Acupuncture for Symptomatic Rotator Cuff Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for patients with rotator cuff diseases. There were 12 electronic databases and 3 trial registries searched up to November 30th, 2019. All randomized trials were eligible, regardless of language, date of publication, or settings. The primary outcomes were pain, shoulder function, and proportion of improved participants assessed within 12 weeks of randomization of the trial. The Cochrane risk of bias for the studies was assessed. Effects sizes were presented as a risk ratio, mean difference, or standardized mean difference with a 95% confidence intervals. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was adopted to rate certainty of evidence. Of the 3,686 records screened, 28 randomized trials (2,216 participants) were included in this review. The types of acupuncture included manual acupuncture, dry needling, electroacupuncture, acupotomy, warm needle acupuncture, and fire needle acupuncture. All of the studies had an unclear or high risk of bias related to more than 1 domain. Significant benefits of acupuncture in terms of pain and shoulder function were observed in all comparisons, however, the proportion of improved participants was not described in 2 comparisons. There was substantial heterogeneity among meta-analyzed trials. No serious harm was observed. For primary outcomes, the overall certainty of evidence was very low. There was very low certainty of evidence for the benefits of acupuncture for patients with rotator cuff diseases. The safety of acupuncture remains unclear due to the incompleteness of reporting. Future welldesigned randomized trials with transparent reporting are required.

Download Full-text

Feeding in neonates with antenatal doppler abnormalities- a systematic review and meta-analysis

10.21203/rs.3.rs-1163424/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Rajendra Prasad Anne ◽

Abhishek S Aradhya ◽

Srinivas Murki

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Preterm Neonates ◽

Study Objective ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Evaluation Approach ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Late Initiation ◽

Hospital Acquired ◽

The Impact

Abstract Preterm neonates with antenatal doppler abnormalities are at increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). In these neonates, we did a meta-analysis to compare the impact of early versus late initiation of feeding, and slow versus rapid feed advancement on the important neonatal outcomes. The databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane central, CINAHL and google scholar were searched on 6th September 2020. We included all randomized controlled trials addressing the study objective(s). The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias tool, version 2. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Early feeding did not increase the incidence of NEC stage 2 or more (odds ratio/OR 1.27, 95% confidence interval/CI 0.83, 1.96; 6 studies, 772 participants) and mortality (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.4, 1.57; 3 studies, 498 participants). A trend was noted towards an increased incidence of feeding intolerance (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.98, 1.92). There was a significant reduction in time to reach full feeds, duration of total parental nutrition, duration of hospital stay, and rates of hospital-acquired infections. The time to regain birth weight was not different. Rapid feed advancement decreased the time to reach full feeds, without affecting other outcomes. The overall certainty of the evidence was rated low. Heterogeneity was not significant. Conclusion: There is low-certainty evidence to recommend early feed initiation in preterm neonates with antenatal doppler abnormalities. The data is insufficient to make a recommendation on the rapidity of feed advancement.

Download Full-text

Association between vision impairment and mortality: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037556 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (6) ◽

pp. e037556

Author(s):

Joshua R Ehrlich ◽

Jacqueline Ramke ◽

David Macleod ◽

Bonnielin K Swenor ◽

Helen Burn ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Global Health ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Vision Impairment ◽

Published Data ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Evaluation Approach ◽

Meta Analyses

IntroductionDue to growth and ageing of the world’s population, the number of individuals worldwide with vision impairment (VI) and blindness is projected to increase rapidly over the coming decades. VI and blindness are an important cause of years lived with disability. However, the association of VI and blindness with mortality, including the risk of bias in published studies and certainty of the evidence, has not been adequately studied in an up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods and analysisThe planned systematic review and meta-analysis will adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Databases, including MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid and Global Health, will be searched for relevant studies. Two reviewers will then screen studies and review full texts to identify studies for inclusion. Data extraction will be performed, and for included studies, the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence will be assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The prognostic factor in this study is visual function, which must have been measured using a standard objective ophthalmic clinical or research instrument. We will use standard criteria from WHO to categorise VI and blindness. All-cause mortality may be assessed by any method one or more years after baseline assessment of vision. Results from included studies will be meta-analysed according to relevant sections of the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist.Ethics and disseminationThis review will only include published data; therefore, ethics approval will not be sought. The findings of this review and meta-analysis will be published in an open-access, peer-reviewed journal and will be included in the ongoing Lancet Global Health Commission on Global Eye Health.

Download Full-text

Effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction and anchorage preservation during two-step technique: A systematic review and meta-analysis

10.21203/rs.2.18558/v1 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Haonan Tian ◽

Congman Xie ◽

Min Lin ◽

Hongmei Yang ◽

Aishu Ren

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Mean Difference ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Canine Retraction ◽

Temporary Anchorage Devices ◽

The Mean ◽

Implant Anchorage

Abstract Background: To assess the effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction during two-step technique. Methods: The search was systematically performed up to June 2019 in five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus). A risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for controlled clinical trials (CCTs) . The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was applied for quality assessment. Data concerning the mean difference in mesial molar movement and extent of canine retraction were extracted for statistical analysis. The mean difference and 95% confidence interval were analyzed for continuous data. A meta-analysis with a random-effects model for comparable outcomes was carried out. Results: Three RCTs and five CCTs were finally included. Meta-analysis showed a significant increase not only in anchorage preservation in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (1. 56 mm , 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.98, P <0.00001 ) and the mandible (1.62 mm , 95% CI: 1.24 to 2.01, P <0.00001 ) but also in canine retraction in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (0.43 mm , 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.69, P =0.001 ) and the mandible (0.26 mm , 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.49, P =0.03 ). Conclusions: Very low-quality evidence shows that implant anchorage is more efficient than conventional anchorage during canine retraction. Further high-quality studies are needed.

Download Full-text

Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of medical abortion at home versus in the clinic: a systematic review and meta-analysis in response to COVID-19

BMJ Global Health ◽

10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003934 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 5 (12) ◽

pp. e003934

Author(s):

Katherine Gambir ◽

Camille Garnsey ◽

Kelly Ann Necastro ◽

Thoai D Ngo

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

High Risk ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Medical Abortion ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Evaluation Approach ◽

Home Based ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

At Home

BackgroundIncreased access to home-based medical abortion may offer women a convenient, safe and effective abortion method, reduce burdens on healthcare systems and support social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Home-based medical abortion is defined as any abortion where mifepristone, misoprostol or both medications are taken at home.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (NRSs) were conducted. We searched databases from inception to 10 July 2019 and 14 June 2020. Successful abortion was the main outcome of interest. Eligible studies were RCTs and NRSs studies with a concurrent comparison group comparing home versus clinic-based medical abortion. Risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% CIs were calculated. Estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to assess risk of bias by outcome and to evaluate the overall quality of the evidence.ResultsWe identified 6277 potentially eligible published studies. Nineteen studies (3 RCTs and 16 NRSs) were included with 11 576 women seeking abortion up to 9 weeks gestation. Neither the RCTs nor the NRS found any difference between home-based and clinic-based administration of medical abortion in having a successful abortion (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01, I2=0%; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.01, I2=52%, respectively). The certainty of the evidence for the 16 NRSs was downgraded from low to very low due to high risk of bias and publication bias. The certainty of the evidence for the three RCTs was downgraded from high to moderate by one level for high risk of bias.ConclusionHome-based medical abortion is effective, safe and acceptable to women. This evidence should be used to expand women’s abortion options and ensure access to abortion for women during COVID-19 and beyond.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020183171.

Download Full-text

Effect of consumption of animal milk compared to infant formula for non-breastfed/mixed-fed infants 6–11 months of age: a systematic review (protocol)

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046370 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. e046370

Author(s):

Aamer Imdad ◽

Julie Melissa Ehrlich ◽

Joseph Catania ◽

Emily Tanner-Smith ◽

Abigail Smith ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Infant Formula ◽

Breast Feeding ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

World Health ◽

Control Group ◽

Breastfed Infants ◽

Evaluation Approach ◽

Animal Milk

IntroductionPrevalence rates of breastfeeding remain low even though the World Health Organization (WHO) and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend exclusive breast feeding for the first 6 months of life in combination with appropriate complementary feeding beyond six 6 months of age. There have been several studies that address the implication of drinking animal milk and/or infant formula on children’s health and development when breast feeding is not offered during the first year of life. Vast improvements have been made in infant formula design, which may increase its benefits compared with animal’s milk. The objective of this review is therefore to synthesise the most recent evidence on the effects of the consumption of animal milk compared with infant formula in non-breastfed or mixed breastfed infants aged 6–11 months.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that assessed the effect of animal milk compared with formula or mixed-fed (breastmilk and formula) on infants aged 6–11 months. The primary outcomes of interest include anaemia, gastrointestinal blood loss, weight for age, height for age and weight for height. We will include randomised and non-randomised studies with a control group. We will use the Cochrane risk of bias tools to assess the risk of bias. We will use meta-analysis to pool findings if the identified studies are conceptually homogenous and data are available from more than one study. We will assess the overall quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.Ethics and disseminationThis is a systematic review, so no patients will be directly involved in the design or development of this study. The findings from this systematic review will be disseminated to relevant patient populations and caregivers and will guide the WHO’s recommendations on formula consumption versus animal milk in infants aged 6–11 months.Trial registration numberCRD42020210925.

Download Full-text

Tolerability of statin-based management of patients with a history of statin-associated muscle symptoms: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052341 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (8) ◽

pp. e052341

Author(s):

Fanny Villoz ◽

Christina Lyko ◽

Cinzia Del Giovane ◽

Nicolas Rodondi ◽

Manuel R Blum

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Mean Difference ◽

Control Group ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Clinical Issue ◽

Standard Data ◽

Evaluation Approach ◽

History Of

IntroductionStatin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMSs) are a major clinical issue in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Current guidelines advise various approaches mainly based on expert opinion. We will lead a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the tolerability and acceptability and effectiveness of statin-based therapy management of patients with a history of SAMS. We aim to provide evidence on the tolerability and different strategies of statin-based management of patients with a history of SAMS.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies with a control group. We will search in Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov and Proquest from inception until April 2021. Two independent reviewers will carry out the study selection based on eligibility criteria. We will extract data following a standard data collection form. The reviewers will use the Cochrane Collaboration’s tools and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to appraise the study risk of bias. Our primary outcome will be tolerability and our secondary outcomes will be acceptability and effectiveness. We will conduct a qualitative analysis of all included studies. In addition, if sufficient and homogeneous data are available, we will conduct quantitative analysis. We will synthesise dichotomous data using OR with 95% CI and continuous outcomes by using mean difference or standardised mean difference (with 95% CI). We will determine heterogeneity visually with forest plots and quantitatively with I2 and Q-test. We will summarise the confidence in the quantitative estimate by using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.Ethics and disseminationAs a systematic review of literature without collection of new clinical data, there will be no requirement for ethical approval. We will disseminate findings through peer-reviewed publications.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020202619.

Download Full-text

Can Vaccination Trigger Autoimmune Disorders? A Meta-Analysis

Vaccines ◽

10.3390/vaccines9080821 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (8) ◽

pp. 821

Author(s):

Marek Petráš ◽

Ivana Králová Lesná ◽

Jana Dáňová ◽

Alexander M. Čelko

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

Autoimmune Disorders ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Extensive Literature ◽

Primary Analysis ◽

Measures Of Association ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Extensive Literature Search ◽

The Stability

Vaccination as an important tool in the fight against infections has been suggested as a possible trigger of autoimmunity over the last decades. To confirm or refute this assumption, a Meta-analysis of Autoimmune Disorders Association With Immunization (MADAWI) was conducted. Included in the meta-analysis were a total of 144 studies published in 1968–2019 that were available in six databases and identified by an extensive literature search conducted on 30 November 2019. The risk of bias classification of the studies was performed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The strength of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. While our primary analysis was conducted in terms of measures of association employed in studies with a low risk of bias, the robustness of the MADAWI outcome was tested using measures independent of each study risk of bias. Additionally, subgroup analyses were performed to determine the stability of the outcome. The pooled association of 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.97–1.02), based on a total of 364 published estimates, confirmed an equivalent occurrence of autoimmune disorders in vaccinated and unvaccinated persons. The same level of association reported by studies independently of the risk of bias was supported by a sufficient number of studies, and no serious limitation, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, and publication bias. A sensitivity analysis did not reveal any discrepancy in the primary result. Current common vaccination is not the cause of any of the examined autoimmune disorders in the medium and long terms.

Download Full-text

Effect of Earthworm on Wound Healing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Frontiers in Pharmacology ◽

10.3389/fphar.2021.691742 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

Author(s):

Dong Wang ◽

Zhen Ruan ◽

Rongchao Zhang ◽

Xuejing Wang ◽

Ruihui Wang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Wound Healing ◽

Healing Rate ◽

Weighted Mean Difference ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Healing Process ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Mean Difference ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Weighted Mean

Background: Earthworm, also called dilong (Chinese language), has been used as a traditional Chinese medicine for thousands of years. Recently, some scientists believe that earthworm extracts (EE) can promote wound healing. However, its effectiveness remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of EE on wound healing based on the healing rate.Methods: We comprehensively reviewed literature that mentioned EE for wound healing in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, and WanFang database that have been published until January 2021. We computed weighted mean difference (WMD) for analysis with RevMan 5.3 software in animal and human models groups. Two researchers independently selected studies and evaluated the risk of bias with the Cochrane Collaboration tool. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. This study is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020168400).Results: From 2,486 articles, we selected 16 studies for analysis. EE treatment was associated with improvements in wound healing performance based on wound healing rate (mouse model: weighted mean difference (WMD) = 3.55, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.34–4.77, p < 0.00001; rat model: WMD = 17.29, 95% CI: 5.75–28.82, p = 0.003; rabbit model: WMD = 19.29, 95% CI: 9.95–28.64, p < 0.0001). Clinical studies also confirmed that EE could reduce healing time in hospital (WMD = −8.94, 95% CI: −17.75 to −0.14, p = 0.05).Conclusion: The results of this meta-analysis demonstrated the efficacy of EE on wound healing process. As a corollary, EE can be a useful natural product for wound healing drug development.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=168400, identifier CRD42020168400.

Download Full-text

Comparing the Effects of Docosahexaenoic and Eicosapentaenoic Acids on Inflammation Markers Using Pairwise and Network Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials

Advances in Nutrition ◽

10.1093/advances/nmaa086 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Cécile Vors ◽

Janie Allaire ◽

Sonia Blanco Mejia ◽

Tauseef A Khan ◽

John L Sievenpiper ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Randomized Clinical Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Necrosis Factor Alpha ◽

Assessment Development ◽

Evaluation Approach ◽

Tnf Α ◽

Mean Differences ◽

Meta Analyses

ABSTRACT Recent data from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) suggest that DHA may have stronger anti-inflammatory effects than EPA. This body of evidence has not yet been quantitatively reviewed. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of DHA and EPA on several markers of systemic inflammation by pairwise and network meta-analyses of RCTs. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were searched through to September 2019. We included RCTs of ≥7 d on adults regardless of health status that directly compared the effects of DHA with EPA and RCTs of indirect comparisons, in which the effects of DHA or EPA were compared individually to a control fatty acid. Differences in circulating concentrations of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and adiponectin were the primary outcome measures. Data were pooled by pairwise and network meta-analysis and expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed (Cochran Q statistic) and quantified (I2 statistic) in the pairwise meta-analysis. Inconsistency and transitivity were evaluated in the network meta-analysis. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Eligibility criteria were met by 5 RCTs (N = 411) for the pairwise meta-analysis and 20 RCTs (N = 1231) for the network meta-analysis. In the pairwise meta-analysis, DHA and EPA had similar effects on plasma CRP [MDDHA versus EPA = 0.14 mg/L (95% CI: –0.57, 0.85); I2 = 61%], IL-6 [MDDHA versus EPA = 0.10 pg/mL (–0.15, 0.34); I2 = 40%], and TNF-α [MDDHA versus EPA = –0.10 pg/mL (–0.37, 0.18); I2 = 40%]. In the network meta-analysis, the effects of DHA and EPA on plasma CRP [MDDHA versus EPA = –0.33 mg/L (–0.75, 0.10)], IL-6 [MDDHA versus EPA = 0.09 pg/mL (–0.12, 0.30)], and TNF-α [MDDHA versus EPA = –0.02 pg/mL (–0.25, 0.20)] were also similar. DHA and EPA had similar effects on plasma adiponectin in the network meta-analysis. Results from pairwise and network meta-analyses suggest that supplementation with either DHA or EPA does not differentially modify systemic markers of subclinical inflammation.

Download Full-text

Intra-articular Injection of Culture-Expanded Mesenchymal Stem Cells Without Adjuvant Surgery in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The American Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/0363546519892278 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 48 (11) ◽

pp. 2839-2849 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Seong Hwan Kim ◽

Yoshi Pratama Djaja ◽

Yong-Beom Park ◽

Jung-Gwan Park ◽

Young-Bong Ko ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Knee Osteoarthritis ◽

Cartilage Repair ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Mean Difference ◽

Resonance Imaging ◽

Adjuvant Surgery ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Standardized Mean Difference ◽

And Cartilage

Background: Although many clinical studies have assessed the efficacy of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in knee osteoarthritis, evidence on their efficacy remains unclear owing to heterogeneity of cell entity and concomitant procedures. Purpose: To determine the efficacy of culture-expanded MSCs in knee osteoarthritis in terms of clinical outcome and cartilage repair via meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) without adjuvant surgery. Study Design: Meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus were searched from inception to December 31, 2018. RCTs with culture-expanded MSCs for treating knee osteoarthritis were included. Studies with adjuvant surgery or cell concentrate were excluded. Quality was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool. For meta-analysis, data on clinical outcomes were measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and data on cartilage repair were measured using the Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (WORMS); categorization related to improvement was extracted. Results: Six RCTs (203 patients) were included. Two studies were deemed to have a low risk of bias. In pooled analysis, the only significant difference was in the VAS score (mean difference, –13.55; 95% CI, –22.19 to −4.9). In cumulative pain analysis with VAS and WOMAC pain scores, there was significant improvement after treatment (standardized mean difference, –0.54; 95% CI, –0.85 to −0.23). There was no significant difference in cartilage repair assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (standardized mean difference, 0.11; 95% CI, –0.51 to 0.73), WORMS (standardized mean difference, 1.68; 95% CI −14.84 to 18.21), or categorical results (odds ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 0.32-7.59). Conclusion: Intra-articular injection of culture-expanded MSCs without adjuvant surgery can improve pain for patients experiencing knee osteoarthritis at short-term follow-up (6-12 months). However, evidence regarding function and cartilage repair remains limited.

Download Full-text