scholarly journals The prevalence of malnutrition and its effects on the all-cause mortality among patients with heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. e0259300
Author(s):  
Shubin Lv ◽  
Songchao Ru
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Total Prevalence ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Objective Malnutrition has a high occurrence in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). The prevalence of malnutrition and its impact on all-cause mortality in patients with CHF were assessed using a meta-analysis. Methods PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Medline, CBM, CNKI, WANFANG DATA, and VIP databases were searched to collect cross-sectional and cohort studies on malnutrition, and the prevalence and all-cause mortality of patients with CHF were determined. The time of retrieval was from the database establishment to May 2021. Two researchers independently performed screening of the literature, data extraction and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. Then Stata 16.0 software was used for meta-analysis. Results A total of 10 cross-sectional and 21 cohort studies were included, including 12537 patients with CHF. A meta-analysis demonstrated that the total prevalence of malnutrition in patients with heart failure was 46% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43, 0.49). Compared to patients with non-malnutrition, malnutrition increased the risk of all-cause mortality in patients with CHF (hazard ratio = 2.15, 95% CI [1.89, 2.45], P < 0.05). Discussion Current evidence suggests that the prevalence of malnutrition is high among patients with CHF. The risk of all-cause mortality in such patients can be increased by malnutrition. Therefore, the risk of malnutrition in patients with CHF should be considered to reduce the occurrence of adverse clinical outcomes.

Abstract 14848: Meta-analysis of the Effects of Carvedilol vs Metoprolol on All-cause Mortality and Hospitalizations in Patients With Heart Failure

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandros Briasoulis ◽  
Sagar Mallikethi-Reddy ◽  
Shikha Sharma ◽  
Rajeev Sudhakar ◽  
Luis Afonso
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Metoprolol Tartrate ◽  
Metoprolol Succinate ◽  
Medline Search ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Long Term Treatment ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Introduction: Long-term treatment with appropriate doses of carvedilol or metoprolol is currently recommended for patients with Heart Failure with reduced Ejection Fraction (HFrEF) to decrease the risk of death, hospitalizations and patients’ symptoms. It remains unclear if the b-blockers used in HFrEF patients are equal or carvedilol is superior to metoprolol types. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of the comparative effects of carvedilol vs metoprolol tartrate and succinate on all-cause mortality or/and hospitalization. We conducted an EMBASE and MEDLINE search for prospective controlled trials and cohort studies of patients with HFrEF who were received to treatment with carvedilol vs. metoprolol. Results: We identified 4 prospective controlled and 6 cohort studies with 30943 that received carvedilol and 69925 patients on metoprolol types (tartrate and succinate) with an average follow up duration of 36.4 months. All-cause mortality was reduced in prospective studies with carvdedilol vs metoprolol tartrate. Neither all-cause mortality nor hospitalizations were significantly different between carvedilol and metoprolol succinate in the cohort studies. Conclusion: In patients with HFrEF carvedilol and metoprolol succinate have similar effectiveness in reducing all-cause mortality.

scholarly journals Association Between Asthma and Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lin-Lin Kang ◽  
Pei-En Chen ◽  
Tao-Hsin Tung ◽  
Ching-Wen Chien
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Newcastle Ottawa Scale ◽  
The Cochrane Library ◽  
The Relationship

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the association between asthma and migraine and assess the risk for migraine in patients with asthma.Methods: We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), and Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE) databases from inception to September 26, 2021, for indexed observational studies that examined either the odds or risk of migraine in subjects with asthma. The qualities of the included studies were evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to calculate the odds ratio for case-control and cross-sectional studies and the risk ratio for cohort studies.Results: Seven observational studies (four cross-sectional and three cohort studies) with a total of 549,534 study subjects were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis and selected for data extraction. Four articles were considered to be of moderate quality; other studies were considered to be of high quality. Asthma was associated with increased odds (OR, 1.85; 95%CI, 1.39–2.45) and risk of migraine (RR, 1.70; 95%CI, 1.52–1.90).Conclusions: The available evidence that supports the existence of an association between asthma and migraine is limited. Clinicians should be aware that patients with asthma show both increased prevalence and incidence of migraine. Further studies are warranted to further clarify the relationship between asthma and migraine.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=185881, identifier: CRD42020185881.

scholarly journals Prediction of all-cause mortality with malnutrition assessed by controlling nutritional status score in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Huiyang Li ◽  
Peng Zhou ◽  
Yikai Zhao ◽  
Huaichun Ni ◽  
Xinping Luo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Nutritional Status ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Conut Score

Abstract Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the association between malnutrition assessed by the controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score and all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Settings: A comprehensively literature search of PubMed and Embase databases was performed until 30 November 2020. Studies reporting the utility of CONUT score in prediction of all-cause mortality among patients with heart failure were eligible. Patients with a CONUT score ≥2 are grouped as malnourished. Predictive values of the CONUT score were summarized by pooling the multivariable-adjusted risk ratios (RR) with 95 % CI for the malnourished v. normal nutritional status or per point CONUT score increase. Participants: Ten studies involving 5196 patients with heart failure. Results: Malnourished patients with heart failure conferred a higher risk of all-cause mortality (RR 1·92; 95 % CI 1·58, 2·34) compared with the normal nutritional status. Subgroup analysis showed the malnourished patients with heart failure had an increased risk of in-hospital mortality (RR 1·78; 95 % CI 1·29, 2·46) and follow-up mortality (RR 2·01; 95 % CI 1·58, 2·57). Moreover, per point increase in CONUT score significantly increased 16% risk of all-cause mortality during the follow-up. Conclusions: Malnutrition defined by the CONUT score is an independent predictor of all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure. Assessment of nutritional status using CONUT score would be helpful for improving risk stratification of heart failure.

Executive functions in children with heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
William M. Jackson ◽  
Nicholas Davis ◽  
Johanna Calderon ◽  
Jennifer J. Lee ◽  
Nicole Feirsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Executive Functions ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Executive Dysfunction ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Planning Problem ◽  
Healthy Controls ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Increased Risk

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.

scholarly journals Risk of dementia in gout and hyperuricaemia: a meta-analysis of cohort studies

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e041680
Author(s):  
Shu-Yue Pan ◽  
Rui-Juan Cheng ◽  
Zi-Jing Xia ◽  
Qiu-Ping Zhang ◽  
Yi Liu
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Crystal Formation ◽  
Medical Subject Headings ◽  
Eligibility Criteria

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.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Systolic Heart Failure in Sinus Rhythm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Cohort Studies

TH Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 04 (04) ◽  
pp. e383-e392
Author(s):  
Marie H. Nygaard ◽  
Anne-Mette Hvas ◽  
Erik L. Grove
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Sinus Rhythm ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Introduction There is conflicting evidence on the risk–benefit ratio of oral anticoagulants (OAC) in heart failure (HF) patients without atrial fibrillation. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OAC in HF patients in sinus rhythm. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed and Embase. We included randomized controlled trials (RCT) and cohort studies, comparing OAC with antiplatelet or no treatment/placebo in patients with HF. Outcomes evaluated were stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, and major bleeding. Results Five RCTs and three cohort studies were included. OAC was associated with a reduced risk of ischemic stroke when compared with no treatment/placebo (odds ratio [OR] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.47, 0.94]) and antiplatelet therapy (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: [0.37, 0.81]). No significant reduction was found in MI, when OAC was compared with no treatment/placebo (OR = 0.82, 95% CI: [0.63, 1.07]) or antiplatelet therapy (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: [0.60, 1.81]). The all-cause mortality analysis showed no significant reduction when comparing OAC with no treatment/placebo (OR = 0.99, 95% CI: [0.87, 1.12]) or antiplatelet therapy (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: [0.86, 1.16]). The nonsignificant effect of OAC on all-cause mortality was supported by a meta-analysis of the three cohort studies (OR = 1.02, 95% CI: [0.75, 1.38]). Patients treated with OAC had a significantly higher risk of major bleeding than patients receiving antiplatelet therapy (OR = 2.16, 95% CI: [1.55, 3.00]) and a numerically higher risk when compared with no treatment/placebo (OR = 2.38, 95% CI: [0.87, 6.49]). Conclusion The present study does not support the routine use of OAC in patients with HF in sinus rhythm.

scholarly journals The safety and efficacy of SDLT-2 (Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2) inhibitor versus placebo in the treatment of heart failure in patients with or without T2DM (Type 2 diabetes mellitus): A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qian Zhang ◽  
Xiaofei Wang ◽  
Peipei Ge ◽  
Aizhen Hu ◽  
Xuexun Li
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sglt2 Inhibitor ◽  
Systemic Review ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Volume Depletion ◽  
Patients With Heart Failure ◽  
Safety Outcomes

Abstract Background Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor which is a type of drug used for the treatment of diabetes mellitus, has been reported by many trials that it could be beneficial for patients with established heart failure. A meta-analysis on this subject could obtain more reliable estimates of the efficacy and safety outcomes. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials of SGLT2 inhibitor in patients with heart failure was conducted. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for trials published from inception to March, 2018. PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) was used to conduct the review. For quality assessment of included studies. The methodological quality of the included trials was assessed using the Cochrane tool for assessing randomized clinical trials (RCT). Efficacy outcomes included hospitalization for heart failure and all-cause death. Safety outcomes consisted of serious adverse event (SAE) and volume depletion. Results We included data from 5 identified studies and 8775 patients (aged 64.9, female 29.8%). A total of 3930 (44.8%) patients were known to have diabetes mellitus. Compared with placebo, SGLT2 inhibitor decrease the incidence of hospitalization for heart failure (RR 0.692; 95%CI, 0.611-0.784 P<0.001), and all-cause death (RR 0.824; 95%CI, 0.736-0.922 P=0.001). The incidence of SAE in patients with a treatment of SGLT2 inhibitor was low (RR 0.869; 95%CI, 0.779-0.970 P=0.012). SGLT2 inhibitor didn’t increase the incidence of volume depletion (RR1.165, 95%CI, 0.977-1.390 P=0.089). Conclusion Our results confirm that SGLT2 inhibitor is effective and safe for patients with heart failure regardless of presence of diabetes mellitus.

Comparison between Ologen implant and Mitomycin C in trabeculectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyan Liu ◽  
Yali Du ◽  
Min Lei ◽  
Leyi Zhuang ◽  
Peng Lv
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Collagen Matrix ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Alternative Choice

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.

The Incidence of SARS-COV-2 Manifestations in the Central Nervous System: A Rapid Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Verena Mayr ◽  
Glechner Anna ◽  
Gerald Gartlehner ◽  
Irma Klerings ◽  
Peter Lackner
Keyword(s):  
Central Nervous System ◽  
Nervous System ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neurological Complications ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Treatment Team

Abstract Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by SARS-CoV-2 and presents itself mainly as a respiratory tract infection. However, reports of associated central nervous system (CNS) manifestations are increasing.Methods: We conducted this rapid review to determine the frequency of CNS manifestations of COVID-19 (CNS symptoms, acute cerebrovascular disease, and infectious/inflammatory CNS diseases) and to summarize the current evidence for direct invasion of the CNS by SARS-CoV-2. An information specialist searched Ovid MEDLINE, the CDC: COVID-19 Research Articles Downloadable and WHO COVID-19 Databases, CENTRAL, and Epistemonikos.org on May 13, 2020. Two reviewers screened abstracts and potentially relevant full-text publications independently. The data extraction, assessment of risk of bias,and certainty of evidence using GRADE was done by one reviewer and double-checked by another. If possible and reasonable, a meta-analysis was carried out.Results: We identified 13 relevant studies (four cohort studies, nine case studies) with a total of 866 COVID-19 patients.In a Chinese cohort, dizziness (16.8%; 36 of 214) and headache (13.1%; 28 of 214) were the most common CNS symptoms reported. A meta-analysis of four cohort studies including 851 COVID-19 patients showed an incidence of 3.3% (95% CI: 2.2–4.9) for ischemic stroke (follow-up: one to five weeks). In 13 of 15 encephalitis case studies, PCR testing of the cerebrospinal fluid did not detect any virus components.Conclusion: CNS manifestations occur frequently in patients with COVID-19. It is important to integrate neurologists into the multiprofessional COVID-19 treatment team to detect neurological complications early and to treat them correctly.

scholarly journals Neighbourhood socioeconomic status and overweight/obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological studies

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 ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Neighbourhood Socioeconomic Status

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