-
Environmental Research Oct 2018The health benefits of greenspaces have demanded the attention of policymakers since the 1800s. Although much evidence suggests greenspace exposure is beneficial for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The health benefits of greenspaces have demanded the attention of policymakers since the 1800s. Although much evidence suggests greenspace exposure is beneficial for health, there exists no systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesise and quantify the impact of greenspace on a wide range of health outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
To quantify evidence of the impact of greenspace on a wide range of health outcomes.
METHODS
We searched five online databases and reference lists up to January 2017. Studies satisfying a priori eligibility criteria were evaluated independently by two authors.
RESULTS
We included 103 observational and 40 interventional studies investigating ~100 health outcomes. Meta-analysis results showed increased greenspace exposure was associated with decreased salivary cortisol -0.05 (95% CI -0.07, -0.04), heart rate -2.57 (95% CI -4.30, -0.83), diastolic blood pressure -1.97 (95% CI -3.45, -0.19), HDL cholesterol -0.03 (95% CI -0.05, <-0.01), low frequency heart rate variability (HRV) -0.06 (95% CI -0.08, -0.03) and increased high frequency HRV 91.87 (95% CI 50.92, 132.82), as well as decreased risk of preterm birth 0.87 (95% CI 0.80, 0.94), type II diabetes 0.72 (95% CI 0.61, 0.85), all-cause mortality 0.69 (95% CI 0.55, 0.87), small size for gestational age 0.81 (95% CI 0.76, 0.86), cardiovascular mortality 0.84 (95% CI 0.76, 0.93), and an increased incidence of good self-reported health 1.12 (95% CI 1.05, 1.19). Incidence of stroke, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, asthma, and coronary heart disease were reduced. For several non-pooled health outcomes, between 66.7% and 100% of studies showed health-denoting associations with increased greenspace exposure including neurological and cancer-related outcomes, and respiratory mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
Greenspace exposure is associated with numerous health benefits in intervention and observational studies. These results are indicative of a beneficial influence of greenspace on a wide range of health outcomes. However several meta-analyses results are limited by poor study quality and high levels of heterogeneity. Green prescriptions involving greenspace use may have substantial benefits. Our findings should encourage practitioners and policymakers to give due regard to how they can create, maintain, and improve existing accessible greenspaces in deprived areas. Furthermore the development of strategies and interventions for the utilisation of such greenspaces by those who stand to benefit the most.
Topics: Asthma; Blood Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Environment; Female; Gestational Age; Health Status; Heart Rate; Humans; Hypertension; Infant, Newborn; Mortality; Neoplasms; Observational Studies as Topic; Pregnancy; Premature Birth
PubMed: 29982151
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.06.030 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2019Asymptomatic bacteriuria is a bacterial infection of the urine without any of the typical symptoms that are associated with a urinary infection, and occurs in 2% to 15%... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Asymptomatic bacteriuria is a bacterial infection of the urine without any of the typical symptoms that are associated with a urinary infection, and occurs in 2% to 15% of pregnancies. If left untreated, up to 30% of mothers will develop acute pyelonephritis. Asymptomatic bacteriuria has been associated with low birthweight and preterm birth. This is an update of a review last published in 2015.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of antibiotic treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria on the development of pyelonephritis and the risk of low birthweight and preterm birth.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 4 November 2018, and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing antibiotic treatment with placebo or no treatment in pregnant women with asymptomatic bacteriuria found on antenatal screening. Trials using a cluster-RCT design and quasi-RCTs were eligible for inclusion, as were trials published in abstract or letter form, but cross-over studies were not.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data, and checked for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 15 studies, involving over 2000 women. Antibiotic treatment compared with placebo or no treatment may reduce the incidence of pyelonephritis (average risk ratio (RR) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 0.41; 12 studies, 2017 women; low-certainty evidence). Antibiotic treatment may be associated with a reduction in the incidence of preterm birth (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.88; 3 studies, 327 women; low-certainty evidence), and low birthweight babies (average RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.93; 6 studies, 1437 babies; low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in persistent bacteriuria at the time of delivery (average RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.53; 4 studies; 596 women), but the results were inconclusive for serious adverse neonatal outcomes (average RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.79, 3 studies; 549 babies). There were very limited data on which to estimate the effect of antibiotics on other infant outcomes, and maternal adverse effects were rarely described. Overall, we judged only one trial at low risk of bias across all domains; the other 14 studies were assessed as high or unclear risk of bias. Many studies lacked an adequate description of methods, and we could only judge the risk of bias as unclear, but in most studies, we assessed at least one domain at high risk of bias. We assessed the quality of the evidence for the three primary outcomes with GRADE software, and found low-certainty evidence for pyelonephritis, preterm birth, and birthweight less than 2500 g.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Antibiotic treatment may be effective in reducing the risk of pyelonephritis in pregnancy, but our confidence in the effect estimate is limited given the low certainty of the evidence. There may be a reduction in preterm birth and low birthweight with antibiotic treatment, consistent with theories about the role of infection in adverse pregnancy outcomes, but again, the confidence in the effect is limited given the low certainty of the evidence. Research implications identified in this review include the need for an up-to-date cost-effectiveness evaluation of diagnostic algorithms, and more evidence to learn whether there is a low-risk group of women who are unlikely to benefit from treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Asymptomatic Infections; Bacteriuria; Female; Humans; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Pyelonephritis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31765489
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000490.pub4 -
The Lancet. Oncology Aug 2022The trade-off between comparative effectiveness and reproductive morbidity of different treatment methods for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) remains unclear.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative effectiveness and risk of preterm birth of local treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and stage IA1 cervical cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The trade-off between comparative effectiveness and reproductive morbidity of different treatment methods for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) remains unclear. We aimed to determine the risks of treatment failure and preterm birth associated with various treatment techniques.
METHODS
In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database for randomised and non-randomised studies reporting on oncological or reproductive outcomes after CIN treatments from database inception until March 9, 2022, without language restrictions. We included studies of women with CIN, glandular intraepithelial neoplasia, or stage IA1 cervical cancer treated with excision (cold knife conisation [CKC], laser conisation, and large loop excision of the transformation zone [LLETZ]) or ablation (radical diathermy, laser ablation, cold coagulation, and cryotherapy). We excluded women treated with hysterectomy. The primary outcomes were any treatment failure (defined as any abnormal histology or cytology) and preterm birth (<37 weeks of gestation). The network for preterm birth also included women with untreated CIN (untreated colposcopy group). The main reference group was LLETZ for treatment failure and the untreated colposcopy group for preterm birth. For randomised controlled trials, we extracted group-level summary data, and for observational studies, we extracted relative treatment effect estimates adjusted for potential confounders, when available, and we did random-effects network meta-analyses to obtain odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs. We assessed within-study and across-study risk of bias using Cochrane tools. This systematic review is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018115495 and CRD42018115508.
FINDINGS
7880 potential citations were identified for the outcome of treatment failure and 4107 for the outcome of preterm birth. After screening and removal of duplicates, the network for treatment failure included 19 240 participants across 71 studies (25 randomised) and the network for preterm birth included 68 817 participants across 29 studies (two randomised). Compared with LLETZ, risk of treatment failure was reduced for other excisional methods (laser conisation: OR 0·59 [95% CI 0·44-0·79] and CKC: 0·63 [0·50-0·81]) and increased for laser ablation (1·69 [1·27-2·24]) and cryotherapy (1·84 [1·33-2·56]). No differences were found for the comparison of cold coagulation versus LLETZ (1·09 [0·68-1·74]) but direct data were based on two small studies only. Compared with the untreated colposcopy group, risk of preterm birth was increased for all excisional techniques (CKC: 2·27 [1·70-3·02]; laser conisation: 1·77 [1·29-2·43]; and LLETZ: 1·37 [1·16-1·62]), whereas no differences were found for ablative methods (laser ablation: 1·05 [0·78-1·41]; cryotherapy: 1·01 [0·35-2·92]; and cold coagulation: 0·67 [0·02-29·15]). The evidence was based mostly on observational studies with their inherent risks of bias, and the credibility of many comparisons was low.
INTERPRETATION
More radical excisional techniques reduce the risk of treatment failure but increase the risk of subsequent preterm birth. Although there is uncertainty, ablative treatments probably do not increase risk of preterm birth, but are associated with higher failure rates than excisional techniques. Although we found LLETZ to have balanced effectiveness and reproductive morbidity, treatment choice should rely on a woman's age, size and location of lesion, and future family planning.
FUNDING
National Institute for Health and Care Research: Research for Patient Benefit.
Topics: Conization; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Network Meta-Analysis; Premature Birth; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Uterine Cervical Dysplasia
PubMed: 35835138
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00334-5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2023Gestational diabetes with onset or first recognition during pregnancy is an increasing problem worldwide. Myo-inositol, an isomer of inositol, is a naturally occurring... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Gestational diabetes with onset or first recognition during pregnancy is an increasing problem worldwide. Myo-inositol, an isomer of inositol, is a naturally occurring sugar commonly found in cereals, corn, legumes and meat. Myo-inositol is one of the intracellular mediators of the insulin signal and correlates with insulin sensitivity in type 2 diabetes. The potential beneficial effect of improving insulin sensitivity suggests that myo-inositol may be useful for women in preventing gestational diabetes. This is an update of a review first published in 2015.
OBJECTIVES
To assess if antenatal dietary supplementation with myo-inositol is safe and effective, for the mother and fetus, in preventing gestational diabetes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP (17 March 2022) and the reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including cluster-RCTs and conference abstracts, assessing the effects of myo-inositol for the prevention of gestational diabetes in pregnant women. We included studies that compared any dose of myo-inositol, alone or in a combination preparation, with no treatment, placebo or another intervention. Quasi-randomised and cross-over trials were not eligible. We excluded women with pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted the data. We checked the data for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven RCTs (one conducted in Ireland, six conducted in Italy) reporting on 1319 women who were 10 weeks to 24 weeks pregnant at the start of the studies. The studies had relatively small sample sizes and the overall risk of bias was low. For the primary maternal outcomes, meta-analysis showed that myo-inositol may reduce the incidence of gestational diabetes (risk ratio (RR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 0.90; 6 studies, 1140 women) and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.61; 5 studies, 1052 women). However, the certainty of the evidence was low to very low. For the primary neonatal outcomes, only one study measured the risk of a large-for-gestational-age infant and found myo-inositol was associated with both appreciable benefit and harm (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.02; 1 study, 234 infants; low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported on the other primary neonatal outcomes (perinatal mortality, mortality or morbidity composite). For the secondary maternal outcomes, we are unclear about the effect of myo-inositol on weight gain during pregnancy (mean difference (MD) -0.25 kilogram (kg), 95% CI -1.26 to 0.75 kg; 4 studies, 831 women) and perineal trauma (RR 4.0, 95% CI 0.45 to 35.25; 1 study, 234 women) because the evidence was assessed as being very low-certainty. Further, myo-inositol may result in little to no difference in caesarean section (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.07; 4 studies, 829 women; low-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported on the other secondary maternal outcomes (postnatal depression and the development of subsequent type 2 diabetes mellitus). For the secondary neonatal outcomes, meta-analysis showed no neonatal hypoglycaemia (RR 3.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 10.52; 4 studies; 671 infants; very low-certainty evidence). However, myo-inositol may be associated with a reduction in the incidence of preterm birth (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.70; 4 studies; 829 infants). There were insufficient data for a number of maternal and neonatal secondary outcomes, and no data were reported for any of the long-term childhood or adulthood outcomes, or for health service utilisation outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence from seven studies shows that antenatal dietary supplementation with myo-inositol during pregnancy may reduce the incidence of gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and preterm birth. Limited data suggest that supplementation with myo-inositol may not reduce the risk of a large-for-gestational-age infant. The current evidence is based on small studies that were not powered to detect differences in outcomes such as perinatal mortality and serious infant morbidity. Six of the included studies were conducted in Italy and one in Ireland, which raises concerns about the lack of generalisability to other settings. There is evidence of inconsistency among doses of myo-inositol, the timing of administration and study population. As a result, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence for many outcomes to low or very low certainty. Further studies for this promising antenatal intervention for preventing gestational diabetes are encouraged and should include pregnant women of different ethnicities and varying risk factors. Myo-inositol at different doses, frequency and timing of administration, should be compared with placebo, diet and exercise, and pharmacological interventions. Long-term follow-up should be considered and outcomes should include potential harms, including adverse effects.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetes, Gestational; Dietary Supplements; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Inositol; Insulin Resistance; Perinatal Death; Premature Birth
PubMed: 36790138
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011507.pub3 -
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth Apr 2023Growing evidence suggests low and high maternal hemoglobin (Hb) concentrations may have adverse consequences for maternal and child health. There remain questions on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Growing evidence suggests low and high maternal hemoglobin (Hb) concentrations may have adverse consequences for maternal and child health. There remain questions on specific Hb thresholds to define anemia and high Hb as well as how cutoffs may vary by anemia etiology and timing of assessment.
METHODS
We conducted an updated systematic review (using PubMed and Cochrane Review) on low (< 110 g/L) and high (≥ 130 g/L) maternal Hb concentrations and associations with a range of maternal and infant health outcomes. We examined associations by timing of Hb assessment (preconception; first, second, and third trimesters, as well as at any time point in pregnancy), varying cutoffs used for defining low and high hemoglobin concentrations and performed stratified analyses by iron-deficiency anemia. We conducted meta-analyses to obtain odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
The updated systematic review included 148 studies. Low maternal Hb at any time point in pregnancy was associated with: low birthweight, LBW (OR (95% CI) 1.28 (1.22-1.35)), very low birthweight, VLBW (2.15 (1.47-3.13)), preterm birth, PTB (1.35 (1.29-1.42)), small-for-gestational age, SGA (1.11 (1.02-1.19)), stillbirth 1.43 (1.24-1.65)), perinatal mortality (1.75 (1.28-2.39)), neonatal mortality (1.25 (1.16-1.34), postpartum hemorrhage (1.69 (1.45-1.97)), transfusion (3.68 (2.58-5.26)), pre-eclampsia (1.57 (1.23-2.01)), and prenatal depression (1.44 (1.24-1.68)). For maternal mortality, the OR was higher for Hb < 90 (4.83 (2.17-10.74)) than for Hb < 100 (2.87 (1.08-7.67)). High maternal Hb was associated with: VLBW (1.35 (1.16-1.57)), PTB (1.12 (1.00-1.25)), SGA (1.17 (1.09-1.25)), stillbirth (1.32 (1.09-1.60)), maternal mortality (2.01 (1.12-3.61)), gestational diabetes (1.71 (1.19-2.46)), and pre-eclampsia (1.34 (1.16-1.56)). Stronger associations were noted earlier in pregnancy for low Hb and adverse birth outcomes while the role of timing of high Hb was inconsistent. Lower Hb cutoffs were associated with greater odds of poor outcomes; for high Hb, data were too limited to identify patterns. Information on anemia etiology was limited; relationships did not vary by iron-deficiency anemia.
CONCLUSION
Both low and high maternal Hb concentrations during pregnancy are strong predictors of adverse maternal and infant health outcomes. Additional research is needed to establish healthy reference ranges and design effective interventions to optimize maternal Hb during pregnancy.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Child; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Pregnancy Outcome; Stillbirth; Premature Birth; Anemia, Iron-Deficiency; Pre-Eclampsia; Infant Health; Anemia; Hemoglobins
PubMed: 37076797
DOI: 10.1186/s12884-023-05489-6 -
Pediatric Research Jan 2020Neonatal intensive care practices have resulted in marked improvements in the survival of premature infants; however, they remain at significant risk for adverse...
BACKGROUND
Neonatal intensive care practices have resulted in marked improvements in the survival of premature infants; however, they remain at significant risk for adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes. The impact of current nutritional practices on brain development following early extra-uterine exposure in premature infants is not well known.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review to investigate nutritional effects on postnatal brain development in healthy term and prematurely born infants utilizing advanced magnetic resonance imaging tools.
RESULTS
Systematic screen yielded 595 studies for appraisal. Of these, 22 total studies were selected for inclusion in the review, with findings summarized in a qualitative, descriptive fashion.
CONCLUSION
Fat and energy intake are associated with improved brain volume and development in premature infants. While breast milk intake and long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation has been proven beneficial in term infants, the impact in preterm infants is less well understood.
Topics: Age Factors; Bottle Feeding; Brain; Breast Feeding; Child Development; Gestational Age; Humans; Infant Formula; Infant Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Neurogenesis; Nutritional Status; Premature Birth
PubMed: 31349359
DOI: 10.1038/s41390-019-0508-3 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Aug 2023To systematically review the proportions of infants with early exposure to antenatal corticosteroids but born at term or late preterm, and short term and long term... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The proportions of term or late preterm births after exposure to early antenatal corticosteroids, and outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis of 1.6 million infants.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the proportions of infants with early exposure to antenatal corticosteroids but born at term or late preterm, and short term and long term outcomes.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analyses.
DATA SOURCES
Eight databases searched from 1 January 2000 to 1 February 2023, reflecting recent perinatal care, and references of screened articles.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Randomised controlled trials and population based cohort studies with data on infants with early exposure to antenatal corticosteroids (<34 weeks) but born at term (≥37 weeks), late preterm (34-36 weeks), or term/late preterm combined.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full text articles and assessed risk of bias (Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised controlled trials and Newcastle-Ottawa scale for population based studies). Reviewers extracted data on populations, exposure to antenatal corticosteroids, and outcomes. The authors analysed randomised and cohort data separately, using random effects meta-analyses.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The primary outcome was the proportion of infants with early exposure to antenatal corticosteroids but born at term. Secondary outcomes included the proportions of infants born late preterm or term/late preterm combined after early exposure to antenatal corticosteroids and short term and long term outcomes versus non-exposure for the three gestational time points (term, late preterm, term/late preterm combined).
RESULTS
Of 14 799 records, the reviewers screened 8815 non-duplicate titles and abstracts and assessed 713 full text articles. Seven randomised controlled trials and 10 population based cohort studies (1.6 million infants total) were included. In randomised controlled trials and population based data, ∼40% of infants with early exposure to antenatal corticosteroids were born at term (low or very low certainty). Among children born at term, early exposure to antenatal corticosteroids versus no exposure was associated with increased risks of admission to neonatal intensive care (adjusted odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.19 to 1.86, one study, 5330 infants, very low certainty; unadjusted relative risk 1.69, 95% confidence interval 1.51 to 1.89, three studies, 1 176 022 infants, I=58%, τ=0.01, low certainty), intubation (unadjusted relative risk 2.59, 1.39 to 4.81, absolute effect 7 more per 1000, 95% confidence interval from 2 more to 16 more, one study, 8076 infants, very low certainty, one study, 8076 infants, very low certainty), reduced head circumference (adjusted mean difference -0.21, 95% confidence interval -0.29 to -0.13, one study, 183 325 infants, low certainty), and any long term neurodevelopmental or behavioural disorder in population based studies (eg, any neurodevelopmental or behavioural disorder in children born at term, adjusted hazard ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.36 to 1.60, one study, 641 487 children, low certainty).
CONCLUSIONS
About 40% of infants exposed to early antenatal corticosteroids were born at term, with associated adverse short term and long term outcomes (low or very low certainty), highlighting the need for caution when considering antenatal corticosteroids.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42022360079.
Topics: Child; Infant, Newborn; Infant; Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Infant, Premature; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Glucocorticoids; Parturition
PubMed: 37532269
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2023-076035 -
Sexually Transmitted Infections Aug 2020Genital chlamydia infection in women is often asymptomatic, but may result in adverse outcomes before and during pregnancy. The purpose of this study was to examine the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Genital chlamydia infection in women is often asymptomatic, but may result in adverse outcomes before and during pregnancy. The purpose of this study was to examine the strength of the relationships between chlamydia infection and different reproductive health outcomes and to assess the certainty of the evidence.
METHODS
This review was registered and followed the Cochrane guidelines. We searched three databases to quantitatively examine adverse outcomes associated with chlamydia infection. We included pregnancy and fertility-related outcomes. We performed meta-analyses on different study designs for various adverse outcomes using unadjusted and adjusted analyses.
RESULTS
We identified 4730 unique citations and included 107 studies reporting 12 pregnancy and fertility-related outcomes. Sixty-eight studies were conducted in high-income countries, 37 studies were conducted in low-income or middle-income countries, and 2 studies were conducted in both high-income and low-income countries. Chlamydia infection was positively associated with almost all of the 12 included pregnancy and fertility-related adverse outcomes in unadjusted analyses, including stillbirth (OR=5.05, 95% CI 2.95 to 8.65 for case-control studies and risk ratio=1.28, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.51 for cohort studies) and spontaneous abortion (OR=1.30, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.49 for case-control studies and risk ratio=1.47, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.85 for cohort studies). However, there were biases in the design and conduct of individual studies, affecting the certainty of the overall body of evidence. The risk of adverse outcomes associated with chlamydia is higher in low-income and middle-income countries compared with high-income countries.
CONCLUSION
Chlamydia is associated with an increased risk of several pregnancy and fertility-related adverse outcomes in unadjusted analyses, especially in low-income and middle-income countries. Further research on how to prevent the sequelae of chlamydia in pregnant women is needed.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42017056818.
Topics: Abortion, Spontaneous; Chlamydia Infections; Chlamydia trachomatis; Endometritis; Female; Fetal Membranes, Premature Rupture; Humans; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Small for Gestational Age; Infertility, Female; Obstetric Labor, Premature; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Pregnancy Outcome; Pregnancy, Ectopic; Premature Birth; Puerperal Infection; Reproductive Tract Infections; Stillbirth
PubMed: 31836678
DOI: 10.1136/sextrans-2019-053999 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017Periodontal disease has been linked with a number of conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, stroke, diabetes and adverse pregnancy outcomes, all likely through... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Periodontal disease has been linked with a number of conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, stroke, diabetes and adverse pregnancy outcomes, all likely through systemic inflammatory pathways. It is common in women of reproductive age and gum conditions tend to worsen during pregnancy. Some evidence from observational studies suggests that periodontal intervention may reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes. There is need for a comprehensive Cochrane review of randomised trials to assess the effect of periodontal treatment on perinatal and maternal health.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of treating periodontal disease in pregnant women in order to prevent or reduce perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 6 October 2016), Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (to 7 October 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 9) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 6 October 2016), Embase Ovid (1980 to 6 October 2016), and LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; 1982 to 6 October 2016). ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials on 6 October 2016. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of periodontal treatment in preventing or reducing perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality. We excluded studies where obstetric outcomes were not reported.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts and extracted data using a prepiloted data extraction form. Missing data were obtained by contacting authors and risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's 'Risk of bias' tool. Where appropriate, results of comparable trials were pooled and expressed as risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) . The random-effects model was used for pooling except where there was an insufficient number of studies. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
There were 15 RCTs (n = 7161 participants) meeting our inclusion criteria. All the included studies were at high risk of bias mostly due to lack of blinding and imbalance in baseline characteristics of participants. The studies recruited pregnant women from prenatal care facilities who had periodontitis (14 studies) or gingivitis (1 study).The two main comparisons were: periodontal treatment versus no treatment during pregnancy and periodontal treatment versus alternative periodontal treatment. The head-to-head comparison between periodontal treatments assessed a more intensive treatment versus a less intensive one.Eleven studies compared periodontal treatment with no treatment during pregnancy. The meta-analysis shows no clear difference in preterm birth < 37 weeks (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.10; 5671 participants; 11 studies; low-quality evidence) between periodontal treatment and no treatment. There is low-quality evidence that periodontal treatment may reduce low birth weight < 2500 g (9.70% with periodontal treatment versus 12.60% without treatment; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.95; 3470 participants; 7 studies).It is unclear whether periodontal treatment leads to a difference in preterm birth < 35 weeks (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.76; 2557 participants; 2 studies; ) and < 32 weeks (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.32; 2755 participants; 3 studies), low birth weight < 1500 g (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.70; 2550 participants; 2 studies), perinatal mortality (including fetal and neonatal deaths up to the first 28 days after birth) (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.43; 5320 participants; 7 studies; very low-quality evidence), and pre-eclampsia (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.62; 2946 participants; 3 studies; very low-quality evidence). There is no evidence of a difference in small for gestational age (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.16; 3610 participants; 3 studies; low-quality evidence) when periodontal treatment is compared with no treatment.Four studies compared periodontal treatment with alternative periodontal treatment. Data pooling was not possible due to clinical heterogeneity. The outcomes reported were preterm birth < 37 weeks, preterm birth < 35 weeks, birth weight < 2500 g, birth weight < 1500 g and perinatal mortality (very low-quality evidence). It is unclear whether there is a difference in < 37 weeks, preterm birth < 35 weeks, birth weight < 2500 g, birth weight < 1500 g and perinatal mortality when different periodontal treatments are compared because the quality of evidence is very low.Maternal mortality and adverse effects of the intervention did not occur in any of the studies that reported on either of the outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
It is not clear if periodontal treatment during pregnancy has an impact on preterm birth (low-quality evidence). There is low-quality evidence that periodontal treatment may reduce low birth weight (< 2500 g), however, our confidence in the effect estimate is limited. There is insufficient evidence to determine which periodontal treatment is better in preventing adverse obstetric outcomes. Future research should aim to report periodontal outcomes alongside obstetric outcomes.
Topics: Female; Gingivitis; Humans; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Small for Gestational Age; Perinatal Mortality; Periodontal Diseases; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome; Premature Birth; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28605006
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005297.pub3 -
JAMA Psychiatry Dec 2019Antidepressant use is increasing worldwide. Yet, contrasting evidence on the safety of antidepressants is available from meta-analyses, and the credibility of these...
IMPORTANCE
Antidepressant use is increasing worldwide. Yet, contrasting evidence on the safety of antidepressants is available from meta-analyses, and the credibility of these findings has not been quantified.
OBJECTIVE
To grade the evidence from published meta-analyses of observational studies that assessed the association between antidepressant use or exposure and adverse health outcomes.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Scopus, and PsycINFO were searched from database inception to April 5, 2019.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
Only meta-analyses of observational studies with a cohort or case-control study design were eligible. Two independent reviewers recorded the data and assessed the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses. Evidence of association was ranked according to established criteria as follows: convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant.
RESULTS
Forty-five meta-analyses (17.9%) from 4471 studies identified and 252 full-text articles scrutinized were selected that described 120 associations, including data from 1012 individual effect size estimates. Seventy-four (61.7%) of the 120 associations were nominally statistically significant at P ≤ .05 using random-effects models. Fifty-two associations (43.4%) had large heterogeneity (I2 > 50%), whereas small-study effects were found for 17 associations (14.2%) and excess significance bias was found for 9 associations (7.5%). Convincing evidence emerged from both main and sensitivity analyses for the association between antidepressant use and risk of suicide attempt or completion among children and adolescents, autism spectrum disorders with antidepressant exposure before and during pregnancy, preterm birth, and low Apgar scores. None of these associations remained supported by convincing evidence after sensitivity analysis, which adjusted for confounding by indication.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This study's findings suggest that most putative adverse health outcomes associated with antidepressant use may not be supported by convincing evidence, and confounding by indication may alter the few associations with convincing evidence. Antidepressant use appears to be safe for the treatment of psychiatric disorders, but more studies matching for underlying disease are needed to clarify the degree of confounding by indication and other biases. No absolute contraindication to antidepressants emerged from this umbrella review.
Topics: Adolescent; Antidepressive Agents; Apgar Score; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Child; Female; Humans; Mental Disorders; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Observational Studies as Topic; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects; Suicide, Attempted; Suicide, Completed
PubMed: 31577342
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.2859