scholarly journals The Relation between Caffeine Consumption and Endometriosis: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
pp. 3457
Author(s):  
Konstantinos S. Kechagias ◽  
Konstantinos Katsikas Triantafyllidis ◽  
Margarita Kyriakidou ◽  
Panagiotis Giannos ◽  
Ilkka Kalliala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Caffeine Intake ◽  
Contributing Factors ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Caffeine Consumption ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Probable Role

While the contributing factors leading to endometriosis remain unclear, its clinical heterogeneity suggests a multifactorial causal background. Amongst others, caffeine has been studied extensively during the last decade as a putative contributing factor. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we provide an overview/critical appraisal of studies that report on the association between caffeine consumption and the presence of endometriosis. In our search strategy, we screened PubMed and Scopus for human studies examining the above association. The main outcome was the relative risk of endometriosis in caffeine users versus women consuming little or no caffeine (<100 mg/day). Subgroup analyses were conducted for different levels of caffeine intake: high (>300 mg/day) or moderate (100–300 mg/day). Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis (five cohort and five case-control studies). No statistically significant association was observed between overall caffeine consumption and risk for endometriosis (RR 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97–1.28, I2 = 70%) when compared to little or no (<100 mg/day) caffeine intake. When stratified according to level of consumption, high intake was associated with increased risk of endometriosis (RR 1.30, 95%CI 1.04–1.63, I2 = 56%), whereas moderate intake did not reach nominal statistical significance (RR 1.18, 95%CI 0.99–1.40, I2 = 37%). In conclusion, caffeine consumption does not appear to be associated with increased risk for endometriosis. However, further research is needed to elucidate the potential dose-dependent link between caffeine and endometriosis or the probable role of caffeine intake as a measurement of other unidentified biases.

scholarly journals The Differential Role of Human Cationic Trypsinogen (PRSS1) p.R122H Mutation in Hereditary and Nonhereditary Chronic Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheng Hu ◽  
Li Wen ◽  
Lihui Deng ◽  
Chenlong Zhang ◽  
Aurelia Lugea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Pancreatitis ◽  
Environmental Factors ◽  
Genetic Factors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Complex Disorder ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Cationic Trypsinogen

Background. Environmental factors and genetic mutations have been increasingly recognized as risk factors for chronic pancreatitis (CP). ThePRSS1p.R122H mutation was the first discovered to affect hereditary CP, with 80% penetrance. We performed here a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the associations ofPRSS1p.R122H mutation with CP of diverse etiology.Methods. The PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE database were reviewed. The pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals was used to evaluate the association of p.R122H mutation with CP. Initial analysis was conducted with all etiologies of CP, followed by a subgroup analysis for hereditary and nonhereditary CP, including alcoholic or idiopathic CP.Results. A total of eight case-control studies (1733 cases and 2415 controls) were identified and included. Overall,PRSS1p.R122H mutation was significantly associated with an increased risk of CP (OR = 4.78[1.13–20.20]). Further analysis showed p.R122H mutation strongly associated with the increased risk of hereditary CP (OR = 65.52[9.09–472.48]) but not with nonhereditary CP, both alcoholic and idiopathic CP.Conclusions. Our study showing the differential role of p.R122H mutation in various etiologies of CP indicates that this complex disorder is likely influenced by multiple genetic factors as well as environmental factors.

scholarly journals Association between Smoking and Risk of Primary Biliary Cholangitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 197-203
Author(s):  
Karn Wijarnpreecha ◽  
Monia Werlang ◽  
Panadeekarn Panjawatanan ◽  
Paul T Kroner ◽  
Omar Y Mousa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Primary Biliary Cholangitis ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Inverse Variance ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Former Smokers

Background & Aims: Studies have suggested that smokers may have a higher risk of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) although the results have been inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to better characterize the risk of PBC among smokers by identifying all relevant studies and summarizing their results together. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using Embase and Pubmed/MEDLINE databases from inception to September 2018 to identify all studies which compared the risk of PBC among current, ever and former smokers to non-smokers. Effect estimates from each study were extracted and combined together using the random-effect, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird. Results: Nine case-control studies with 21,577 participants met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The risk of PBC among ever smokers was significantly higher than non-smokers with the pooled odds ratio (OR) of 1.31 (95% CI, 1.03-1.67; I 2 89%). Subgroup analysis found that the risk was higher in both former smokers (pooled OR 1.36; 95% CI, 1.01-1.84; I 2 75%) and current smokers (pooled OR 1.18; 95% CI, 0.94-1.50; I 2 79%), although the latter did not reach statistical significance. Immunomodulatory and cytotoxic effect of cigarettes were the possible mechanisms behind this increased risk. Conclusions: A significantly increased risk of PBC among individuals who ever smoked was observed in this study, adding to the already long list of harmful health consequences of smoking.

scholarly journals Systematic review and meta-analysis of female lifestyle factors and risk of recurrent pregnancy loss

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ka Ying Bonnie Ng ◽  
George Cherian ◽  
Alexandra J. Kermack ◽  
Sarah Bailey ◽  
Nick Macklon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
General Population ◽  
Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lifestyle Factors ◽  
Caffeine Intake ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Secondary Outcomes

AbstractIt is known that lifestyle factors affect sporadic miscarriage, but the extent of this on RPL (recurrent pregnancy loss) is less well known. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the associations between lifestyle factors and RPL. Studies that analysed RPL in the context of BMI, smoking, alcohol and caffeine intake were included. The primary and secondary outcomes were odds of having RPL in the general population and odds of further miscarriage, respectively. Underweight and women with BMI > 25 are at higher odds of RPL in the general population (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.12–1.28 and OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06–1.38, respectively). In women with RPL, having BMI > 30 and BMI > 25 has increased odds of further miscarriages (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.25–2.50 and OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.07–1.72, respectively). The quality of the evidence for our findings was low or very low. Being underweight and BMI > 25 contributes significantly to increased risk of RPL (general population). BMI > 25 or BMI > 30 increases the risk of further miscarriages (RPL population). Larger studies addressing the effects of alcohol, cigarette smoking and caffeine on the risk of RPL with optimisation of BMI in this cohort of women are now needed.

Effect of Exposure to Cats and Dogs on the Risk of Asthma and Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 703-714
Author(s):  
Xiaoping Gao ◽  
Mei Yin ◽  
Pei Yang ◽  
Xia Li ◽  
Lingling Di ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Protective Role ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Favorable Effect ◽  
Case Control Studies

Background Controversies persist regarding whether exposure to cat or dog increases the risk of asthma and allergic rhinitis. Objective This meta-analysis aimed to assess the associations between exposure to cats or dogs and the development of asthma and allergic rhinitis. Methods A systematic review was performed to identify case-control and cohort studies before May 2019, evaluating the association between exposure to cats and dogs and the risk of asthma and rhinitis. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. The odds ratios (ORs) and risk ratios (RRs) were pooled for case-control and cohort studies, respectively. Subgroup analyses were performed on prespecified study-level characteristics. Results The meta-analysis of 34 cohort studies showed a protective role of exposure to cats [RR: 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.77–0.99] or dogs (RR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.73–0.97) in the development of asthma. The subgroup analysis of birth cohort (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.56–0.93) and children population (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70–0.96) also suggested a favorable role of exposure to dogs in the development of asthma. Pooled evidence from 13 case-control studies indicated no significant impact of cats (OR: 1.66, 95% CI: 0.39–2.94) and dogs (OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.92–1.52) on the development of asthma. A pooled analysis of five cohort studies showed a favorable effect of exposure to cats (RR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.33–0.86) or dogs (RR: 0.68, 95% CI 0.44–0.90) on the development of allergic rhinitis. Conclusion The findings indicated a protective effect of exposure to cats and dogs, especially ownership, on the development of asthma and allergic rhinitis.

scholarly journals Hypertension and the risk of endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dagfinn Aune ◽  
Abhijit Sen ◽  
Lars J. Vatten
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Contraceptive Use ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Adjusted Relative Risk ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Relative Risks ◽  
Increased Risk

Abstract A history of hypertension has been associated with increased risk of endometrial cancer in several studies, but the results have not been consistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies to clarify the association between hypertension and endometrial cancer risk. PubMed and Embase databases were searched up to 27th of February 2016. Prospective and case-control studies which reported adjusted relative risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals of endometrial cancer associated with a hypertension diagnosis were included. Summary relative risks were estimated using a random effects model. Nineteen case-control studies and 6 cohort studies were included. The summary RR was 1.61 (95% CI: 1.41–1.85, I2 = 86%) for all studies, 1.73 (95% CI: 1.45–2.06, I2 = 89%) for case-control studies and 1.32 (95% CI: 1.12–1.56, I2 = 47%) for cohort studies. The association between hypertension and endometrial cancer was weaker, but still significant, among studies with adjustment for smoking, BMI, oral contraceptive use, and parity, compared to studies without such adjustment. This meta-analysis suggest an increased risk of endometrial cancer among patients with hypertension, however, further studies with more comprehensive adjustments for confounders are warranted to clarify the association.

scholarly journals Oral hormone pregnancy tests and the risks of congenital malformations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

F1000Research ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 1725 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl Heneghan ◽  
Jeffrey K. Aronson ◽  
Elizabeth Spencer ◽  
Bennett Holman ◽  
Kamal R. Mahtani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Congenital Malformations ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Renal Anomalies ◽  
Congenital Heart Malformations ◽  
Increased Risk

Background: Oral hormone pregnancy tests (HPTs), such as Primodos, containing ethinylestradiol and high doses of norethisterone, were given to over a million women from 1958 to 1978, when Primodos was withdrawn from the market because of concerns about possible teratogenicity. We aimed to study the association between maternal exposure to oral HPTs and congenital malformations. Methods: We have performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies that included data from pregnant women and were exposed to oral HPTs within the estimated first three months of pregnancy, if compared with a relevant control group. We used random-effects meta-analysis and assessed the quality of each study using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for non-randomized studies. Results: We found 16 case control studies and 10 prospective cohort studies, together including 71 330 women, of whom 4,209 were exposed to HPTs. Exposure to oral HPTs was associated with a 40% increased risk of all congenital malformations: pooled odds ratio (OR) = 1.40 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.66; P<0.0001; I2 = 0%). Exposure to HPTs was associated with an increased risk of congenital heart malformations: pooled OR = 1.89 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.72; P = 0.0006; I2=0%); nervous system malformations  OR = 2.98 (95% CI 1.32 to 6.76; P = 0.0109 I2 = 78%); gastrointestinal malformations, OR = 4.50 (95% CI 0.63 to 32.20; P = 0.13; I2 = 54%); musculoskeletal malformations, OR = 2.24 (95% CI 1.23 to 4.08; P= 0.009; I2 = 0%); the VACTERL syndrome (Vertebral defects, Anal atresia, Cardiovascular anomalies, Tracheoesophageal fistula, Esophageal atresia, Renal anomalies, and Limb defects), OR = 7.47 (95% CI 2.92 to 19.07; P < 0.0001; I2 = 0%). Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis shows that use of oral HPTs in pregnancy is associated with increased risks of congenital malformations.

scholarly journals Relationship between caffeine intake and infertility: a systematic review of controlled clinical studies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bu Fanlong ◽  
Xue Feng ◽  
Xiao-Ying Yang ◽  
Jun Ren ◽  
Hui-juan Cao
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Clinical Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Average Score ◽  
Caffeine Intake ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
High Doses

Abstract Background: Previous studies showed that high dose of caffeine intake may induce some specific human reproductive system diseases, even lead to infertility. This review is aimed to systematically review the evidence from all controlled clinical studies of caffeine intake for infertility.Methods: Relevant randomized/quasi-randomized controlled trials, non-randomized clinical studies, cohort studies, and case-control studies were included. Participants were either those without a history of infertility who are willing to have a baby (for prospective studies) or infertile patients with confirmed diagnosis (for retrospective studies). Caffeine or caffeine-containing beverage was observed as the exposure factor. The key outcome was the diagnosis of infertility.Results: Four studies (one cohort study and three case-control studies) involving 12912 participants were included. According Newcastle - Ottawa Scale (NOS), the average score of case-control studies was 6, and the cohort study achieved 9. Meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were conducted. The results showed that low (OR 0.95, 95%CI 0.78-1.16), medium (OR 1.14, 95%CI 0.69-1.86) and high doses (OR 1.86, 95%CI 0.28-12.22) of caffeine intake may not increase the risk of infertility. The GRADE method was used to assess the certainty of the evidence and the results showed that the quality of the three evidence bodies were all low.Conclusion: Our study provides low quality evidence that regardless of low, medium and high doses of caffeine intake do not appear increase the risk of infertility. But the conclusion should be treated with caution. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42015015714

scholarly journals Prenatal maternal stress and risk of neurodevelopmental disorders in the offspring: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicla Manzari ◽  
Karen Matvienko-Sikar ◽  
Franco Baldoni ◽  
Gerard W. O'Keeffe ◽  
Ali S. Khashan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Maternal Stress ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Prenatal Maternal Stress ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Impact

Background: Prenatal maternal stress (PNMS) is defined as the experience of significant levels of prenatal stress, depression or anxiety during pregnancy. PNMS has been associated with increased risk of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in exposed offspring. However, these findings are inconsistent and other studies found no association, meaning a clear consensus on the impact of PNMS on ASD and ADHD risk is required. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize and critically review the existing literature on the effects of PNMS on ASD and ADHD risk. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus and EMBASE) will be searched for articles following a detailed search strategy. We will include cohort and case-control studies that assessed maternal exposure to psychological and/or environmental stress and had ASD or ADHD as an outcome. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles, abstracts and full articles to identify eligible studies. We will use a standardised data extraction form for extracting data and a bias classification tool for assessing study quality. This systematic review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The generic inverse variance method will be used if possible to perform meta-analyses. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required for this study because it will not involve the conduct or inclusion of any experimental or personal data that would require informed consent.  The systematic review will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018084222.

Coffee and caffeine intake and risk of ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 579-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fateme Shafiei ◽  
Asma Salari-Moghaddam ◽  
Alireza Milajerdi ◽  
Bagher Larijani ◽  
Ahmad Esmaillzadeh
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Coffee Consumption ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Caffeine Intake ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Coffee Intake ◽  
Decaffeinated Coffee ◽  
Caffeinated Coffee

BackgroundResults from earlier publications on the association of coffee and caffeine and risk of ovarian cancer are inconsistent.ObjectiveTo evaluate the link between coffee, caffeine, caffeinated coffee, and decaffeinated coffee consumption and risk of ovarian cancer.MethodsWe searched PubMed/Medline, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar to identify relevant publications up to April 2018. All case–control studies that considered coffee, caffeine, caffeinated coffee, or decaffeinated coffee as the exposure variables and ovarian cancer as the main outcome variable or as one of the outcomes were included in the systematic review. Publications in which odds ratios (ORs) or rate or risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported, were included in the meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 22 case–control studies were included in the systematic review, and 20 studies in the meta-analysis. Overall, 40 140 participants, including 8568 patients with ovarian cancer, aged ≥ 17 years were included. Combining 21 effect sizes from 18 studies, no significant association was observed between total coffee intake and risk of ovarian cancer (OR=1.09; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.26). There was no significant association between total caffeine intake and ovarian cancer risk (OR=0.89; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.45). In addition, caffeinated coffee intake was not significantly associated with ovarian cancer (OR=1.05; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.28). However, combining effect sizes from five studies, we found an inverse significant association between decaffeinated coffee intake and risk of ovarian cancer (OR=0.72; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.90).ConclusionsOur findings indicated an inverse association between decaffeinated coffee consumption and risk of ovarian cancer. No significant association was found between coffee, caffeine or caffeinated coffee intake and risk of ovarian cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document