A Systematic Review and Updated Meta-Analysis

Cancers ◽

10.3390/cancers12071899 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 12 (7) ◽

pp. 1899

Author(s):

Alessandro Rizzo ◽

Margherita Nannini ◽

Annalisa Astolfi ◽

Valentina Indio ◽

Pierandrea De Iaco ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Recurrence Rate ◽

Locoregional Recurrence ◽

Early Stage ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Distant Recurrence ◽

Uterine Leiomyosarcoma ◽

Primary Surgery ◽

Locoregional Recurrence Rate ◽

Meta Analyses

Background: Although the use of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) appears to be increasing over the past few years, several clinical trials and previous meta-analyses failed to determine whether AC could improve clinical outcomes in uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare AC (with or without radiotherapy) versus observation (obs) after primary surgery in early stage uLMS. Materials and Methods: Randomized controlled (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRSs) were retrieved. Outcomes of interest were as follows: distant recurrence rate, locoregional recurrence rate and overall recurrence rate. Results about distant recurrence rate, locoregional recurrence rate and overall recurrence rate were compared by calculating odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs); ORs were combined with Mantel–Haenszel method. Results: Nine studies were included in the analysis, involving 545 patients (AC: 252, obs: 293). Compared with obs, AC did not reduce locoregional and distant recurrence rate, with a pooled OR of 1.36 and 0.63, respectively. Similarly, administration of AC did not decrease overall recurrence rate in comparison to obs. Conclusion: According to our results, AC (with or without radiotherapy) did not decrease recurrence rate in early stage uLMS; thus, the role of AC in this setting remains unclear.

Download Full-text

Systematic Review: Allogenic Use of Stromal Vascular Fraction (SVF) and Decellularized Extracellular Matrices (ECM) as Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMP) in Tissue Regeneration

International Journal of Molecular Sciences ◽

10.3390/ijms21144982 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 21 (14) ◽

pp. 4982 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Pietro Gentile ◽

Aris Sterodimas ◽

Jacopo Pizzicannella ◽

Laura Dionisi ◽

Domenico De Fazio ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Stromal Vascular Fraction ◽

Lateral Epicondylitis ◽

Medicinal Products ◽

Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products ◽

Advanced Therapy ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Clinical Experiments

Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) containing adipose stem cells (ASCs) has been used for many years in regenerative plastic surgery for autologous applications, without any focus on their potential allogenic role. Allogenic SVF transplants could be based on the possibility to use decellularized extracellular matrix (ECM) as a scaffold from a donor then re-cellularized by ASCs of the recipient, in order to develop the advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMP) in fully personalized clinical approaches. A systematic review of this field has been realized in accordance with the Preferred Reporting for Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. Multistep research of the PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Pre-MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Clinicaltrials.gov, Scopus database, and Cochrane databases has been conducted to identify articles and investigations on human allogenic ASCs transplant for clinical use. Of the 341 articles identified, 313 were initially assessed for eligibility on the basis of the abstract. Of these, only 29 met all the predetermined criteria for inclusion according to the PICOS (patients, intervention, comparator, outcomes, and study design) approach, and 19 have been included in quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). Ninety-one percent of the studies previously screened (284 papers) were focused on the in vitro results and pre-clinical experiments. The allogenic use regarded the treatment of perianal fistulas, diabetic foot ulcers, knee osteoarthritis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, refractory rheumatoid arthritis, pediatrics disease, fecal incontinence, ischemic heart disease, autoimmune encephalomyelitis, lateral epicondylitis, and soft tissue defects. The information analyzed suggested the safety and efficacy of allogenic ASCs and ECM transplants without major side effects.

Download Full-text