scholarly journals Effectiveness of Interventions on Early Neurodevelopment of Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marilyn Aita ◽  
Gwenaëlle De Clifford-Faugère ◽  
Andréane Lavallée ◽  
Nancy Feeley ◽  
Robyn Stremler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preterm Infants ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensory Stimulation ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

Abstract Background and ObjectiveAs preterm infants’ neurodevelopment is shaped by NICU-related factors during their hospitalization, it is essential to evaluate which interventions are more beneficial for their neurodevelopment at this specific time. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions initiated during NICU hospitalization on preterm infants’ early neurodevelopment during their hospitalization and up to two weeks corrected age (CA).MethodsThis systematic review referred to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017047072). We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Systematic Reviews, CENTRAL, and Web of Science from 2002 to February 2020 and included randomized controlled/clinical trials conducted with preterm infants born between 24 and 366/7 weeks of gestation. All types of interventions instigated during NICU hospitalization were included. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection, data extraction, assessment of risks of bias and quality of evidence.ResultsFindings of 12 studies involving 901 preterm infants were synthesized. We combined three studies in a meta-analysis showing that compared to standard care, the NIDCAP intervention is effective in improving preterm infants’ neurobehavioral and neurological development at two weeks CA. We also combined two other studies in a meta-analysis indicating that parental participation did not significantly improve preterm infants’ neurobehavioral development during NICU hospitalization. For all other interventions (i.e., developmental care, sensory stimulation, music and physical therapy), the synthesis of results shows that compared to standard care or other types of comparators, the effectiveness was either controversial or partially effective.Conclusions and Implications:The overall quality of evidence was rated low to very low. Future studies are needed to identify interventions that are the most effective in promoting preterm infants’ early neurodevelopment during NICU hospitalization or close to term age. Interventions should be appropriately designed to allow comparison with previous studies and a combination of different instruments could provide a more global assessment of preterm infants’ neurodevelopment and thus allow for comparisons across studies.Systematic Review Protocol Registration:Prospero CRD42017047072

scholarly journals Effectiveness of interventions on early neurodevelopment of preterm infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marilyn Aita ◽  
Gwenaëlle De Clifford Faugère ◽  
Andréane Lavallée ◽  
Nancy Feeley ◽  
Robyn Stremler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preterm Infants ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensory Stimulation ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Quality Of Evidence

Abstract Background As preterm infants’ neurodevelopment is shaped by NICU-related factors during their hospitalization, it is essential to evaluate which interventions are more beneficial for their neurodevelopment at this specific time. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions initiated during NICU hospitalization on preterm infants’ early neurodevelopment during their hospitalization and up to two weeks corrected age (CA). Methods This systematic review referred to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017047072). We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Systematic Reviews, CENTRAL, and Web of Science from 2002 to February 2020 and included randomized controlled/clinical trials conducted with preterm infants born between 24 and 366/7 weeks of gestation. All types of interventions instigated during NICU hospitalization were included. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection, data extraction, assessment of risks of bias and quality of evidence. Results Findings of 12 studies involving 901 preterm infants were synthesized. We combined three studies in a meta-analysis showing that compared to standard care, the NIDCAP intervention is effective in improving preterm infants’ neurobehavioral and neurological development at two weeks CA. We also combined two other studies in a meta-analysis indicating that parental participation did not significantly improve preterm infants’ neurobehavioral development during NICU hospitalization. For all other interventions (i.e., developmental care, sensory stimulation, music and physical therapy), the synthesis of results shows that compared to standard care or other types of comparators, the effectiveness was either controversial or partially effective. Conclusions The overall quality of evidence was rated low to very low. Future studies are needed to identify interventions that are the most effective in promoting preterm infants’ early neurodevelopment during NICU hospitalization or close to term age. Interventions should be appropriately designed to allow comparison with previous studies and a combination of different instruments could provide a more global assessment of preterm infants’ neurodevelopment and thus allow for comparisons across studies. Trial registration Prospero CRD42017047072.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Interventions on Early Neurodevelopment of Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marilyn Aita ◽  
Gwenaëlle De Clifford-Faugère ◽  
Andréane Lavallée ◽  
Nancy Feeley ◽  
Robyn Stremler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preterm Infants ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensory Stimulation ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Quality Of Evidence

Abstract Background: As preterm infants’ neurodevelopment is shaped by NICU-related factors during their hospitalization, it is essential to evaluate which interventions are more beneficial for their neurodevelopment at this specific time. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions initiated during NICU hospitalization on preterm infants’ early neurodevelopment during their hospitalization and up to two weeks corrected age (CA). Methods: This systematic review referred to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017047072). We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Systematic Reviews, CENTRAL, and Web of Science from 2002 to February 2020 and included randomized controlled/clinical trials conducted with preterm infants born between 24 and 366/7 weeks of gestation. All types of interventions instigated during NICU hospitalization were included. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection, data extraction, assessment of risks of bias and quality of evidence. Results: Findings of 12 studies involving 901 preterm infants were synthesized. We combined three studies in a meta-analysis showing that compared to standard care, the NIDCAP intervention is effective in improving preterm infants’ neurobehavioral and neurological development at two weeks CA. We also combined two other studies in a meta-analysis indicating that parental participation did not significantly improve preterm infants’ neurobehavioral development during NICU hospitalization. For all other interventions (i.e., developmental care, sensory stimulation, music and physical therapy), the synthesis of results shows that compared to standard care or other types of comparators, the effectiveness was either controversial or partially effective. Conclusions: The overall quality of evidence was rated low to very low. Future studies are needed to identify interventions that are the most effective in promoting preterm infants’ early neurodevelopment during NICU hospitalization or close to term age. Interventions should be appropriately designed to allow comparison with previous studies and a combination of different instruments could provide a more global assessment of preterm infants’ neurodevelopment and thus allow for comparisons across studies. Systematic Review Protocol Registration: Prospero CRD42017047072

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Interventions on Early Neurodevelopment of Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marilyn Aita ◽  
Gwenaëlle De Clifford-Faugère ◽  
Andréane Lavallée ◽  
Nancy Feeley ◽  
Robyn Stremler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preterm Infants ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Quality Of Evidence

Abstract Background : As preterm infants’ neurodevelopment is shaped by NICU-related factors during their hospitalization, it is essential to evaluate which interventions are more beneficial for their neurodevelopment at this specific time. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions initiated during NICU hospitalization on preterm infants’ early neurodevelopment during their hospitalization and up to two weeks corrected age (CA). Methods: This systematic review referred to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017047072). We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Systematic Reviews, CENTRAL, and Web of Science from 2002 to February 2020. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection, data extraction, assessment of risks of bias and quality of evidence. Results: Findings of 12 studies involving 901 preterm infants were synthesized. We combined three studies in a meta-analysis showing that compared to standard care, NIDCAP intervention is effective in improving preterm infants’ neurobehavioral and neurological development at two weeks CA. We also combined two other studies in a meta-analysis indicating that parental participation did not significantly improve preterm infants’ neurobehavioral development during NICU hospitalization. For all other interventions (i.e., developmental care, sensory stimulation, music and physical therapy), the synthesis of results shows that compared to standard care or other types of comparators, the effectiveness was either controversial or partially effective. Conclusions: The overall quality of evidence was rated low to very low. Future studies are needed to identify interventions that are the most effective in promoting preterm infants’ neurodevelopment during NICU hospitalization or close to term age. Interventions should be appropriately designed to allow comparison with previous studies and a combination of different instruments could provide a more global assessment of preterm infants’ neurodevelopment and thus allow for comparisons across studies. Systematic Review Protocol Registration: Prospero CRD42017047072

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Antalgic Therapies in Patients with Vertebral Bone Metastasis: A Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. 3991
Author(s):  
Antonio Jose Martin-Perez ◽  
María Fernández-González ◽  
Paula Postigo-Martin ◽  
Marc Sampedro Pilegaard ◽  
Carolina Fernández-Lao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bone Metastasis ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Pharmacological Intervention ◽  
Vertebral Metastasis ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

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

scholarly journals Prognostic factors for chronic post-surgical pain after lung or pleural surgery: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e051554
Author(s):  
Pascal Richard David Clephas ◽  
Sanne Elisabeth Hoeks ◽  
Marialena Trivella ◽  
Christian S Guay ◽  
Preet Mohinder Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Prognostic Factor ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Surgical Pain ◽  
Literature Reviews ◽  
Chronic Post Surgical Pain

IntroductionChronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) after lung or pleural surgery is a common complication and associated with a decrease in quality of life, long-term use of pain medication and substantial economic costs. An abundant number of primary prognostic factor studies are published each year, but findings are often inconsistent, methods heterogeneous and the methodological quality questionable. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are therefore needed to summarise the evidence.Methods and analysisThe reporting of this protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist. We will include retrospective and prospective studies with a follow-up of at least 3 months reporting patient-related factors and surgery-related factors for any adult population. Randomised controlled trials will be included if they report on prognostic factors for CPSP after lung or pleural surgery. We will exclude case series, case reports, literature reviews, studies that do not report results for lung or pleural surgery separately and studies that modified the treatment or prognostic factor based on pain during the observation period. MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, Google Scholar and relevant literature reviews will be searched. Independent pairs of two reviewers will assess studies in two stages based on the PICOTS criteria. We will use the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool for the quality assessment and the CHARMS-PF checklist for the data extraction of the included studies. The analyses will all be conducted separately for each identified prognostic factor. We will analyse adjusted and unadjusted estimated measures separately. When possible, evidence will be summarised with a meta-analysis and otherwise narratively. We will quantify heterogeneity by calculating the Q and I2 statistics. The heterogeneity will be further explored with meta-regression and subgroup analyses based on clinical knowledge. The quality of the evidence obtained will be evaluated according to the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation guideline 28.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be necessary, as all data are already in the public domain. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021227888.

scholarly journals Mini-Implant-Retained Overdentures for the Rehabilitation of Completely Edentulous Maxillae: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. 4377
Author(s):  
Serena Vi ◽  
Damon Pham ◽  
Yu Yian Marina Du ◽  
Himanshu Arora ◽  
Santosh Kumar Tadakamadla
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Full Text Review

Purpose: Mini-dental implants (MDIs) have been used to support and retain overdentures, providing patients with a less invasive placement procedure. Although lucrative, the use of MDIs to retain a maxillary overdenture is still not an established treatment modality. This systematic review aims to answer the question: Do mini-implant-retained maxillary overdentures provide a satisfactory treatment outcome for complete edentulism? Methods: A systematic search for relevant articles was conducted to include articles published until April 2021 in the following electronic databases: CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science. All empirical studies evaluating the biological, survival, or patient-reported outcomes after placing mini-implant-retained overdentures in maxilla were considered for inclusion. The risk of bias was assessed by utilizing the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist. Study screening and data extraction were conducted by three reviewers independently. Results: The electronic search retrieved 1276 titles after omitting duplicates. Twenty articles were considered for full-text review, of which six studies were included in this systematic review. The included studies evaluated a total of 173 participants with a mean age of 66.3 years. The overall mini-implant survival rate was 77.1% (95% CI: 64.7–89.5%) with a mean follow-up time of 1.79 years (range: 6 months to 3 years). Implant survival differed significantly when comparing complete and partial palatal coverage overdentures. Those with complete palatal coverage exhibited less bone loss overall compared to partial coverage overdentures. Participants of all studies reported an increase in the quality of life and in satisfaction after rehabilitation treatment with MDIs. Conclusions: The survival rate of mini-implants retaining an overdenture in the maxilla was observed to be lower than the values reported for traditional implants in the literature. Improvements were observed in all aspects in terms of patient satisfaction, quality of life, oromyofunction, and articulation after the treatment.

scholarly journals What does my neighbourhood have to do with my weight? A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between neighbourhood socioeconomic status and body weight

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. e017567
Author(s):  
Shimels Hussien Mohammed ◽  
Mulugeta Molla Birhanu ◽  
Tesfamichael Awoke Sissay ◽  
Tesfa Dejenie Habtewold ◽  
Balewgizie Sileshi Tegegn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Newcastle Ottawa Scale ◽  
Neighbourhood Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Using Data

IntroductionIndividuals living in poor neighbourhoods are at a higher risk of overweight/obesity. There is no systematic review and meta-analysis study on the association of neighbourhood socioeconomic status (NSES) with overweight/obesity. We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse the existing evidence on the association of NSES with overweight/obesity.Methods and analysisCross-sectional, case–control and cohort studies published in English from inception to 15 May 2017 will be systematically searched using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Sciences and Google Scholar. Selection, screening, reviewing and data extraction will be done by two reviewers, independently and in duplicate. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) will be used to assess the quality of evidence. Publication bias will be checked by visual inspection of funnel plots and Egger’s regression test. Heterogeneity will be checked by Higgins’s method (I2statistics). Meta-analysis will be done to estimate the pooled OR. Narrative synthesis will be performed if meta-analysis is not feasible due to high heterogeneity of studies.Ethics and disseminationEthical clearance is not required as we will be using data from published articles. Findings will be communicated through a publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations at professional conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017063889.

scholarly journals Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Published in Indexed Portuguese Medical Journals: Time Trends and Critical Appraisal.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luísa Prada ◽  
Ana Prada ◽  
Miguel Antunes ◽  
Ricardo Fernandes ◽  
João Costa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Measurement Tool ◽  
Medical Journals ◽  
Electronic Search ◽  
Potential Impact

Abstract Introduction:Over the last years, the number of systematic reviews published is steadily increasing due to the global interest in this type of evidence synthesis. However, little is known about the characteristics of this research published in Portuguese medical journals. This study aims to evaluate the publication trends and overall quality of these systematic reviews.Material and Methods:Systematic reviews were identified through an electronic search up to August 2020, targeting Portuguese Medical journals indexed in MEDLINE. Systematic reviews selection and data extraction were done independently by three authors. The overall quality critical appraisal using the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR II) was independently assessed by three authors. Disagreements were solved by consensus.Results:Seventy systematic reviews published in 5 Portuguese medical journals were included. Most (n=57; 81,4%) were systematic reviews without meta-analysis. Until 2010, the number of systematic reviews per year increased. Since then, the number of reviews published has not remained stable and no less than 3 SRs were published per year. According to the systematic reviews’ typology, most have been predominantly conducted to assess the effectiveness of health interventions (n=28; 40,0%). General and Internal Medicine (n=26; 37,1%) was the most addressed field. Most systematic reviews (n=45; 64,3%) were rated as being of “critically low-quality”.Conclusions:There were consistent flaws in the methodological quality report of the systematic reviews included, particularly in establishing a prior protocol and not assessing the potential impact of the risk of bias on the results.Through the years, the number of systematic reviews published increased, yet their quality is suboptimal. There is a need to improve the reporting of systematic reviews in Portuguese medical journals, which can be achieved by better adherence to quality checklists/tools.Systematic review registration: INPLASY202090105

scholarly journals Genetic Association Studies of Red Blood Cell Transfusion Related Alloimmunization: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2459-2459
Author(s):  
Jorn Gerritsma ◽  
Ilja Oomen ◽  
Sanne Meinderts ◽  
C. Ellen van der Schoot ◽  
Bart J. Biemond ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Genetic Variants ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Association Studies ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Genetic Association Studies ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Cell Disease

Introduction: Blood transfusions are an important treatment modality for patients with either acute or chronic onset anemia such as trauma, sickle cell disease, and hematological malignancies. Transfusion poses a risk for alloimmunization, which may lead to potentially lethal transfusion reactions. A promising strategy to prevent alloimmunization is extensive matching on blood groups, yet this is a costly procedure and should be reserved for patients at highest risk for alloimmunization. Identification of genetic variants that increase the risk for alloimmunization might help to identify high-risk patients and could be used as a screening tool for patients receiving multiple transfusions. Objectives: To summarize all available evidence on genetic risk factors for alloimmunization after blood transfusion. Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of observational studies. Studies were only included in the meta-analysis if polymorphisms were tested at least 3 times, and if ethnic background of the population and the control populations were comparable between studies. Data sources: The online databases Embase, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were search for relevant articles with search terms: 1) transfusion, 2) alloimmunization 3) genetics. The search was last updated March 2018. Eligibility criteria: 1) Primary study that assessed the association of genetic polymorphisms with transfusion related alloimmunization, 2) a human population, 3) studies with at least 50 patients, 4) full text availability. Data extraction: Two reviewers independently screened articles for eligibility, extracted data using a standardized data extraction form. Extracted data included study setting, study population, participant demographics, baseline characteristics, study methodology, comparisons and outcome, and risk of bias. Primary outcome measure: Alloimmunization after one or more blood transfusions. Risk of bias assessment: The quality of the included studies was assessed by the Q-genie tool for genetic association studies. Results: A total of 2045 cases and 24084 controls were derived from 18 genetic case-control studies that were included in this systematic review. Most commonly studied disease group was sickle cell disease (SCD) (8 studies). Three studies included patients with different diseases and seven studies did not report the underlying disease. Eleven studies identified the association of HLA polymorphisms with alloimmunization and 8 studies focused on non-HLA variants. Overall quality of the included studies was moderate (11 studies), 2 studies were of high quality, and 5 studies were ranked as poor. HLA-DRB1*04 (Odds Ratio 7.16, 95%CI 3.87-13.22, P<0.00001) and HLA-DRB1*15 (OR 3.01, 95%CI 1.84-5.53, P<0.0001) were by meta-analysis significantly associated with anti-Fy(a) formation, although there was considerable heterogeneity (I2=78% and 55% respectively). Moreover, HLA-DRB1*10 (OR 2.64, 95%CI 1.41-4.95, P=0.002), HLA*DRB1*11 (OR 2.11, 95%CI 1.34-3.32, P=0.001), and HLA-DRB1*13 (OR 1.71, 95%CI 1.26-2.33, P=0.0006) were overall associated with anti-Kell formation. Heterogeneity was less prominent with an I2 of 0%, 54% and 19% respectively (Figure 1). No other variants were eligible for meta-analysis. Non-HLA variants were tested less extensively, as most variants were reported by only 1 study. Polymorphisms of genes in the immunomodulatory pathways were assessed most frequently. Of these variants, FC-gamma-receptor 2C.nc-ORF was associated with a decreased risk of alloimmunization in SCD (OR 0.26, 95%CI 0.11-0.64, p=0.003). All other associations that were described as significant by the original articles were summarized in Figure 2. Discussion: There is limited evidence supporting the role of genetic risk factors for alloimmunization. The results of our meta-analysis suggest that several HLA polymorphisms potentially influence antigen presentation of the Duffy(a) and Kell antigen. Once confirmed by experimental studies, these polymorphisms could be used as a screening tool for the prevention of alloimmunization among frequently transfused patients. Overall, the effect of genetic variants on alloimmunization has mostly been assessed by small studies, hampering reliable interpretation of the results. Future studies should include large and well-defined cohorts when performing genetic analysis on this complicated subject. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors associated with survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l6373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon M Fernando ◽  
Alexandre Tran ◽  
Wei Cheng ◽  
Bram Rochwerg ◽  
Monica Taljaard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
English Language ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Strategy ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Abstract Objective To determine associations between important pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to 4 February 2019. Primary, unpublished data from the United Kingdom National Cardiac Arrest Audit database. Study selection criteria English language studies that investigated pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Data extraction PROGRESS (prognosis research strategy group) recommendations and the CHARMS (critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies) checklist were followed. Risk of bias was assessed by using the QUIPS tool (quality in prognosis studies). The primary analysis pooled associations only if they were adjusted for relevant confounders. The GRADE approach (grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation) was used to rate certainty in the evidence. Results The primary analysis included 23 cohort studies. Of the pre-arrest factors, male sex (odds ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 0.95, moderate certainty), age 60 or older (0.50, 0.40 to 0.62, low certainty), active malignancy (0.57, 0.45 to 0.71, high certainty), and history of chronic kidney disease (0.56, 0.40 to 0.78, high certainty) were associated with reduced odds of survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Of the intra-arrest factors, witnessed arrest (2.71, 2.17 to 3.38, high certainty), monitored arrest (2.23, 1.41 to 3.52, high certainty), arrest during daytime hours (1.41, 1.20 to 1.66, high certainty), and initial shockable rhythm (5.28, 3.78 to 7.39, high certainty) were associated with increased odds of survival. Intubation during arrest (0.54, 0.42 to 0.70, moderate certainty) and duration of resuscitation of at least 15 minutes (0.12, 0.07 to 0.19, high certainty) were associated with reduced odds of survival. Conclusion Moderate to high certainty evidence was found for associations of pre-arrest and intra-arrest prognostic factors with survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018104795

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document