Accuracy of chest radiography compared to ultrasound for positioning the umbilical venous catheter in neonates: A meta-analysis and systematic review

2021 ◽  
pp. 112972982110467
Author(s):  
Juan Cao ◽  
Yuzheng Zhang ◽  
Yanling Yin ◽  
Yuxiu Liu

This study was aimed to investigate the accuracy of anteroposterior chest radiography for tip position verification for the umbilical venous catheters in neonates compared to ultrasound. A search in the PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and EBSCO was conducted to evaluate all the related articles on umbilical venous catheter (UVC), ultrasound AND neonates updated to August, 2020. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed independently by two investigators. Random effects model was used to estimate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). The summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curve was constructed, and the area under the SROC curve (AUC) was calculated. Fourteen related studies were finally included for meta-analysis. The overall diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of X-ray on tip verification of UVC were 0.90 (95% CI 0.71–0.97) and 0.82 (95% CI 0.53–0.95), respectively. The pooled DOR was 3.69 (95% CI 1.64–5.71). The AUC was 0.93 (95% CI 0.90–0.95). The meta-regression analysis suggested that study sample size, study design, different US confirming method, and different gold standard in original design might be potential sources of heterogeneity. Our conclusion is that the commonly used anteroposterior X-ray is not reliable in identifying the exact anatomical location of UVC tip in neonates. Studies suggested ultrasound or echocardiography with saline contrast injection could be the gold standard for verification of catheter location and should be considered whenever possible, especially in premature patients. More studies are needed to expand the use of ultrasound or echocardiography in tip position confirming of UVCs.

2018 ◽  
Vol 104 (2) ◽  
pp. F165-F169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Ling Lean ◽  
Jennifer A Dawson ◽  
Peter G Davis ◽  
Christiane Theda ◽  
Marta Thio

IntroductionUmbilical venous catheter (UVC) placement is a common neonatal procedure. It is important to position the UVC tip accurately at the first attempt to prevent complications and minimise handling. Catheters positioned too low need to be removed, but catheters positioned too high may be withdrawn in a sterile fashion to a safe position. We aimed to determine the precision and accuracy of five published formulae developed to guide UVC placement.MethodsThis was a prospective observational study. Following UVC insertion, anteroposterior and lateral X-rays were performed to identify catheter tip position. Parameters required to apply the five formulae were recorded. Insertion lengths were then calculated and compared with the gold standard (UVC tip at the level of the diaphragm on the lateral X-ray). They were also used to classify predicted UVC tip position as either correct (UVC tip at or up to 1 cm above the diaphragm), too high or too low.ResultsOf 118 eligible infants, 70 had the UVC tip in a position where measurements could be used. Their median (IQR) gestational age and weight were 28.5 (26–36) weeks and 1035 (745–2788) g, respectively. The predicted success rate for each formula ranged from 44.9% to 55.7%. A formula based on birth weight had the highest rate of either correct or high position (95.8%).ConclusionsInserting a UVC into a safe position on first attempt is difficult and low tip placement is common. Around half of UVCs need to be manipulated to achieve the desired position.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e040997
Author(s):  
Varo Kirthi ◽  
Paul Nderitu ◽  
Uazman Alam ◽  
Jennifer Evans ◽  
Sarah Nevitt ◽  
...  

IntroductionThere is growing evidence of a higher than expected prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes. This paper presents the protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of retinopathy in prediabetes. The aim of the review is to estimate the prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes and to summarise the current data.Methods and analysisThis protocol is developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. A comprehensive electronic bibliographic search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies will report prevalence data for retinopathy on fundus photography in adults with prediabetes. No time restrictions will be placed on the date of publication. Screening for eligible studies and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers independently, using predefined inclusion criteria and prepiloted data extraction forms. Disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved by discussion, and if required, a third (senior) reviewer will arbitrate.The primary outcome is the prevalence of any standard features of diabetic retinopathy (DR) on fundus photography, as per International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (ICDRSS) classification. Secondary outcomes are the prevalence of (1) any retinal microvascular abnormalities on fundus photography that are not standard features of DR as per ICDRSS classification and (2) any macular microvascular abnormalities on fundus photography, including but not limited to the presence of macular exudates, microaneurysms and haemorrhages. Risk of bias for included studies will be assessed using a validated risk of bias tool for prevalence studies. Pooled estimates for the prespecified outcomes of interest will be calculated using random effects meta-analytic techniques. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required as this is a protocol for a systematic review and no primary data are to be collected. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international meetings including Diabetes UK, European Association for the Study of Diabetes, American Diabetes Association and International Diabetes Federation conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184820.


Author(s):  
Antonio Jose Martin-Perez ◽  
María Fernández-González ◽  
Paula Postigo-Martin ◽  
Marc Sampedro Pilegaard ◽  
Carolina Fernández-Lao ◽  
...  

There is no systematic review that has identified existing studies evaluating the pharmacological and non-pharmacological intervention for pain management in patients with bone metastasis. To fill this gap in the literature, this systematic review with meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness of different antalgic therapies (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) in the improvement of pain of these patients. To this end, this protocol has been written according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020135762). A systematic search will be carried out in four international databases: Medline (Via PubMed), Web of Science, Cochrane Library and SCOPUS, to select the randomized controlled clinical trials. The Risk of Bias Tool developed by Cochrane will be used to assess the risk of bias and the quality of the identified studies. A narrative synthesis will be used to describe and compare the studies, and after the data extraction, random effects model and a subgroup analyses will be performed according to the type of intervention, if possible. This protocol aims to generate a systematic review that compiles and synthesizes the best and most recent evidence on the treatment of pain derived from vertebral metastasis.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
William M. Jackson ◽  
Nicholas Davis ◽  
Johanna Calderon ◽  
Jennifer J. Lee ◽  
Nicole Feirsen ◽  
...  

Abstract Context: People with CHD are at increased risk for executive functioning deficits. Meta-analyses of these measures in CHD patients compared to healthy controls have not been reported. Objective: To examine differences in executive functions in individuals with CHD compared to healthy controls. Data sources: We performed a systematic review of publications from 1 January, 1986 to 15 June, 2020 indexed in PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Study selection: Inclusion criteria were (1) studies containing at least one executive function measure; (2) participants were over the age of three. Data extraction: Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two authors. We used a shifting unit-of-analysis approach and pooled data using a random effects model. Results: The search yielded 61,217 results. Twenty-eight studies met criteria. A total of 7789 people with CHD were compared with 8187 healthy controls. We found the following standardised mean differences: −0.628 (−0.726, −0.531) for cognitive flexibility and set shifting, −0.469 (−0.606, −0.333) for inhibition, −0.369 (−0.466, −0.273) for working memory, −0.334 (−0.546, −0.121) for planning/problem solving, −0.361 (−0.576, −0.147) for summary measures, and −0.444 (−0.614, −0.274) for reporter-based measures (p < 0.001). Limitations: Our analysis consisted of cross-sectional and observational studies. We could not quantify the effect of collinearity. Conclusions: Individuals with CHD appear to have at least moderate deficits in executive functions. Given the growing population of people with CHD, more attention should be devoted to identifying executive dysfunction in this vulnerable group.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e041680
Author(s):  
Shu-Yue Pan ◽  
Rui-Juan Cheng ◽  
Zi-Jing Xia ◽  
Qiu-Ping Zhang ◽  
Yi Liu

ObjectivesGout, characterised by hyperuricaemia with monosodium urate crystal formation and inflammation, is the most common inflammatory arthritis in adults. Recent studies have found that elevated uric acid levels are related to the occurrence of dementia. We conducted a study to investigate the association between dementia and gout or hyperuricaemia.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.Data sourcesStudies were screened from inception to 28 June 2019 by searching Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases.Eligibility criteriaCohort studies comparing the risk of dementia in patients with gout and hyperuricaemia versus non-gout and non-hyperuricaemia controls were enrolled.Data extraction and analysisTwo reviewers separately selected studies and extracted data using the Medical Subject Headings without restriction on languages or countries. The adjusted HRs were pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random effects model. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the stability of the results. Publication bias was evaluated using Egger’s and Begg’s tests. Quality assessment was performed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.ResultsFour cohort studies that met the inclusion criteria were included in our meta-analysis. We found that gout and hyperuricaemia did not increase the risk of dementia, with a pooled HR of 0.94 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.28), but might decrease the risk of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), with a pooled HR of 0.78 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.95). There was little evidence of publication bias. Quality assessment of the included studies was high (range: 6–8 points).ConclusionsOur study shows that gout and hyperuricaemia do not increase the risk of dementia. However, gout and hyperuricaemia might have a protective effect against AD. Due to the limited number of research articles, more investigations are needed to demonstrate the potential relationship between dementia and gout or hyperuricaemia.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyan Liu ◽  
Yali Du ◽  
Min Lei ◽  
Leyi Zhuang ◽  
Peng Lv

Abstract Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the biodegradable collagen matrix (Ologen) implant in trabeculectomy. Research design and methods We searched Pubmed, Cochrane library, Embase and Web of Science databases to find studies that met our pre-stated inclusion criteria. Reference lists of retrieved articles were also reviewed. The search was finished by February 2019. Study selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and data analyses were performed according to the Cochrane standards. Either a fixed or a random-effects model was used to calculate the overall combined risk estimates. The efficacy measures were the weighted mean differences (WMDs) for the intraocular pressure reduction (IOPR) and the glaucoma medications reduction, the odds ratio (OR) for the success rate and adverse events. Results Fifteen randomized controlled trials involved 682 eyes were included in the meta-analysis. There were no statistically differences between two groups in the IOPR at any time postoperatively. The MD of the IOPR was [MD= -0.45,95% Confidence Interval (CI), (-2.36,1.46), P=0.65] at one day, [MD= -0.82,95% CI, (-1.97, 0.33), P=0.16] at one week, [MD= -1.33, 95% CI,(-3.12, 0.47), P=0.15] at one month, [MD= 0.11,95% CI, (-1.87, 2.08), P=0.92] at three months, [MD= -0.60,95% CI, (-2.27, 1.06), P=0.48] at six months, [MD= -0.33,95% CI, (-1.99, 1.32), P=0.69] at one year, [MD= -0.13,95% CI, (-1.90, 1.65), P=0.89] at two years, [MD= 2.54,95% CI, (-2.83, 7.90), P=0.35] at three years, [MD= 3.04,95% CI, (-3.95, 10.03), P=0.39] at five years. There was no statistically significant difference between the Ologen groups and MMC groups concerned the complete success rate [OR=1.19, 95%CI, (0.83, 1.71), P=0.35]. With regard to the adverse events, no obvirously significance was observed. Seven studies reported the change of antiglaucoma medications. We found that the change of antiglaucoma medications is higher in MMC groups than that in Ologen groups [MD=-0.18, 95%CI, (-0.33, -0.03), P=0.02]. There is no significant difference in complications between the two groups. Conclusions From the current evidence, Ologen may be an alternative choice for trabeculectomy when considering the efficacy and safety. However, MMC might be the preferred choice concerned cost-effectiveness.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Gui-Min Zhang ◽  
Zhi-Yan Huang ◽  
Rong Sun ◽  
Shi-Li Ye ◽  
Qun Feng

Background. This study was aimed at systematically evaluating the clinical effect and safety of Xiao’er Xiaoji Zhike oral liquid in the treatment of Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia (MPP) in children and providing evidence-based references for clinical application. Methods. The databases like Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China Network Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan Fang Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically investigated via searching clinical trials about Xiao’er Xiaoji Zhike oral liquid in treating MPP from the establishment of these databases to Jun 8, 2020, the valid data from which were entered meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was assessed by GRADE criteria. Results. Totally, 15 trials and 1500 patients were involved in this review. It showed that clinical efficacy of trial group was more superior than control group at the outcome measures of cough disappearance time, lung rale disappearance time, fever subsidence time, total effective rate, lung X-ray infiltrates disappearing time, reduction of hospital stay, immunological indexes, and some other measures. And the differences between groups were statistically significant. There was no statistical difference in the adverse effects between two groups. Lung X-ray infiltrates disappearing time and cough disappearance time were separately high- and moderate-quality evidences while lung rale disappearance time and fever subsidence time were all low in accordance with GRADE criteria. Conclusions. In accordance with trials with low methodological quality, Xiao’er Xiaoji Zhike oral liquid combined with azithromycin seems to be safe and superior to azithromycin alone for the treatment of MPP in children. However, further trials with rigorous methodology need to be implemented for these potential benefits.


2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lijun Zhang ◽  
Yangyang Wang ◽  
Lianlian Xiong ◽  
Yanfang Luo ◽  
Zhijun Huang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have a high prevalence of cardiovascular diseases, which often lead to physical inactivity that correlates with CKD exacerbation. The benefits of regular exercise to cardiovascular health have been well established in healthy population and highly suggestive in patients with CKD. To further strengthen the evidence base for the management of CKD, this meta-analysis was performed to systematically evaluate the effects of exercise therapy on renal function, blood pressure, blood lipid and body mass index (BMI) in non-dialysis CKD patients. Methods This meta-analysis was conducted following a previous protocol. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effects of exercise therapy in non-dialysis CKD patients were searched in Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and three major Chinese biomedical databases (CNKI, WANGFANG and VIP) from their start date to October 30th, 2018. The Cochrane systematic review methods were applied for quality assessment and data extraction, and Revman version 5.3 was used for systematic review and meta-analysis. Results 13 RCTs, representing 421 patients with non-dialysis CKD, were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to the controls, exercise therapy brought an increase in eGFR (MD = 2.62, 95% CI:0.42 to 4.82, P = 0.02, I2 = 22%), and decreases in systolic blood pressure (SBP) (MD = -5.61, 95% CI:-8.99 to − 2.23, P = 0.001, I2 = 44%), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (MD = -2.87, 95% CI:-3.65 to − 2.08, P < 0.00001, I2 = 16%) and BMI (MD = -1.32, 95% CI:-2.39 to − 0.25, P = 0.02, I2 = 0%) in non-dialysis CKD patients. Exercise therapy of short-term (< 3 months) decreased triglyceride (TG) level (P = 0.0006). However, exercise therapy did not significantly affect serum creatinine (SCr), total cholesterol (TC), high density lipoprotein (HDL) or low density lipoprotein (LDL) in non-dialysis CKD patients. Conclusion Exercise therapy could benefit non-dialysis CKD patients by increasing eGFR while reducing SBP, DBP and BMI. Additionally, short-term intervention of exercise could decrease TG.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e039813
Author(s):  
Xinxing Lai ◽  
Jian Liu ◽  
Tianyi Zhang ◽  
Luda Feng ◽  
Ping Jiang ◽  
...  

IntroductionWith the threat of a worldwide pandemic of COVID-19, it is important to identify the prognostic factors for critical conditions among patients with non-critical COVID-19. Prognostic factors and models may assist front-line clinicians in rapid identification of high-risk patients, early management of modifiable factors, appropriate triaging and optimising the use of limited healthcare resources. We aim to systematically assess the clinical, laboratory and imaging predictors as well as prediction models for severe or critical illness and mortality in patients with COVID-19.Methods and analysisAll peer-reviewed and preprint primary articles with a longitudinal design that focused on prognostic factors or models for critical illness and mortality related to COVID-19 will be eligible for inclusion. A systematic search of 11 databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang Data, SinoMed, bioRxiv, Arxiv and MedRxiv will be conducted. Study selection will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data extraction will be performed using the modified version of the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies checklist and quality will be evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Quality In Prognosis Studies tool. The association between prognostic factors and outcomes of interest will be synthesised and a meta-analysis will be conducted with three or more studies reporting a particular factor in a consistent manner.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was not required for this systematic review. We will disseminate our findings through publication in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD 42020178798.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e028238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shimels Hussien Mohammed ◽  
Tesfa Dejenie Habtewold ◽  
Mulugeta Molla Birhanu ◽  
Tesfamichael Awoke Sissay ◽  
Balewgizie Sileshi Tegegne ◽  
...  

ObjectiveLow neighbourhood socioeconomic status (NSES) has been linked to a higher risk of overweight/obesity, irrespective of the individual’s own socioeconomic status. No meta-analysis study has been done on the association. Thus, this study was done to synthesise the existing evidence on the association of NSES with overweight, obesity and body mass index (BMI).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Sciences and Google Scholar databases were searched for articles published until 25 September 2019.Eligibility criteriaEpidemiological studies, both longitudinal and cross-sectional ones, which examined the link of NSES to overweight, obesity or BMI, were included.Data extraction and synthesisData extraction was done by two reviewers, working independently. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for the observational studies. The summary estimates of the relationships of NSES with overweight, obesity and BMI statuses were calculated with random-effects meta-analysis models. Heterogeneity was assessed by Cochran’s Q and I2 statistics. Subgroup analyses were done by age categories, continents, study designs and NSES measures. Publication bias was assessed by visual inspection of funnel plots and Egger’s regression test.ResultA total of 21 observational studies, covering 1 244 438 individuals, were included in this meta-analysis. Low NSES, compared with high NSES, was found to be associated with a 31% higher odds of overweight (pooled OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.47, p<0.001), a 45% higher odds of obesity (pooled OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.74, p<0.001) and a 1.09 kg/m2 increase in mean BMI (pooled beta=1.09, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.50, p<0.001).ConclusionNSES disparity might be contributing to the burden of overweight/obesity. Further studies are warranted, including whether addressing NSES disparity could reduce the risk of overweight/obesity.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017063889


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document