scholarly journals A systematic review of perioperative seizure prophylaxis during brain tumor resection: the case for a multicenter randomized clinical trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. E18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vyshak Chandra ◽  
Andrew K. Rock ◽  
Charles Opalak ◽  
Joel M. Stary ◽  
Adam P. Sima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Brain Tumor ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Seizure Prophylaxis ◽  
History Of ◽  
Brain Tumor Resection

OBJECTIVEThe majority of neurosurgeons administer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) prophylactically for supratentorial tumor resection without clear evidence to support this practice. The putative benefit of perioperative seizure prophylaxis must be weighed against the risks of adverse effects and drug interactions in patients without a history of seizures. Consequently, the authors conducted a systematic review of prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have evaluated the efficacy of perioperative seizure prophylaxis among patients without a history of seizures.METHODSFive databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL/Academic Search Complete, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect) were searched for RCTs published before May 2017 and investigating perioperative seizure prophylaxis in brain tumor resection. Of the 496 unique research articles identified, 4 were selected for inclusion in this review.RESULTSThis systematic review revealed a weighted average seizure rate of 10.65% for the control groups. There was no significant difference in seizure rates among the groups that received seizure prophylaxis and those that did not. Further, this expected incidence of new-onset postoperative seizures would require a total of 1258 patients to enroll in a RCT, as determined by a Farrington-Manning noninferiority test performed at the 0.05 level using a noninferiority difference of 5%.CONCLUSIONSAccording to a systematic review of major RCTs, the administration of prophylactic AEDs after brain tumor resection shows no significant reduction in the incidence of seizures compared with that in controls. A large multicenter randomized clinical trial would be required to assess whether perioperative seizure prophylaxis provides benefit for patients undergoing brain tumor resection.

Can Preoperative Mapping with Functional MRI Reduce Morbidity in Brain Tumor Resection? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 68 Observational Studies

Radiology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 204723
Author(s):  
Licia P. Luna ◽  
Farzaneh Ghazi Sherbaf ◽  
Haris I. Sair ◽  
Debraj Mukherjee ◽  
Isabella Bezerra Oliveira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Brain Tumor ◽  
Functional Mri ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Preoperative Mapping ◽  
Brain Tumor Resection

Prophylactic antiepileptic drug administration following brain tumor resection: results of a recent AANS/CNS Section on Tumors survey

2016 ◽  
Vol 126 (6) ◽  
pp. 1772-1778 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. Dewan ◽  
Reid C. Thompson ◽  
Steven N. Kalkanis ◽  
Fred G. Barker ◽  
Constantinos G. Hadjipanayis
Keyword(s):  
Brain Tumor ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
High Grade Glioma ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Seizure Prophylaxis ◽  
Tumor Pathology ◽  
Conflicting Evidence ◽  
Brain Tumor Resection

OBJECTIVEAntiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are often administered prophylactically following brain tumor resection. With conflicting evidence and unestablished guidelines, however, the nature of this practice among tumor surgeons is unknown.METHODSOn November 24, 2015, a REDCap (Research Electronic Database Capture) survey was sent to members of the AANS/CNS Section on Tumors to query practice patterns.RESULTSResponses were received from 144 individuals, including 18.8% of board-certified neurosurgeons surveyed (across 86 institutions, 16 countries, and 5 continents). The majority reported practicing in an academic setting (85%) as a tumor specialist (71%). Sixty-three percent reported always or almost always prescribing AED prophylaxis postoperatively in patients with a supratentorial brain tumor without a prior seizure history. Meanwhile, 9% prescribed occasionally and 28% rarely prescribed AED prophylaxis. The most common agent was levetiracetam (85%). The duration of seizure prophylaxis varied widely: 25% of surgeons administered prophylaxis for 7 days, 16% for 2 weeks, 21% for 2 to 6 weeks, and 13% for longer than 6 weeks. Most surgeons (61%) believed that tumor pathology influences epileptogenicity, with high-grade glioma (39%), low-grade glioma (31%), and metastases (24%) carrying the greatest seizure risk. While the majority used prophylaxis, 62% did not believe or were unsure if prophylactic AEDs reduced seizures postoperatively. The vast majority (82%) stated that a well-designed randomized trial would help guide their future clinical decision making.CONCLUSIONSWide knowledge and practice gaps exist regarding the frequency, duration, and setting of AED prophylaxis for seizure-naive patients undergoing brain tumor resection. Acceptance of universal practice guidelines on this topic is unlikely until higher-level evidence supporting or refuting the value of modern seizure prophylaxis is demonstrated.

Dental Implant Placement in Patients with a History of Medications Related to Osteonecrosis of the Jaws: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judd Sher ◽  
Kate Kirkham-Ali ◽  
Denny Luo ◽  
Catherine Miller ◽  
Dileep Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Drug Therapy ◽  
Dental Implant ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Bisphosphonate Treatment ◽  
Implant Placement ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
History Of

The present systematic review evaluates the safety of placing dental implants in patients with a history of antiresorptive or antiangiogenic drug therapy. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science, and OpenGrey databases were used to search for clinical studies (English only) to July 16, 2019. Study quality was assessed regarding randomization, allocation sequence concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective outcome reporting, and other biases using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for case series. A broad search strategy resulted in the identification of 7542 studies. There were 28 studies reporting on bisphosphonates (5 cohort, 6 case control, and 17 case series) and one study reporting on denosumab (case series) that met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis. The quality assessment revealed an overall moderate quality of evidence among the studies. Results demonstrated that patients with a history of bisphosphonate treatment for osteoporosis are not at increased risk of implant failure in terms of osseointegration. However, all patients with a history of bisphosphonate treatment, whether taken orally for osteoporosis or intravenously for malignancy, appear to be at risk of ‘implant surgery-triggered’ MRONJ. In contrast, the risk of MRONJ in patients treated with denosumab for osteoporosis was found to be negligible. In conclusion, general and specialist dentists should exercise caution when planning dental implant therapy in patients with a history of bisphosphonate and denosumab drug therapy. Importantly, all patients with a history of bisphosphonates are at risk of MRONJ, necessitating this to be included in the informed consent obtained prior to implant placement. The James Cook University College of Medicine and Dentistry Honours program and the Australian Dental Research Foundation Colin Cormie Grant were the primary sources of funding for this systematic review.

Effective Parental intervention strategies to reduce screen time among preschool-aged children: A systematic review (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Raj ◽  
Halimatus Sakdiah Minhat ◽  
Nor Afiah Mohd. Zulkefli ◽  
Norliza Ahmad
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Preschool Children ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Screen Time ◽  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Intervention Strategies ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Parental Intervention

BACKGROUND The increasing screen time exposure among young children in general and the reported negative consequences associated with excessive ST, calls for focused strategies to reduce ST, especially among young children. OBJECTIVE This systematic review aimed to identify effective parental intervention strategies to reduce ST among preschool children. METHODS A total of five databases, namely Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Medline Complete, PubMed, and Scopus, were searched for randomised controlled trials that involved intervention strategies in ST reduction among preschool children. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines were used. RESULTS A total of nine studies were assessed. The results showed that besides providing knowledge and awareness regarding ST, having restrictive practices, offering alternative activities to parents, and removal of screen from child’s bedroom were the most common strategies used by studies that reported successful intervention. Intervention duration of between six to eight weeks was sufficient to produce ST reduction. Face-to-face method was the commonest mode of delivery. Theoretical constructs that aimed at increasing parental self-efficacy, listing outcome expectations, and offering reinforcement of strategies that targeted both the parents and home environment were beneficial in reducing ST. CONCLUSIONS By offering appropriate strategies to parents, a reduction in the amount of ST was observed among the children. Future intervention studies could benefit in exploring culturally adapted strategies, especially in developing countries. Trials of higher quality would also facilitate the drawing of conclusions in future research. CLINICALTRIAL PROSPERO No: CRD42020199398

scholarly journals Effect of gut microbiota modulation on feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Najmeh Seifi ◽  
Ali Jafarzadeh Esfahani ◽  
Alireza Sedaghat ◽  
Reza Rezvani ◽  
Majid Khadem-Rezaiyan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Gut Microbiota ◽  
Beneficial Effect ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Energy Intake ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Clinical Endpoints ◽  
Feeding Tolerance

Abstract Purpose The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of pre-, pro-, and synbiotics on feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients. Methods MEDLINE, Science Direct, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to November 2019. English language randomized controlled trials reporting the effect of pre, pro or synbiotics on the feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients were included. Results Overall, 15 papers were selected for review. Among six studies reporting the energy intake, only two studies showed significantly higher energy intake in the prebiotic-receiving groups. Among four RCTs reporting frequency or time to achieve the target calorie, only one found a significant effect of probiotics to reduce the time to achieve a target dose of calorie. About the prevalence or duration of diarrhea, 7 out of 12 RCTs reported a beneficial effect. All but one study found no beneficial effects for gut microbiota manipulation on clinical endpoints including length of stay (LOS) in hospital and intensive care unit (ICU). Conclusion It should be noticed that the heterogeneity in study designs, product format, and ICU patient populations makes it difficult to draw any general conclusion. Overall, it seems that pre, pro, or synbiotics have no significant beneficial effect on feeding tolerance and clinical endpoints in critically ill adults, but they may reduce the prevalence or duration of diarrhea.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of inulin supplementation for functional constipation: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e042597
Author(s):  
Xinyuan Liu ◽  
Qing Yang ◽  
Zhongning He ◽  
Shukun Yao
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lifestyle Intervention ◽  
Functional Constipation ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
Basic Material ◽  
Economic Losses ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Clinical Trial Registry

IntroductionFunctional constipation (FC) is a common digestive system disease, with an uptrend in morbidity and mortality, resulting in huge social and economic losses. Although the guidelines recommend lifestyle intervention as a first-line treatment, lifestyle intervention is not widely used in clinic. Inulin can be used as the basic material of functional food. Clinical studies have shown that inulin supplementation is associated with increased frequency of bowel movements, but has certain side effects. Therefore, the efficacy and safety of inulin in the treatment of FC need to be further evaluated.Methods and analysisWe will search Medline, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Wanfang Database and China Biomedical Literature Database. We will also search the China Clinical Trial Registry, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and related conference summaries. This systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RevMan V.5.3.5 will be used for analysis.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will evaluate the efficacy and safety of inulin supplementation for the treatment of FC. All included data will be obtained from published articles, there is no need for the ethical approval, and it will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Due to lack of a new systematic review in this field, this study will combine relevant randomised controlled trials to better explore the evidence of inulin supplementation in the treatment of FC and guide clinical practice and clinical research.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020189234.

scholarly journals Health outcomes of sexual and gender minorities after cancer: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mandi L. Pratt-Chapman ◽  
Ash B. Alpert ◽  
Daniel A. Castillo
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Transgender Persons ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
History Of ◽  
Reported Health ◽  
And Gender ◽  
After Cancer

Abstract Purpose Cancer research on sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations is gaining momentum. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine what is currently known in the research literature regarding patient-reported health outcomes after cancer treatment among SGM populations. Methods In March 2021, a medical librarian conducted a systematic keyword search on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The primary inclusion criterion was assessment of at least one physical, psychosocial, emotional, or functional patient-reported health outcome related to the impacts of cancer diagnosis and/or treatment. Articles that met inclusion criteria were reviewed in their entirety, charted in a Word Table, and assessed for quality. Quality considerations included study design, sampling approach, diversity of sample, measures used, and analytic procedures. Studies were synthesized based on type of cancer study participants experienced. Results Sixty-four studies were included in the final analysis: most were quantitative, secondary analyses or cross-sectional studies with convenience samples, and focused on people with a history of breast or prostate cancer. Differences between sexual minority men and women in terms of coping and resilience were noted. Few studies reported on experiences of transgender persons and none reported on experiences of intersex persons. Conclusions A growing literature describes the patient-reported health outcomes of SGM people with a history of cancer. This study summarizes important between-group differences among SGM and heterosexual, cisgender counterparts that are critical for clinicians to consider when providing care. Implications for cancer survivors Sexual orientation and gender identity are relevant to cancer survivors’ health outcomes. Subgroups of SGM people have differential experiences and outcomes related to cancer and its impacts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document