scholarly journals Thrombotic Events in COVID-19 Patients Undergoing Convalescent Plasma Therapy: A Systematic Review

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3221-3221
Author(s):  
Philip Yu ◽  
Faran Khalid ◽  
Allen Li ◽  
Marissa Laureano ◽  
Mark Crowther
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Septic Shock ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Standard Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Plasma Therapy ◽  
Central Registry ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract INTRODUCTION Convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) has been proposed as a mechanism of passive immunization against COVID-19. Current guidelines on the efficacy of its use is not well delineated with limited studies analyzing the risk of thromboembolic events during treatment. The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the risk of arterial and venous thromboembolisms from CPT in patients with COVID-19. METHODS We conducted a comprehensive literature review of Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and EMBASE from inception to June 2021. Title and abstract screening and full-text screening was done in duplicate by two independent reviewers. All randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that analyzed adult COVID-19 patients undergoing CPT were included for analysis. Editorials, conference abstracts, narrative reviews, case series, containing less than 100 patients were excluded. The primary outcome analyzed was the risk of thrombotic events in CPT + standard therapy vs standard therapy alone. Meta-analysis was done using a random-effects model using the Revman 5 software. RESULTS Of 1774 studies identified from our search, three randomized (n= 660 patients), and one non-randomized matched cohort study) (n = 96 patients) were included for analysis. The risk ratio for thrombotic events was 2.33, favoring the CPT group (95% CI, [0.70, 7.72], P = 0.17, I2 = 29%). Subgroup analyses showed that CPT + standard therapy was associated with a decreased risk of in-hospital mortality (RR = 0.70 [0.49, 0.98], P = 0.04, I2 = 0%). No significant difference in cardiovascular events (RR = 0.90 [0.67, 1.20], P = 0.48, I2 = 0%), hypertension (RR = 1.67 [0.56, 4.98], P = 0.35, I2 = 0%), and septic shock (RR = 0.97 [0.40, 2.35], P = 0.94, I2 = 41%) was found between CPT + standard therapy and standard therapy alone. CONCLUSION We found treatment of COVID-19 with standard therapy + CPT was not associated with an increase in the risk of thromboembolic events. CPT was associated with a decreased risk of in-hospital mortality but not of MACE, hypertension, or septic shock. Disclosures Crowther: Hemostasis reference laboratories: Honoraria; Bayer: Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Speakers Bureau; Precision Biologicals: Honoraria; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Syneos Health: Honoraria.

scholarly journals Safety and efficacy of routine diagnostic test reduction interventions in patients admitted to the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-34
Author(s):  
Katherine P Hooper ◽  
Matthew H Anstey ◽  
Edward Litton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Significant Difference

Reducing unnecessary routine diagnostic testing has been identified as a strategy to curb wasteful healthcare. However, the safety and efficacy of targeted diagnostic testing strategies are uncertain. The aim of this study was to systematically review interventions designed to reduce pathology and chest radiograph testing in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). A predetermined protocol and search strategy included OVID MEDLINE, OVID EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until 20 November 2019. Eligible publications included interventional studies of patients admitted to an ICU. There were no language restrictions. The primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and test reduction. Key secondary outcomes included ICU mortality, length of stay, costs and adverse events. This systematic review analysed 26 studies (with more than 44,00 patients) reporting an intervention to reduce one or more diagnostic tests. No studies were at low risk of bias. In-hospital mortality, reported in seven studies, was not significantly different in the post-implementation group (829 of 9815 patients, 8.4%) compared with the pre-intervention group (1007 of 9848 patients, 10.2%), (relative risk 0.89, 95% confidence intervals 0.79 to 1.01, P = 0.06, I2 39%). Of the 18 studies reporting a difference in testing rates, all reported a decrease associated with targeted testing (range 6%–72%), with 14 (82%) studies reporting >20% reduction in one or more tests. Studies of ICU targeted test interventions are generally of low quality. The majority report substantial decreases in testing without evidence of a significant difference in hospital mortality.

Mortality Benefit From the Passive Leg Raise Maneuver in Guiding Resuscitation of Septic Shock Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 088506662110197
Author(s):  
Moosa Azadian ◽  
Suyee Win ◽  
Amir Abdipour ◽  
Carolyn Krystal Kim ◽  
H. Bryant Nguyen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Septic Shock ◽  
Fluid Resuscitation ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Passive Leg Raise

Background: Fluid therapy plays a major role in the management of critically ill patients. Yet assessment of intravascular volume in these patients is challenging. Different invasive and non-invasive methods have been used with variable results. The passive leg raise (PLR) maneuver has been recommended by international guidelines as a means to determine appropriate fluid resuscitation. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to determine if using this method of volume assessment has an impact on mortality outcome in patients with septic shock. Methods: This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched available data in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases from inception until October 2020 for prospective, randomized, controlled trials that compared PLR-guided fluid resuscitation to standard care in adult patients with septic shock. Our primary outcome was mortality at the longest duration of follow-up. Results: We screened 1,425 article titles and abstracts. Of the 23 full-text articles reviewed, 5 studies with 462 patients met our eligibility criteria. Odds ratios (ORs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for mortality at the longest reported time interval were calculated for each study. Using random effects modeling, the pooled OR (95% CI) for mortality with a PLR-guided resuscitation strategy was 0.82 (0.52 -1.30). The included studies were not blinded and they ranged from having low to high risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Conclusion: Our analysis showed there was no statistically significant difference in mortality among septic shock patients treated with PLR-guided resuscitation vs. those with standard care.

Use of Prophylaxis for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Isolated Foot or Ankle Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 119 (10) ◽  
pp. 1686-1694 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bavand Bikdeli ◽  
Renuka Visvanathan ◽  
David Jimenez ◽  
Manuel Monreal ◽  
Samuel Z. Goldhaber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Vte Prophylaxis ◽  
Ankle Surgery ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractAlthough prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) is recommended after many surgeries, evidence base for use of VTE prophylaxis after foot or ankle surgery has been elusive, leading into varying guidelines recommendations and notable practice variations. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to determine if use of VTE prophylaxis decreased the frequency of subsequent VTE, including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), compared with control. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov through May 2018, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective controlled observational studies of VTE prophylaxis in patients undergoing foot and ankle surgery. Our search retrieved 263 studies, of which 6 were finally included comprising 1,600 patients. Patients receiving VTE prophylaxis had lower risk for subsequent DVT (risk ratio [RR]: 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55–0.94) and subsequent VTE (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.55–0.94). There was only one case of nonfatal PE, no cases of fatal PE, and no change in all-cause mortality (RR: 3.51; 95% CI: 0.14–84.84). There was no significant difference in the risk for bleeding (RR: 2.12; 95% CI: 0.53–8.56). Very few RCTs exist regarding the efficacy and safety of VTE prophylaxis in foot and ankle surgery. Prophylaxis appears to reduce the risk of subsequent VTE, but the event rates are low and symptomatic events are rare. Future studies should determine the subgroups of patients undergoing foot or ankle surgery in whom prophylaxis may be most useful.

scholarly journals Blinding integrity in randomized sham-controlled trials of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for major depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1173-1181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelo T. Berlim ◽  
Hannah J. Broadbent ◽  
Frederique Van den Eynde
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Major Depression ◽  
Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Treatment Allocation ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a safe and effective treatment for major depression (MD). However, the perceived lack of a suitable sham rTMS condition might have compromised the success of blinding procedures in clinical trials. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind and sham-controlled trials (RCTs) on high frequency (HF-), low frequency (LF-) and bilateral rTMS for MD. We searched the literature from January 1995 to July 2012 using Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Scopus. The main outcome measure was participants' ability to correctly guess their treatment allocation at study end. We used a random-effects model and risk difference (RD). Overall, data were obtained from seven and two RCTs on HF- and bilateral rTMS, respectively. No RCT on LF-rTMS reporting on blinding success was found. HF- and bilateral rTMS trials enrolled 396 and 93 depressed subjects and offered an average of approximately 13 sessions. At study end, 52 and 59% of subjects receiving HF-rTMS and sham rTMS were able to correctly guess their treatment allocation, a non-significant difference (RD = −0.04; z = −0.51; p = 0.61). Furthermore, 63.3 and 57.5% of subjects receiving bilateral and sham rTMS were able to correctly guess their treatment allocation, also a non-significant difference (RD = 0.05; z = 0.49; p = 0.62). In addition, the use of angulation and sham coil in HF-rTMS trials produced similar results. In summary, existing sham rTMS interventions appear to result in acceptable levels of blinding regarding treatment allocation.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of effects of acupuncture on pain and function in non-specific low back pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 235-243
Author(s):  
Yun-xia Li ◽  
Su-e Yuan ◽  
Jie-qiong Jiang ◽  
Hui Li ◽  
Yue-jiao Wang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Functional Improvement ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Significant Difference

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of acupuncture for non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) through systematic review of published randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: Studies were identified in electronic databases from their inception to February 2018, and were grouped according to the control interventions. The outcomes of interest were pain intensity and disability. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias criteria and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) checklist. The review was reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Results: 25 trials (n=7587 participants) were identified and included in a meta-analysis. The results showed that acupuncture was more effective at inducing pain relief than: no treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) −0.69, 95% CI −0.99 to −0.38); sham acupuncture in the immediate term (SMD −0.33, 95% CI −0.49 to −0.18), short term (SMD −0.47, 95% CI −0.77 to −0.17), and intermediate term (SMD −0.17, 95% CI −0.28 to −0.05); and usual care in the short term (SMD −1.07, 95% CI −1.81 to −0.33) and intermediate term (SMD −0.43, 95% CI −0.77 to −0.10). Also, adjunctive acupuncture with usual care was more effective than usual care alone at all time points studied. With regard to functional improvement, the analysis showed a significant difference between acupuncture and no treatment (SMD −0.94, 95% CI −1.57 to −0.30), whereas the other control therapies could not be assessed. Conclusion: We draw a cautious conclusion that acupuncture appears to be effective for NSLBP and that acupuncture may be an important supplement to usual care in the management of NSLBP.

scholarly journals Comparison of nephroscopy and cystoscopy used in the treatment of bladder stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BMC Surgery ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Liping Gou ◽  
Zhenghao Wang ◽  
Ye Zhou ◽  
Xiaofeng Zheng
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Bladder Stones ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare the safety and efficiency of nephroscopy and cystoscopy in transurethral cystolithotripsy (TUCL) for bladder stones (BS). Methods The PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to January 2021 for studies assessing the effect of different types of endoscopes among patients who underwent TUCL. The search strategy and study selection process were in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Results Five randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed no difference in stone-free rate (RR = 1.00, CI = 0.98–1.02, p = 1.00) between the two groups and nonsignificant heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, p = 1.00), and all patients were rendered stone free. Use of the nephroscope significantly shortened the operative time compared with the cystoscope group (RR= − 26.26, CI = − 35.84 to − 16.68, p < 0.00001), and there was significant heterogeneity (I2= 87%, p < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in mean urethral entries (RR = 0.66, CI = − 0.71 to − 2.04, p = 0.35), hospitalization (MD = 0.08, 95% CI = − 0.07 to 0.23, p = 0.31) or total complication rate (RR=1.37, 95% CI = 0.47–4.00, p = 0.56) between the two groups. Conclusions In conclusion, this systematic review demonstrates that both nephroscopy and cystoscopy have high stone clearance efficiency, low rates of complications and short hospitalizations. The mean urethral entries depend on the treatment method for large stone fragments. However, the use of nephroscopy can significantly reduce the operative time.

scholarly journals Difluprednate versus Prednisolone Acetate after Cataract Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e026752
Author(s):  
Mahmoud Tawfik KhalafAllah ◽  
Ahmed Basiony ◽  
Ahmed Salama
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Prednisolone Acetate ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Topical Steroids ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Small Incision Cataract Surgery ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Evidence Quality

ObjectiveTopical steroids are the cornerstone in controlling the inflammation after cataract surgery. Prednisolone acetate and difluprednate are the two main products for this purpose. However, it is unclear which one should be used in terms of effectiveness and safety.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline via PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of science and clinicaltrials.gov were searched through 10 January 2018, and updated on 20 July 2019, in addition to researching the references’ lists of the relevant articles.Eligibility criteriaRandomised-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing difluprednate and prednisolone acetate regardless of the dosing regimen used.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent authors assessed the included RCTs regarding the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool. Relevant data were extracted, and meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to appraise the evidence quality.ResultsWe included six RCTs with 883 patients: 441 received difluprednate and 442 received prednisolone acetate. The evidence quality was graded as moderate for corneal oedema and intraocular pressure and low for anterior chamber (AC) clearance. After small incision cataract surgery, difluprednate was superior in clearing AC cells at 1 week (OR=2.5, p>0.00001) and at 2 weeks (OR=2.5, p=0.04), as well as clearing the AC flare at 2 weeks (OR=6.7, p=0.04). After phacoemulsification, difluprednate was superior in terms of corneal clarity at 1 day (OR=2.6, p=0.02) and 1 week after surgery (OR=1.96, p=0.0007). No statistically significant difference was detected between both agents at 1 month in effectiveness. Also, both agents were safe, evaluated by the ocular hypertension (OR=1.23, p=0.8).ConclusionWith low-to-moderate certainty, difluprednate and prednisolone acetate are safe agents for controlling the inflammation after cataract surgery. Difluprednate showed significant superiority in terms of AC cells and AC flare at 2 weeks postoperatively.

scholarly journals Auricular Plaster Therapy for Comorbid Insomnia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huimin Zhao ◽  
Dan Li ◽  
Ying Yang ◽  
Yueting Liu ◽  
Jie Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effective Rate ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Comorbid Insomnia ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference

Background. Although the effectiveness of auricular plaster therapy (APT) on primary insomnia has been systematically reviewed, no systematic review of studies has focused on the effect on comorbid insomnia. Objective. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of APT for comorbid insomnia. Methods. Fifteen databases were searched from inception to July 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of APT as an exclusive intervention for comorbid insomnia against Western medications, sham APT or no treatment were identified. Results. Fourteen studies involving 928 participants were identified. The pooled outcomes revealed that APT was superior to control conditions for the global score on PSQI (SMD = -1.13, and 95% CI = -1.48—-0.78) and the effective rate (RR = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.13—1.36, NNT = 5, and 95% CI =4—7). Furthermore, the results of subgroup analyses were similar to the pooled results. Additionally, the pooled results were verified to be stable by sensitivity analyses. Regarding safety, no significant difference was identified between APT and Western medications. Conclusions. APT appears to be an effective and safe treatment for comorbid insomnia. However, the benefits of APT for comorbid insomnia could not be ascertained due to the paucity of the quantity and quality of the included studies. Large-scale studies using proper methodology are needed to yield a firm conclusion.

scholarly journals Comparison of photoselective green light laser vaporisation versus traditional transurethral resection for benign prostate hyperplasia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and prospective studies

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e028855 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shicong Lai ◽  
Panxin Peng ◽  
Tongxiang Diao ◽  
Huimin Hou ◽  
Xuan Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Transurethral Resection ◽  
Prospective Studies ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Green Light ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Green Light Laser ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of green-light laser photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis, conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement.Data sourcesPubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library until October 2018.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials and prospective studies comparing the safety and efficacy of PVP versus TURP for LUTS manifesting through BPH.Data extraction and synthesisPerioperative parameters, complications rates and functional outcomes including treatment-related adverse events such as International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual (PVR), quality of life (QoL) and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF).Results22 publications consisting of 2665 patients were analysed. Pooled analysis revealed PVP is associated with reduced blood loss, transfusion, clot retention, TUR syndrome, capsular perforation, catheterisation time and hospitalisation, but also with a higher reintervention rate and longer intervention duration (all p<0.05). No significant difference in IPSS, Qmax, QoL, PVR or IIEF at 3, 24, 36 or 60 months was identified. There was a significant difference in QoL at 6 months (MD=−0.08; 95% CI −0.13 to −0.02; p=0.007), and IPSS (MD = −0.10; 95% CI −0.15 to −0.05; p<0.0001) and Qmax (MD=0.62; 95% CI 0.06 to 1.19; p=0.03) at 12 months, although these differences were not clinically relevant.ConclusionPVP is an effective alternative, holding additional safety benefits. PVP has equivalent long-term IPSS, Qmax, QoL, PVR, IIEF efficacy and fewer complications. The main drawbacks are dysuria and reintervention, although both can be managed with non-invasive techniques. The additional shortcoming is that PVP does not acquire histological tissue examination which removes an opportunity to identify prostate cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document