Functional cortical changes associated with shoulder instability – a systematic review

Background Glenohumeral joint instability is associated with structural deficits and/or alterations in sensory and motor processing; however, a proportion of patients with glenohumeral joint instability fail to respond to surgical and rehabilitative measures. This systematic review aimed to establish if functional cortical changes occur in patients with glenohumeral joint instability. Methods AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Medline, PEDro, Pubmed, PsychINFO and Scopus were searched from inception to 17 March 2021. Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised trials were included and quality was appraised using the Downs and Black tool. Results One thousand two hundred seventy-nine records were identified of which five were included in the review. All studies showed altered cortical function when comparing instability patients with healthy controls and included areas associated with higher cortical functions. Discussion The findings of this systematic review offer some insight as to why interventions addressing peripheral pathoanatomical factors in patients with glenohumeral joint instability may fail in some cases due to functional cortical changes. However, data are of moderate to high risk of bias. Further high-quality research is required to ascertain the degree of functional cortical changes associated with the type and duration of glenohumeral joint instability.

Download Full-text

Fluid resuscitation in paediatric burns: how do we get it right? A systematic review of the evidence

Archives of Disease in Childhood ◽

10.1136/archdischild-2017-314504 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 104 (3) ◽

pp. 280-285 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Christopher Stutchfield ◽

Anna Davies ◽

Amber Young

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Fluid Resuscitation ◽

Primary Data ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Burn Shock ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Study Protocols ◽

Central Register ◽

Affect Patient Outcome ◽

Randomised Controlled

BackgroundOptimal fluid resuscitation in children with major burns is crucial to prevent or minimise burn shock and prevent complications of over-resuscitation.ObjectivesTo identify studies using endpoints to guide fluid resuscitation in children with burns, review the range of reported endpoint targets and assess whether there is evidence that targeted endpoints impact on outcome.DesignSystematic review.MethodsMedline, Embase, Cinahl and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched with no restrictions on study design or date. Search terms combined burns, fluid resuscitation, endpoints, goal-directed therapy and related synonyms. Studies reporting primary data regarding children with burns (<16 years) and targeting fluid resuscitation endpoints were included. Data were extracted using a proforma and the results were narratively reviewed.ResultsFollowing screening of 777 unique references, 7 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four studies were exclusively paediatric. Six studies used urine output (UO) as the primary endpoint. Of these, one set a minimum UO threshold, while the remainder targeted a range from 0.5–1.0 mL/kg/hour to 2–3 mL/kg/hour. No studies compared different UO targets. Heterogeneous study protocols and outcomes precluded comparison between the UO targets. One study targeted invasive haemodynamic variables, but this did not significantly affect patient outcome.ConclusionsFew studies have researched resuscitation endpoints for children with burns. Those that have done so have investigated heterogeneous endpoints and endpoint targets. There is a need for future randomised controlled trials to identify optimal endpoints with which to target fluid resuscitation in children with burns.

Download Full-text

Right versus left thoracic approach oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030157 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (7) ◽

pp. e030157

Author(s):

Tianci Chai ◽

Zhimin Shen ◽

Sui Chen ◽

Yuhan Lin ◽

Zhenyang Zhang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Oesophageal Cancer ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Malignant Tumours ◽

Central Register ◽

Registration Number ◽

Thoracic Approach ◽

Randomised Controlled

IntroductionOesophageal cancer is one of the most common malignant tumours and has been identified as one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. Surgery is considered to be the optimal treatment for patients with resectable oesophageal cancer. Oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer can significantly extend the survival period of patients and provide a potential opportunity for a cure. However, there is still controversy regarding which thoracic approach (right or left) during oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer can lead to better surgical outcomes globally. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be performed to determine which thoracic approach during oesophagectomy will achieve longer patient survival and will be more beneficial for patients.Methods and analysisWe will search PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cancerlit, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar databases for relevant clinical trials published in any language before 1 October 2019. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, propensity score-matched comparative studies and prospective cohort studies of interest, published or unpublished, that meet the inclusion criteria will be included. Subgroup analysis of the type of operation, tumour pathological stage and ethnicity will be performed.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019124133.Ethics and disseminationBecause this study will be based on published or unpublished records and studies, there is no need for ethics approval. The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of pharmacological therapies for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation: systematic review and network meta-analysis

Gut ◽

10.1136/gutjnl-2018-316001 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 68 (3) ◽

pp. 434-444 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Pavit Luthra ◽

Nicholas E Burr ◽

Darren M Brenner ◽

Alexander C Ford

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Current Knowledge ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Response To Therapy ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Primary Analysis ◽

Central Register ◽

Bowel Movements ◽

Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveOpioids are increasingly prescribed in the West and have deleterious GI consequences. Pharmacological therapies to treat opioid-induced constipation (OIC) are available, but their relative efficacy is unclear. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to address this deficit in current knowledge.DesignWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMBASE Classic and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials through to December 2017 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of pharmacological therapies in the treatment of adults with OIC. Trials had to report a dichotomous assessment of overall response to therapy, and data were pooled using a random effects model. Efficacy and safety of pharmacological therapies was reported as a pooled relative risk (RR) with 95% CIs to summarise the effect of each comparison tested and ranked treatments according to their P-score.ResultsTwenty-seven eligible RCTs of pharmacological therapies, containing 9149 patients, were identified. In our primary analysis, using failure to achieve an average of ≥3 bowel movements (BMs) per week with an increase of ≥1 BM per week over baseline or an average of ≥3 BMs per week, to define non-response, the network meta-analysis ranked naloxone first in terms of efficacy (RR=0.65; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.80, P-score=0.84), and it was also the safest drug. When non-response to therapy was defined using failure to achieve an average of ≥3 BMs per week, with an increase of ≥1 BM per week over baseline, naldemedinewas ranked first (RR=0.66; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.77, P score=0.91) and alvimopan second (RR=0.74; 95% CI 0.57 to 0.94, P-score=0.71).ConclusionIn network meta-analysis, naloxone and naldemedine appear to be the most efficacious treatments for OIC. Naloxone was the safest of these agents.

Download Full-text

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol

10.1101/2020.04.03.20052530 ◽

2020 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Rocío Bravo-Jeria ◽

María Ximena Rojas Reyes ◽

Juan Víctor Ariel Franco ◽

María Paz Acuña ◽

Luz Ángela Torres López ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Direct Evidence ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Randomised Trials ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Central Register ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

ABSTRACTObjectiveTo determine the relative impact of the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine on outcomes important to patients with COVID 19.DesignThis is the protocol of a living systematic review.Data sourcesWe will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), trial registries, grey literature and in a centralised repository in L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L·OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L·OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methodsWe will follow a common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews, already published and submitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation).We will include randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine — as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs — versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case no direct evidence from randomised trials is found, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes.Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will perform random-effects meta-analyses and use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it if the conclusions change or there are substantial updates.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.

Download Full-text

Acknowledging the gap: a systematic review of micronutrient supplementation in infants under six months of age

Wellcome Open Research ◽

10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16282.1 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 5 ◽

pp. 238

Author(s):

Isabella Stelle ◽

Sruthi Venkatesan ◽

Karen Edmond ◽

Sophie E Moore

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Micronutrient Supplementation ◽

Micronutrient Deficiencies ◽

Term Infants ◽

Middle Income ◽

Central Register ◽

Randomised Controlled

Background: Micronutrient deficiencies remain common worldwide, but the consequences to growth and development in early infancy (under six months of age) are not fully understood. We present a systematic review of micronutrient interventions in term infants under six months of age, with a specific focus on iron supplementation. Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid) and Embase (Ovid) from January 1980 through December 2019. Interventions included iron or multiple micronutrients (MMNs). Results: Of 11,109 records identified, 32 publications from 23 trials were included (18 iron and five MMN supplementation trials). All 23 trials evaluated the effect of supplementation on biochemical outcomes, ten reported on growth, 14 on morbidity and/or mortality and six on neuro-behavioural development. Low- and middle- income countries made up 88% (21/24) of the total trial locations. Meta-analysis was not possible due to extensive heterogeneity in both exposure and outcome measures. However, these trials indicated that infants less than six months of age benefit biochemically from early supplementation with iron, but the effect of additional nutrients or MMNs, along with the impacts on growth, morbidity and/or mortality, and neuro-behavioural outcomes remain unclear. Conclusions: Infants less than six months of age appear to benefit biochemically from micronutrient supplementation. However, well-powered randomised controlled trials are required to determine whether routine supplementation with iron or MMNs containing iron should commence before six months of life in exclusively breast-fed infants in low-resource settings.

Download Full-text

Azithromycin in patients with Covid-19; a systematic review and metanalysis

10.1101/2021.08.03.21261414 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Luis Ayerbe ◽

Ivo Forgnone ◽

Carlos Risco-Risco ◽

Maria Perez-Pinar ◽

Salma Ayis

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Severity ◽

Future Research ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Clinical Settings ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Random Effects Models ◽

Central Register ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Observational Design

Background: Azithromycin (AZM) has been widely used in the management of Covid-19. However, the evidence on its actual effects remains disperse and difficult to apply in clinical settings. This systematic review and metanalysis summarizes the studies on the beneficial and adverse effect of AZM in patients with Covid-19. Methods: The PRISMA 2020 statement criteria were followed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing clinical outcomes of patients treated, and not treated, with AZM, indexed until the 5th of July 2021, were searched in PubMed, Embase, The Web of Science, Scopus, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and MedRXivs. We used Random-effects models to estimate pooled effect size from aggregate data. Results: The initial search produced 4950 results. Finally, 16 studies, five RCTs and 11 with an observational design, with a total of 22984 patients, were included. The metanalysis showed no difference in mortality for those treated, or not, with AZM, OR: 0.95 (0.79-1.13). There was also no significant difference for those treated, and not, with AZM in need for hospital admission or time to admission from ambulatory settings, clinical severity, need for intensive care, or adverse effects. Conclusions: These results presented in this review do not support the use of AZM in the management of Covid-19. They also show that any harm caused to the patient who received it is unlikely. Future research on treatment for patients with Covid-19 may need to focus on other drugs

Download Full-text

Efficacy of pharmacological therapies in patients with IBS with diarrhoea or mixed stool pattern: systematic review and network meta-analysis

Gut ◽

10.1136/gutjnl-2018-318160 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 69 (1) ◽

pp. 74-82 ◽

Cited By ~ 23

Author(s):

Christopher J Black ◽

Nicholas E Burr ◽

Michael Camilleri ◽

David L Earnest ◽

Eamonn MM Quigley ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Abdominal Pain ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Composite Endpoint ◽

Response To Therapy ◽

Stool Consistency ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Once Daily ◽

Central Register ◽

Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveOver half of patients with IBS have either diarrhoea (IBS-D) or a mixed stool pattern (IBS-M). The relative efficacy of licenced pharmacological therapies is unclear in the absence of head-to-head trials. We conducted a network meta-analysis to resolve this uncertainty.DesignWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, Embase Classic, the Cochrane central register of controlled trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov through January 2019 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of licenced pharmacological therapies (alosetron, eluxadoline, ramosetron and rifaximin) in adults with IBS-D or IBS-M. Trials included in the analysis reported a dichotomous assessment of overall response to therapy, and data were pooled using a random effects model. Efficacy and safety of all pharmacological therapies were reported as a pooled relative risk with 95% CIs to summarise the effect of each comparison tested. Treatments were ranked according to their p score.ResultsWe identified 18 eligible RCTs (seven alosetron, five ramosetron, two rifaximin and four eluxadoline), containing 9844 patients. All were superior to placebo for the treatment of IBS-D or IBS-M at 12 weeks, according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended endpoint for trials in IBS. Alosetron 1 mg twice daily was ranked first for efficacy, based on the FDA-recommended composite endpoint of improvement in both abdominal pain and stool consistency, effect on global symptoms of IBS and effect on stool consistency. Ramosetron 2.5µg once daily was ranked first for effect on abdominal pain. Total numbers of adverse events were significantly greater with alosetron 1 mg twice daily and ramosetron 2.5µg once daily, compared with placebo. Rifaximin 550 mg three times daily ranked first for safety. Constipation was significantly more common with all drugs, except rifaximin 550 mg three times daily.ConclusionIn a network meta-analysis of RCTs of pharmacological therapies for IBS-D and IBS-M, we found all drugs to be superior to placebo, but alosetron and ramosetron appeared to be the most effective.

Download Full-text

Should Finasteride Be Routinely Given Preoperatively for TURP?

ISRN Urology ◽

10.1155/2013/458353 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 2013 ◽

pp. 1-7 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

O. M. Aboumarzouk ◽

M. Z. Aslam ◽

A. Wedderburn ◽

K. Turner ◽

O. Hughes ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

Postoperative Bleeding ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Vascular Endothelial ◽

Central Register ◽

Language Restriction ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Endothelial Growth Factor

Objective. The aim of the review was to compare the use of finasteride to placebo in patients undergoing TURP procedures. Material & Methods. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1966–November 2011), EMBASE (1980–November 2011), CINAHL, Clinicaltrials.gov, Google Scholar, reference lists of articles, and abstracts from conference proceedings without language restriction for studies comparing finasteride to placebo patients needing TURPs. Results. Four randomised controlled trials were included comparing finasteride to a placebo. A meta-analysis was not conducted due to the disparity present in the results between the studies. Three of the studies found that finasteride could reduce either intra- or postoperative bleeding after TURP. One study found finasteride to significantly lower the microvessel density (MVD) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). None of the studies reported any long-term complications related to either the medication or the procedure. Conclusion. finasteride reduces bleeding either during or after TURP.

Download Full-text

Tafenoquine for primary and terminal prophylaxis of malaria in apparently healthy people: a systematic review

Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene ◽

10.1093/trstmh/trz052 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 113 (10) ◽

pp. 579-586 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Chaturaka Rodrigo ◽

Senaka Rajapakse ◽

Sumadhya Deepika Fernando

Keyword(s):

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Dose Range ◽

Primary Prophylaxis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Time Restrictions ◽

Central Register ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Malaria Episodes ◽

Apparently Healthy

Abstract Primaquine was the only licenced antimalarial hypnozoiticidal drug available until recently. Now there is a newly approved alternative: tafenoquine. This review explores the efficacy of tafenoquine as a primary and terminal prophylactic agent in malaria. Multiple databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL], MEDLINE [PubMed], Embase [Ovid], Scopus, CINAHL [EBSCOhost] and LILACS) were searched for clinical randomised controlled trials that had used tafenoquine for prophylaxis without language or time restrictions. The last date of searching was 13 August 2018. For primary prophylaxis, tafenoquine reduced episodes of malaria compared with placebo, at a dose range from 50 mg weekly to 400 mg monthly in three trials conducted in Ghana, Kenya and Thailand. Two trials compared tafenoquine vs mefloquine, but malaria episodes were too few to reach a conclusion. For terminal prophylaxis, evidence from two trials suggest that tafenoquine may have equal or better efficacy compared with primaquine. All trials excluded pregnant participants or those with G6PD deficiency. Tafenoquine is effective for both primary and terminal prophylaxis. If used for primary prophylaxis it may continue to offer protection against vivax relapses after exposure has ended (as terminal prophylaxis).

Download Full-text

Lowering blood pressure after acute intracerebral haemorrhage: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis using individual patient data from randomised controlled trials participating in the Blood Pressure in Acute Stroke Collaboration (BASC)

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030121 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (7) ◽

pp. e030121 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Tom J Moullaali ◽

Xia Wang ◽

Lisa J Woodhouse ◽

Zhe Kang Law ◽

Candice Delcourt ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Blood Pressure ◽

Acute Stroke ◽

Intracerebral Haemorrhage ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Patient Data ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Randomised Controlled

IntroductionConflicting results from multiple randomised trials indicate that the methods and effects of blood pressure (BP) reduction after acute intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) are complex. The Blood pressure in Acute Stroke Collaboration is an international collaboration, which aims to determine the optimal management of BP after acute stroke including ICH.Methods and analysisA systematic review will be undertaken according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data (IPD) guideline. A search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE and MEDLINE from inception will be conducted to identify randomised controlled trials of BP management in adults with acute spontaneous (non-traumatic) ICH enrolled within the first 7 days of symptom onset. Authors of studies that meet the inclusion criteria will be invited to share their IPD. The primary outcome will be functional outcome according to the modified Rankin Scale. Safety outcomes will be early neurological deterioration, symptomatic hypotension and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes will include death and neuroradiological and haemodynamic variables. Meta-analyses of pooled IPD using the intention-to-treat dataset of included trials, including subgroup analyses to assess modification of the effects of BP lowering by time to treatment, treatment strategy and patient’s demographic, clinical and prestroke neuroradiological characteristics.Ethics and disseminationNo new patient data will be collected nor is there any deviation from the original purposes of each study where ethical approvals were granted; therefore, further ethical approval is not required. Results will be reported in international peer-reviewed journals.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019141136.

Download Full-text