scholarly journals Perspectives on the Early Quality of Evidence Guiding the Therapeutic Management of SARS CoV-2: A Systematic Literature Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaushik Subramanian ◽  
Anuradha Nalli ◽  
Vinitha Senthil ◽  
Saurabh Jain ◽  
Aravind Nayak ◽  
...  

Abstract Background:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak is a serious health concern. Repurposing of existing drugs indicated for other conditions seems to be the first choice for immediate therapeutic management. The quality of early evidence favoring the different treatment options needs to be apprised for informed decision making. Methods:In this systematic literature review, we apprised the quality of available evidence for different therapeutic options and also the basis for different treatment guidelines. In order to include all studies that are in different stages of publications, we also included studies from the preprint servers, BioRxiv, MedRxiv and published studies from PubMed. Results:We retrieved 5621 articles and included 20 studies for the systematic review. Based on our study, chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine either alone or in combination with azithromycin, remdesivir, corticosteroids, convalescent sera, ritonavir/lopinavir and arbidol were evaluated as therapeutic options. The data from different study designs reveal contradictory findings except for convalescent sera for which the evidence available is only from case series. Based on these early evidence, various national guidelines recommend remdesivir, convalescent sera, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine in different sub set of patients. Conclusion:Establishing consensus with respect to the endpoints to be assessed for respiratory viruses may enhance the quality of evidences in case of future pandemics. Further clinical evidence from the ongoing trials may lead to evolution of treatment guidelines with the addition of more therapeutic options.

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (10) ◽  
pp. 4107-4131
Author(s):  
Kaushik Subramanian ◽  
Anuradha Nalli ◽  
Vinitha Senthil ◽  
Saurabh Jain ◽  
Aravind Nayak ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayesha Saeed ◽  
Elke Rometsch ◽  
Anahí Hurtado-Chong

Abstract Background:Aneurysmal bone cysts (ABC) are rare benign, vascular, osteolytic bone lesions. Pelvic ABCs account for 8 -12% of these tumors and no clear guidelines for their treatment are available. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic literature review regarding pelvic ABCs. Our primary objective was to identify treatment modalities and to assess the bone healing, measured as the degree of radiological ossification. Secondary objectives were to describe demographics, tumor characteristics, clinical and functional outcomes and recurrence.Methods: Searches were conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Based on the scarcity of reports, inclusion criteria were kept broad and comprised primary or recurrent pelvic ABCs, with a minimum follow up of one year and available information on radiological ossification. Data was extracted on the individual patient-level and grouped according to treatment modality. Results:Forty-nine studies reporting on 194 patients were included. The level of evidence was low (29 case reports and 20 retrospective case series) and the reporting of outcomes inconsistent. Patients had a median age of 15 years and 52% were male. Five major treatment groups were identified and divided into 11 subgroups. The largest subgroup was curettage (23%) followed by selective arterial embolization (20%). Most ABCs were located in the ilium. Variations in mean tumor size (4.5-22.2cm) and degree of ossification (60-100%) depended on the treatment modality. Overall, in 77% cases the cyst ossified completely. Recurrence was reported in 22 patients (11%) and 2 patients (1%) died during the course of the treatment.Conclusion:Despite the low quality of reporting, this systematic review provides the first comprehensive overview of pelvic ABC treatment modalities and their radiological and clinical outcomes. Neoadjuvant sclero-embolic treatments appear to be used most in recent years, but further comparative studies and better quality of reporting are needed to determine their effectiveness. Quality of reporting should be improved by following reporting guidelines.Level of Evidence: IV


Author(s):  
Eric Weinstein ◽  
James E. Gosney ◽  
Luca Ragazzoni ◽  
Jeffrey Franc ◽  
TeriLynn Herbert ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objective: A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed to elucidate the current triage and treatment of an entrapped or mangled extremity in resource scarce environments (RSEs). Methods: A lead researcher followed the search strategy following inclusion and exclusion criteria. A first reviewer (FR) was randomly assigned sources. One of the 2 lead researchers was the second reviewer (SR). Each determined the level of evidence (LOE) and quality of evidence (QE) from each source. Any differing opinions between the FR and SR were discussed between them, and if differing opinions remained, then a third reviewer (the other lead researcher) discussed the article until a consensus was reached. The final opinion of each article was entered for analysis. Results: Fifty-eight (58) articles were entered into the final study. There was 1 study determined to be LOE 1, 29 LOE 2, and 28 LOE 3, with 15 determined to achieve QE 1, 37 QE 2, and 6 QE 3. Conclusion: This SLR showed that there is a lack of studies producing strong evidence to support the triage and treatment of the mangled extremity in RSE. Therefore, a Delphi process is suggested to adapt and modify current civilian and military triage and treatment guidelines to the RSE.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1337.2-1337
Author(s):  
T. W. Swinnen ◽  
M. Willems ◽  
I. Jonkers ◽  
F. P. Luyten ◽  
J. Vanrenterghem ◽  
...  

Background:The personal and societal burden of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) urges the research community to identify factors that predict its onset and progression. A mechanistic understanding of disease is currently lacking but needed to develop targeted interventions. Traditionally, risk factors for KOA are termed ‘local’ to the joint or ‘systemic’ referring to whole-body systems. There are however clear indications in the scientific literature that contextual factors such as socioeconomic position merit further scientific scrutiny, in order to justify a more biopsychosocial view on risk factors in KOA.Objectives:The aims of this systematic literature review were to assess the inclusion of socioeconomic factors in KOA research and to identify the impact of socioeconomic factors on pain and function in KOA.Methods:Major bibliographic databases, namely Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane, were independently screened by two reviewers (plus one to resolve conflicts) to identify research articles dealing with socioeconomic factors in the KOA population without arthroplasty. Included studies had to quantify the relationship between socioeconomic factors and pain or function. Main exclusion criteria were: a qualitative design, subject age below 16 years and articles not written in English or Dutch. Methodological quality was assessed via the Cochrane risk of bias tools for randomized (ROB-II) and non-randomized intervention studies (ROBIN-I) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for assessing the quality of non-randomised studies. Due to heterogeneity of studies with respect to outcomes assessed and analyses performed, no meta-analysis was performed.Results:Following de-duplication, 7639 articles were available for screening (120 conflicts resolved without a third reader). In 4112 articles, the KOA population was confirmed. 1906 (25%) were excluded because of knee arthroplasty and 1621 (21%) because of other issues related to the population definition. Socioeconomic factors could not be identified in 4058 (53%) papers and were adjusted for in 211 (3%) articles. In the remaining papers covering pain (n=110) and/or function (n=81), education (62%) and race (37%) were most frequently assessed as socioeconomic factors. A huge variety of mainly dichotomous or ordinal socioeconomic outcomes was found without further methodological justification nor sensitivity analysis to unravel the impact of selected categories. Although the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) was the most popular instrument to assess pain and function, data pooling was not possible as socioeconomic factors estimates were part of multilevel models in most studies. Overall results showed that lower education and African American race were consistent predictors of pain and poor function, but those effects diminished or disappeared when psychological aspects (e.g. discrimination) or poverty estimates were taken into account. When function was assessed using self-reported outcomes, the impact of socioeconomic factors was more clear versus performance-based instruments. Quality of research was low to moderate and the moderating or mediating impact of socioeconomic factors on intervention effects in KOA is understudied.Conclusion:Research on contextual socioeconomic factors in KOA is insufficiently addressed and their assessment is highly variable methodologically. Following this systematic literature review, we can highlight the importance of implementing a standardised and feasible set of socioeconomic outcomes in KOA trials1, as well as the importance of public availability of research databases including these factors. Future research should prioritise the underlying mechanisms in the effect of especially education and race on pain and function and assess its impact on intervention effects to fuel novel (non-)pharmacological approaches in KOA.References:[1]Smith TO et al. The OMERACT-OARSI Core Domain Set for Measurement in Clinical Trials of Hip and/or Knee Osteoarthritis J Rheumatol 2019. 46:981–9.Disclosure of Interests:None declared.


2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. A213.1-A213
Author(s):  
Ritva Rissanen ◽  
Hans-Yngve Berg ◽  
Marie Hasselberg

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document