-
Heliyon Jul 2023Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency is a genetic disorder caused by a structural abnormality in the enzyme. G6PD deficiency is most prevalent among... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency is a genetic disorder caused by a structural abnormality in the enzyme. G6PD deficiency is most prevalent among African, Asian, and Mediterranean people. This study aimed to investigate how prevalent G6PD deficiency is in African neonates with jaundice.
METHODS
The public sources, such as PubMed, Science Direct, Google Scholar, and Africa Journal Online were searched for articles that reported the prevalence of G6PD deficiency published before March 21st, 2022. The Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI) critical assessment checklist was used to evaluate the quality of individual studies. STATA-17 was used to do the statistical analysis. The pooled prevalence of G6PD deficiency in neonates with jaundice in Africa was calculated using a forest plot and a random effects model. I statistics and Galbraith plots were used to assess heterogeneity. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot and Egger's statistical test.
RESULTS
Ten studies involving 1555 neonates with jaundice were involved in the study. G6PD deficiency was prevalent in 24.60% of African neonates with jaundice (95% CI:12.47-36.74) with considerable heterogeneity (I = 100%). Nigerian neonates with jaundice had the highest G6PD deficiency (49.67%), whereas South Africans had the lowest (3.14%).
CONCLUSION
G6PD deficiency has been implicated in a significant portion of African neonates with jaundice, notwithstanding the need for greater research on predisposing variables from other countries. Therefore, it should be thought of performing screening and diagnostic laboratory tests for G6PD deficiency.
PubMed: 37539282
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18437 -
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery May 2022Hyperbilirubinemia following cardiac surgery is a common phenomenon and is of emerging interest in prognostic factor research. This systematic review and meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Hyperbilirubinemia following cardiac surgery is a common phenomenon and is of emerging interest in prognostic factor research. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the association between post-operative hyperbilirubinemia (PH) and mortality and morbidity in cardiac surgery patients.
METHODS
Ovid Medline and Ovid Embase were searched from inception to July 2020 for studies evaluating the prognostic significance of PH following cardiac surgery. Maximally adjusted odds ratios (OR) with associated confidence intervals were obtained from each study and pooled using random effects inverse variance modelling to assess in-hospital mortality. Standardised mean differences were pooled to assess Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS). Qualitative analysis was performed to assess ventilation requirements and long-term mortality. Meta-regression was used to assess inter- and intra-study heterogeneity.
RESULTS
3251 studies satisfied the selection criteria, from which 12 studies incorporating 3876 participants were included. PH significantly predicted in-hospital mortality with a pooled OR of 7.29 (95% CI 3.53, 15.09). Multiple pre-defined covariates contributed to the prognostic significance of PH, however only aortic cross-clamp time (p < 0.0001) and number of transfusions (p = 0.0001) were significant effect modifiers. PH significantly predicted both ICU LOS (Mean difference 1.32 [95% CI 0.04-2.6]) and hospital LOS (Mean difference 1.79 [95% CI 0.36-3.21]). Qualitative analysis suggested PH is associated with increased post-operative ventilation requirements and reduced long-term survival rates.
CONCLUSIONS
Hyperbilirubinemia is a cost-effective, widely available prognostic marker of adverse outcomes following cardiac surgery, albeit with residual sources of heterogeneity.
Topics: Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Hyperbilirubinemia; Length of Stay; Prognosis
PubMed: 35619178
DOI: 10.1186/s13019-022-01870-2 -
Systematic Reviews Apr 2024Leptospirosis, an important zoonotic bacterial disease, commonly affects resource-poor populations and results in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Leptospirosis, an important zoonotic bacterial disease, commonly affects resource-poor populations and results in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. The value of antibiotics in leptospirosis remains unclear, as evidenced by the conflicting opinions published.
METHODS
We conducted a search in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for studies. These studies included clinical trials and retrospective studies that evaluated the efficacy or safety of antibiotics for leptospirosis treatment. The primary outcomes assessed were defervescence time, mortality rate, and hospital stays. Subgroup analyses were performed based on whether there were cases involving children and whether there were cases of severe jaundice. Safety was defined as the prevalence of adverse events associated with the use of antibiotics. p scores were utilized to rank the efficacy of the antibiotics.
RESULTS
There are included 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 control trial (CT), and 3 retrospective studies (RS) involving 920 patients and 8 antibiotics. Six antibiotics resulted in significantly shorter defervescence times compared to the control, namely cefotaxime (MD, - 1.88; 95% CI = - 2.60 to - 1.15), azithromycin (MD, - 1.74; 95% CI = - 2.52 to - 0.95), doxycycline (MD, - 1.53; 95% CI = - 2.05 to - 1.00), ceftriaxone (MD, - 1.22; 95% CI = - 1.89 to - 0.55), penicillin (MD, - 1.22; 95% CI = - 1.80 to - 0.64), and penicillin or ampicillin (MD, - 0.08; 95% CI = - 1.01 to - 0.59). The antibiotics were not effective in reducing the mortality and hospital stays. Common adverse reactions to antibiotics included Jarisch-Herxheimer reaction, rash, headache, and digestive reactions (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and others).
CONCLUSIONS
Findings recommend that leptospirosis patients be treated with antibiotics, which significantly reduced the leptospirosis defervescence time. Cephalosporins, doxycycline, and penicillin are suggested, and azithromycin may be a suitable alternative for drug-resistant cases.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42022354938.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Azithromycin; Doxycycline; Leptospirosis; Network Meta-Analysis; Penicillins
PubMed: 38627798
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02519-y -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Dec 2016Portal biliopathy (PB) is defined as the presence of biliary abnormalities in patients with non-cirrhotic/non-neoplastic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) and... (Review)
Review
Portal biliopathy (PB) is defined as the presence of biliary abnormalities in patients with non-cirrhotic/non-neoplastic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) and portal cavernoma (PC). The pathogenesis of PB is due to compression of bile ducts by PC and/or to ischemic damage secondary to an altered biliary vascularization in EHPVO and PC. Although asymptomatic biliary abnormalities can be frequently seen by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in patients with PC (77%-100%), only a part of these (5%-38%) are symptomatic. Clinical presentation includes jaundice, cholangitis, cholecystitis, abdominal pain, and cholelithiasis. In this subset of patients is required a specific treatment. Different therapeutic approaches aimed to diminish portal hypertension and treat biliary strictures are available. In order to decompress PC, surgical porto-systemic shunt or transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt can be performed, and treatment on the biliary stenosis includes endoscopic (Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with endoscopic sphincterotomy, balloon dilation, stone extraction, stent placement) and surgical (bilioenteric anastomosis, cholecystectomy) approaches. Definitive treatment of PB often requires multiple and combined interventions both on vascular and biliary system. Liver transplantation can be considered in patients with secondary biliary cirrhosis, recurrent cholangitis or unsuccessful control of portal hypertension.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Bile Duct Diseases; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Cholangiopancreatography, Magnetic Resonance; Cholangitis; Cholecystitis; Cholelithiasis; Constriction, Pathologic; Humans; Hypertension, Portal; Jaundice, Obstructive; Portal Vein; Portasystemic Shunt, Surgical; Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic
PubMed: 28018098
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i45.9909 -
World Journal of Surgical Oncology Jul 2016In patients requiring surgical resection for malignant biliary jaundice, it is unclear if preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) would improve mortality and morbidity by... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
In patients requiring surgical resection for malignant biliary jaundice, it is unclear if preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) would improve mortality and morbidity by restoration of biliary flow prior to operation. This is a meta-analysis to pool the evidence and assess the utility of PBD in patients with malignant obstructive jaundice. The primary outcome is comparing mortality outcomes in patients with malignant obstructive jaundice undergoing direct surgery (DS) versus PBD. The secondary outcomes include major adverse events and length of hospital stay in both the groups.
METHODS
Studies using PBD in patients with malignant obstructive jaundice were included in this study. For the data collection and extraction, articles were searched in MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials & Database of Systematic Reviews, etc. Pooled proportions were calculated using both Mantel-Haenszel method (fixed effects model) and DerSimonian-Laird method (random effects model).
RESULTS
Initial search identified 2230 reference articles, of which 204 were selected and reviewed. Twenty-six studies (N = 3532) for PBD in malignant obstructive jaundice which met the inclusion criteria were included in this analysis. The odds ratio for mortality in PBD group versus DS group was 0.96 (95 % CI = 0.71 to 1.29). Pooled number of major adverse effects was lower in the PBD group at 10.40 (95 % CI = 9.96 to 10.83) compared to 15.56 (95 % CI = 15.06 to 16.05) in the DS group. Subgroup analysis comparing internal PBD to DS group showed lower odds for major adverse events (odds ratio, 0.48 with 95 % CI = 0.32 to 0.74).
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with malignant biliary jaundice requiring surgery, PBD group had significantly less major adverse effects than DS group. Length of hospital stay and mortality rate were comparable in both the groups.
Topics: Biliary Tract Neoplasms; Biliary Tract Surgical Procedures; Drainage; Duodenal Neoplasms; Humans; Jaundice, Obstructive; Length of Stay; Odds Ratio; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Preoperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27400651
DOI: 10.1186/s12957-016-0933-2 -
BMC Gastroenterology Oct 2022Liver diseases post-COVID-19 vaccination is extremely rare but can occur. A growing body of evidence has indicated that portal vein thrombosis, autoimmune hepatitis,...
BACKGROUND
Liver diseases post-COVID-19 vaccination is extremely rare but can occur. A growing body of evidence has indicated that portal vein thrombosis, autoimmune hepatitis, raised liver enzymes and liver injuries, etc., may be potential consequence of COVID-19 vaccines.
OBJECTIVES
To describe the results of a systematic review for new-onset and relapsed liver disease following COVID-19 vaccination.
METHODS
For this systematic review, we searched Proquest, Medline, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, Scopus and Nature through the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses PRISMA guideline for studies on the incidence of new onset or relapsed liver diseases post-COVID-19 vaccination, published from December 1, 2020 to July 31, 2022, with English language restriction.
RESULTS
Two hundred seventy-five cases from one hundred and eighteen articles were included in the qualitative synthesis of this systematic review. Autoimmune hepatitis (138 cases) was the most frequent pathology observed post-COVID-19 vaccination, followed by portal vein thrombosis (52 cases), raised liver enzymes (26 cases) and liver injury (21 cases). Other cases include splanchnic vein thrombosis, acute cellular rejection of the liver, jaundice, hepatomegaly, acute hepatic failure and hepatic porphyria. Mortality was reported in any of the included cases for acute hepatic failure (n = 4, 50%), portal vein thrombosis (n = 25, 48.1%), splanchnic vein thrombosis (n = 6, 42.8%), jaundice (n = 1, 12.5%), raised liver enzymes (n = 2, 7.7%), and autoimmune hepatitis (n = 3, 2.2%). Most patients were easily treated without any serious complications, recovered and did not require long-term hepatic therapy.
CONCLUSION
Reported evidence of liver diseases post-COIVD-19 vaccination should not discourage vaccination against this worldwide pandemic. The number of reported cases is relatively very small in relation to the hundreds of millions of vaccinations that have occurred and the protective benefits offered by COVID-19 vaccination far outweigh the risks.
Topics: Humans; Chronic Disease; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Hepatitis, Autoimmune; Liver Failure, Acute; Vaccination; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 36229799
DOI: 10.1186/s12876-022-02507-3 -
Vaccine Sep 2020Vaccination of pregnant women against hepatitis A virus (HAV) or hepatitis B virus (HBV) may benefit the mother and the fetus but is not routinely recommended. However,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Vaccination of pregnant women against hepatitis A virus (HAV) or hepatitis B virus (HBV) may benefit the mother and the fetus but is not routinely recommended. However, the risk associated with vaccination should be weighed against the risk of HAV or HBV infection. Data on safety profiles after hepatitis A, B or combined AB immunization during pregnancy are limited.
METHODS
We searched the GSK Worldwide Safety Database for adverse events (AEs) following immunization of pregnant women with HAV (Havrix, GSK), HBV (Engerix-B, GSK) or the combined hepatitis AB (Twinrix, GSK) vaccine since market authorization through 31 January 2018, covering at least 25 years. AE reports (spontaneous, post-marketing surveillance and clinical trial cases) in the GSK Worldwide Safety Database were identified using a systematic search and were reviewed by clinicians to ascertain pregnancy status at time of vaccination and characterize adverse pregnancy outcomes, including pregnancy-related AEs and AEs in infants regardless of the causality assessment.
RESULTS
Overall, 613, 700 and 363 pregnancies with exposure to Havrix, Engerix-B and Twinrix, respectively, were reported. Of these, 378, 339 and 194 were analyzed. The most frequently identified pregnancy outcomes were live infants (288, 223 and 151), spontaneous abortions (43, 57 and 26) and elective terminations (25, 24 and 9). A total of 19, 29 and 10 cases of congenital anomalies were reported. Of these, 17, 20 and 7 were major birth defects. The most commonly reported pregnancy-related AE and AE in infants were premature delivery (28) and jaundice (11), respectively. No maternal deaths were reported. Congenital anomalies were reported in all recorded infant deaths.
CONCLUSIONS
This review did not indicate any concerning pattern of adverse pregnancy outcomes following exposure to any of the 3 vaccines during pregnancy.
Topics: Female; Hepatitis A Vaccines; Hepatitis B; Hepatitis B Vaccines; Humans; Infant; Pregnancy; Vaccination; Vaccines, Combined
PubMed: 32741674
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.07.041 -
In Vivo (Athens, Greece) 2020Malignant obstructive jaundice (MOJ) is a common condition caused by several primary and secondary cancers. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/AIM
Malignant obstructive jaundice (MOJ) is a common condition caused by several primary and secondary cancers. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate technical success rate and safety of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) versus endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) in MOJ.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Relevant trials were identified by searching electronic databases and conference meetings. We included thirteen retrospective studies and four randomized controlled trials, with PTBD performed in 2353 patients and EBD in 8178 patients. Outcomes of interest included: technical success rate, overall complications, 30-day mortality rate and risk of bleeding, pancreatitis, cholangitis and tube dislocation.
RESULTS
The differences in technical success rate, total complications, 30-day mortality rate and tube dislocation were not statistically significant between the two groups. Patients receiving PTBD showed a lower risk of pancreatitis (OR=0.14, 95%CI=0.06-0.31) and cholangitis (OR=0.52, 95%CI=0.30-0.90) when compared to EBD while PTBD was associated with higher risk of bleeding (OR=1.78; 95%CI=1.32-2.39).
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis indicates the presence of some advantages and limits for both PTBD and EBD. We highlight the paucity of quality-of-life data, a vital element which should be carefully pondered in future studies and in choosing the optimal technique in patients with MOJ.
Topics: Bile Duct Neoplasms; Drainage; Endoscopy; Humans; Jaundice, Obstructive; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 32606139
DOI: 10.21873/invivo.11964 -
Cancer Imaging : the Official... Oct 2017Malignant obstructive jaundice is a common problem in the clinic. Currently, the generally applied treatment methods are percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Malignant obstructive jaundice is a common problem in the clinic. Currently, the generally applied treatment methods are percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD). Nevertheless, there has not been a uniform conclusion published on either efficacy of the two types of drainage or the incidence rate of complications. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing endoscopic versus percutaneous biliary drainage in malignant obstructive jaundice, to determine whether there is any difference between percutaneous and endoscopic biliary drainage, with respect to efficacy and incidence rate of overall complications.
METHODS
The enrolled studies contain a total of three randomized controlled trials and eleven retrospective studies, which together encompass 2246 patients with PTBD and 8100 patients with EBD.
RESULTS
Our analysis indicates that there is no difference between PTBD and EBD with regard to therapeutic success rate (%), overall complication (%), intraperitoneal bile leak, 30-day mortality, sepsis, or duodenal perforation (%). Cholangitis and pancreatitis after PTBD were lower than after EBD, with odds ratios (OR) of 0.48 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31 to 0.74) and 0.16 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.52), respectively. Incidences of bleeding and tube dislocation for PTBD were higher than EBD, OR of 1.81 (95% CI, 1.35 to 2.44) and 3.41 (95% CI, 1.10 to 10.60).
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis indicates certain advantages for both PTBD and EBD. In the clinical practice, it is advised to choose specifically either PTBD or EBD, based on location of obstruction, purpose of drainage (as a preoperative procedure or a palliative treatment) and level of experience in biliary drainage at individual treatment centers.
Topics: Bile Duct Neoplasms; Drainage; Endoscopy, Digestive System; Humans; Jaundice, Obstructive; Publication Bias; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 29037223
DOI: 10.1186/s40644-017-0129-1 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2018There is general agreement that oxytocin given either through the intramuscular or intravenous route is effective in reducing postpartum blood loss. However, it is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There is general agreement that oxytocin given either through the intramuscular or intravenous route is effective in reducing postpartum blood loss. However, it is unclear whether the subtle differences between the mode of action of these routes have any effect on maternal and infant outcomes. This is an update of a review first published in 2012.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of oxytocin administered intramuscularly or intravenously for prophylactic management of the third stage of labour after vaginal birth.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (7 September 2017) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials comparing intramuscular with intravenous oxytocin for prophylactic management of the third stage of labour after vaginal birth. We excluded quasi-randomised trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Three studies with 1306 women are included in the review and compared intramuscular versus intravenous oxytocin administered just after the birth of the anterior shoulder or soon after the birth of the baby. Studies were carried out in hospital settings in Turkey and Thailand and recruited women with singleton, term pregnancies. Overall, the included studies were at moderate risk of bias: none of the studies provided clear information on allocation concealment or attempted to blind staff or women. For GRADE outcomes the quality of the evidence was very low, with downgrading due to study design limitations and imprecision of effect estimates.Only one study reported severe postpartum haemorrhage (blood loss 1000 mL or more) and showed no clear difference between the intramuscular and intravenous oxytocin groups (risk ratio (RR) 0.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 2.04; 256 women; very low-quality evidence). No woman required hysterectomy in either group in one study (no estimable data, very low-quality evidence), and in another study one woman in each group received a blood transfusion (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.82; 256 women; very low-quality evidence). Other important outcomes (maternal death, hypotension, maternal dissatisfaction with the intervention and neonatal jaundice) were not reported by any of the included studies. There were no clear differences between groups for other prespecified secondary outcomes reported (postpartum haemorrhage 500 mL or more, use of additional uterotonics, retained placenta or manual removal of the placenta).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Very low-quality evidence indicates no clear difference between the comparative benefits and risks of intramuscular and intravenous oxytocin when given to prevent excessive blood loss after vaginal birth. Appropriately designed randomised trials with adequate sample sizes are needed to assess whether the route of prophylactic oxytocin after vaginal birth affects maternal or infant outcomes. Such studies could be large enough to detect clinically important differences in major side effects that have been reported in observational studies and should also consider the acceptability of the intervention to mothers and providers as important outcomes.
Topics: Blood Transfusion; Female; Humans; Injections, Intramuscular; Injections, Intravenous; Labor Stage, Third; Oxytocics; Oxytocin; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30246877
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009332.pub3