-
Photobiomodulation, Photomedicine, and... Sep 2023Some studies support the superiority of diode laser gingivectomy to scalpel surgery and nonsurgical treatments. However, a systematic review on this topic is lacking.... (Review)
Review
Gingivectomy with Diode Laser Versus the Conventional Scalpel Surgery and Nonsurgical Periodontal Therapy in Treatment of Orthodontic Treatment-Induced Gingival Enlargement: A Systematic Review.
Some studies support the superiority of diode laser gingivectomy to scalpel surgery and nonsurgical treatments. However, a systematic review on this topic is lacking. This study aimed to compare gingivectomy with diode laser versus the conventional scalpel surgery and nonsurgical periodontal therapy (NSPT) in the treatment of orthodontic treatment-induced gingival enlargement (GE). In this systematic review, an electronic search of the relevant literature was conducted in Web of Science, Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ProQuest with no language restriction. Randomized clinical trials published between 1985 and 2020 on comparative treatment of orthodontic treatment-induced GE by diode laser gingivectomy and scalpel surgery or NSPT regarding intraoperative and postoperative bleeding and/or pain were included. Risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane 1 tool. Of the initially retrieved 288 articles, 40 were duplicates and excluded; 236 articles were excluded following title and abstract screening, and 5 others were excluded following full-text assessment. Finally, 7 studies underwent systematic review. In the risk-of-bias assessment, 5 studies scored 2, and 2 studies scored 3 out of 6. Intraoperative and postoperative bleeding and pain were found to be significantly lower in the laser group. Within the limitations of this systematic review and with respect to the quality of evidence, the present results revealed lower level of pain and bleeding in diode laser gingivectomy compared with the conventional scalpel surgery and NSPT for treatment of orthodontic treatment-induced GE.
Topics: Humans; Lasers, Semiconductor; Gingivectomy; Gingival Overgrowth; Gingival Hyperplasia; Pain
PubMed: 37738371
DOI: 10.1089/photob.2023.0060 -
European Journal of Obstetrics,... Jan 2024A large number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published on the effects of oral/vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin on delivery outcomes; however, data... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effect of misoprostol versus oxytocin on delivery outcomes after labour induction in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
A large number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published on the effects of oral/vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin on delivery outcomes; however, data from these RCTs are conflicting. Although some meta-analyses summarized available findings in this regard, several eligible RCTs have been published since the release of those meta-analyses. Therefore, the current updated systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs was conducted to compare the effects of oral/vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin on delivery and neonatal outcomes. A systematic search, using relevant keywords, was done in the online databases of PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science, up to April 2023, to identify eligible articles investigating the effect of oral/vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin on delivery outcomes including maternal [cesarean/vaginal delivery within 24 h after labour induction, Tachysystole, hypertonicity, hyper-stimulation, postpartum hemorrhage (PPH)] and neonatal outcomes [mean Apgar score, admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and death]. In total, 45 RCTs with a total sample size of 8406 participants were included. Meta-analysis revealed that vaginal misoprostol administration, compared with oxytocin, resulted in a significant reduction in the rate of cesarean and a significant increase in the rate of vaginal delivery and Tachysystole risk. Also, oral misoprostol was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of cesarean and a significant increase in the risk of hypertonicity compared with oxytocin. However, oral misoprostol had no significant effect on vaginal delivery compared with oxytocin. For other outcomes including hyper-stimulation, perinatal death, NICU admission, and mean Apgar score among newborns, we found no significant difference between oral/vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin. In total, vaginal/oral misoprostol might be a better method for labour induction compared with oxytocin. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023412325.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Misoprostol; Oxytocin; Oxytocics; Pregnant Women; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Labor, Induced; Administration, Intravaginal
PubMed: 37976769
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.11.006 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2023Evidence on the association between the risk of new-onset osteoporosis and oral anticoagulants remains controversial. We aimed to compare the risk of osteoporosis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
Evidence on the association between the risk of new-onset osteoporosis and oral anticoagulants remains controversial. We aimed to compare the risk of osteoporosis associated with the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with that associated with warfarin use.
METHODS
Studies published up to 15 March 2023 that investigated the association between the use of DOACs and warfarin and the incidence of osteoporosis were identified by online searches in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science conducted by two independent investigators. Random-effects or fixed-effect models were employed to synthesize hazard ratios (HRs)/relative ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for estimating the risk of osteoporosis correlated with DOAC and warfarin prescriptions (PROSPERO No. CRD42023401199).
RESULTS
Our meta-analysis ultimately included four studies involving 74,338 patients. The results suggested that DOAC use was associated with a significantly lower incidence of new-onset osteoporosis than warfarin use (pooled HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.88, < 0.001, : 85.1%). Subanalyses revealed that rivaroxaban was associated with a lower risk of osteoporosis than both warfarin and dabigatran. In addition, DOACs were associated with a lower risk of developing osteoporosis than warfarin in both male and female patients, in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), and in patients who underwent therapy for > 365 days.
CONCLUSION
DOAC users experienced a lower incidence of osteoporosis than warfarin users. This study may give us insight into safe anticoagulation strategies for patients who are at high risk of developing osteoporosis.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023401199.
Topics: Humans; Male; Female; Warfarin; Stroke; Hemorrhage; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Osteoporosis
PubMed: 37842293
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1212570 -
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis Feb 2024This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of different antithrombotic regimens after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of different antithrombotic regimens after left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from their inception to March 2023. Patients were divided into short-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) group and antiplatelet therapy (APT) group. The incidence of events were performed using RevMan 5.4. The events including device-related thrombus (DRT), ischemic stroke/systemic embolization (SE), major bleeding, any bleeding, any major adverse event and all-cause mortality. Subgroup analysis were based on OAC alone or OAC plus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) in OAC group. Oral anticoagulants include warfarin and direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC). Fourteen studies with 35,166 patients were included. We found that the incidence of DRT (OR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.36-0.66, P<0.0001) and all-cause mortality (OR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.57-0.89, P = 0.002) were significantly lower in OAC group than APT group. However, there was no statistical differences in the incidence rates of ischemic stroke/SE (OR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.49-1.20, P = 0.25), major bleeding (OR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.55-1.27, P = 0.84), any bleeding (OR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.56-1.22, P = 0.34) and any major adverse event (OR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.30-1.03, P = 0.06) in the two groups. Subgroup analysis found that the incidence of DRT, all-cause mortality and any major adverse event in OAC monotherapy were lower than that in APT group (P<0.05), but not statistically different from other outcome. The incidence of DRT, all-cause mortality, any major adverse event and any bleeding in DOAC were significantly better than APT group (P<0.05). While warfarin only has better incidence of DRT than APT (P<0.05), there was no statistical difference between the two groups in other outcome (P>0.05). The incidence of DRT was significantly lower than APT group (P<0.05), major bleeding were higher, and the rest of the outcome did not show any statistically significant differences(P>0.05) when OAC plus SAPT. Based on the existing data, short-term OAC may be favored over APT for patients who undergo LAAC. DOAC monotherapy may be favored over warfarin monotherapy or OAC plus APT, when selecting anticoagulant therapies.
Topics: Humans; Warfarin; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Left Atrial Appendage Closure; Atrial Fibrillation; Treatment Outcome; Anticoagulants; Hemorrhage; Ischemic Stroke; Stroke; Atrial Appendage
PubMed: 38180590
DOI: 10.1007/s11239-023-02919-2 -
Journal of Neurology May 2024Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the leading causes of disability and death worldwide. Most TBI cases occur in older people, because they are at a higher risk of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the leading causes of disability and death worldwide. Most TBI cases occur in older people, because they are at a higher risk of accidental falling. As the population ages, the use of anticoagulants is increasing. Some serious complications of TBI, such as intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), may occur even in mild cases. According to the current guidelines regarding managing mild TBI patients, a CT head scan is recommended for all patients receiving anticoagulation. We aim to assess the incidence of ICH in patients with mild TBI taking oral anticoagulants.
METHODS
Our systematic review and meta-analysis were performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024503086). Twenty-eight studies evaluating patients with a mild TBI from ten countries with a total sample size of 11,172, 5671 on DOACs, and 5501 on VKAs were included in our meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The random-effects overall incidence of ICH among oral anticoagulated patients with mild TBI was calculated to be 9.4% [95% CI 7.2-12.1%, I = 89%]. The rates of immediate ICH for patients taking DOACs and VKAs were 6.4% and 10.5%, respectively. The overall rate of immediate ICH in anticoagulated mild TBI patients was 8.5% [95% CI 6.6-10.9%], with a high heterogeneity between studies (I = 88%). Furthermore, the rates of delayed ICH in patients with mild TBI taking DOACs and VKAs were 1.6% and 1.9%, respectively. The overall incidence of delayed ICH among oral anticoagulated mild TBI patients was 1.7% [95% CI 1-2.8%, I = 79%]. The overall rate of ICH among mild TBI patients taking DOAC was calculated to be 7.3% [95% CI 5.2-10.3%], with significant heterogeneity between studies (I = 79%). However, the overall ICH rate is higher in patients who take only VKAs 11.3% [95% CI 8.6-14.7%, I = 83%]. Patients on DOACs were at lower risk of ICH after mild TBI compared to patients on VKAs (OR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.86, p < 0.01, I = 28%).
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis confirms the need for performing brain CT scan in patients with mild TBI patients who receive oral anticoagulants before injury. Due to limited data, further multi-center, prospective studies are warranted to confirm the true incidence of traumatic ICH in patients on anticoagulants.
PubMed: 38755424
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-024-12424-y -
American Journal of Cardiovascular... Mar 2024oral anticoagulant (DOAC) agents are becoming the anticoagulation strategy of choice for most clinical risks for which they are indicated. However, residual uncertainty... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Compared with Warfarin in Patients with Low Bodyweight who have Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
INTRODUCTION
oral anticoagulant (DOAC) agents are becoming the anticoagulation strategy of choice for most clinical risks for which they are indicated. However, residual uncertainty remains regarding their use in preventing stroke in patients with low bodyweight [< 60 kg or body mass index (BMI) < 18 kg/m]. We have carried out pooled systematic analyses of published studies to determine the efficacy and safety of these agents compared with warfarin in stroke prevention in patients with low bodyweight.
METHODS
We carried out a comprehensive search of electronic databases from inception to June 2023 for eligible studies reporting on the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation who had low bodyweight. These include PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Science Citation Index, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness. Using the random effects model, derived pooled odd ratios (with their corresponding confidence intervals) of mortality outcomes in patient cohorts exposed to direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation who had low bodyweight.
RESULTS
Nine studies (n = 159,514 patients) were included in our meta-analysis. DOAC analogs were associated with lower stroke recurrence compared with warfarin [odds ratio (OR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.9]; however, there was no significant difference in the composite outcome (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59-1.09) and mortality (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.48-1.41). Additionally, DOAC analogs showed a significant reduction in major bleeding events by 30% compared with warfarin (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62-0.80).
CONCLUSION
In this pooled meta-analytical synthesis of studies comprising both real-world and randomized controlled data, the use of DOAC analogs in patients with atrial fibrillation and low bodyweight (< 60 kg or BMI < 18 kg/m) was associated with a significant reduction in risks of stroke and major bleeding compared with patient cohorts stabilized on warfarin-based therapy. There was uncertainty regarding the composite outcome and mortality point estimate between these two anticoagulation strategies. This finding helps to resolve the uncertainty associated with the use of DOACs in this cohort. Additionally, it suggests the need for confirmatory non-inferiority randomized controlled trials evaluating DOACs versus warfarin in this cohort of patients.
Topics: Humans; Warfarin; Atrial Fibrillation; Anticoagulants; Stroke; Hemorrhage; Administration, Oral
PubMed: 38386247
DOI: 10.1007/s40256-024-00628-6 -
Surgical Endoscopy Mar 2024The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as an alternative to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for extended thromboprophylaxis of abdominal/pelvic cancer-related... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for extended thromboprophylaxis following major abdominal/pelvic cancer-related surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as an alternative to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for extended thromboprophylaxis of abdominal/pelvic cancer-related postoperative thromboembolism (VTE) is unclear. We aim to investigate the efficacy and safety of DOACs vs. LMWH in these patients.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted using EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Web of science through May 19th, 2023 for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared the outcomes with DOACs vs. LMWH for extended thromboprophylaxis among patients undergoing abdominal/pelvic cancer surgery. Primary efficacy outcome was clinical VTE, and safety outcome was clinically relevant bleeding complications reported within the 30-day postoperative period. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023413175).
RESULTS
We identified 5078 articles and selected 29 full-text articles for eligibility. A total of 9 studies (2 RCTs and 7 observational studies) encompassing 2651 patients were included for systematic review and 7 for meta-analysis. When compared with LMWH extended thromboprophylaxis, DOACs had a similar incidence of VTE (RR: 0.65 [95% CI: 0.32-1.33], I = 0%), major bleeding (RR: 1.68 [95% CI: 0.36-7.9], I = 26%), and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (RR: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.39-1.19], I = 0%). Subgroup analysis suggested no difference according to the study type (RCTs versus observational studies) regarding clinical VTE or major bleeding (P = 0.43 and P = 0.71, respectively).
CONCLUSION
Our results suggest that DOACs for extended thromboprophylaxis were an effective and safe alternative to LMWH after major abdominal/pelvic cancer-related surgery.
Topics: Humans; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Anticoagulants; Pelvic Neoplasms; Venous Thromboembolism; Hemorrhage; Neoplasms
PubMed: 38267639
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10649-y -
Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Aug 2024This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in adults aged 75 and over undergoing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in adults aged 75 and over undergoing acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase and the CENTRAL were searched up to 25 December 2023. The incidence of VTE recurrence and bleeding events was assessed. Employing a frequentist network meta-analysis approach, interventions not directly compared could be indirectly assessed through the 95% confidence interval (CI), enhancing the interpretability of the search results. The surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) was utilized to generate the relative ranking probabilities for each group.
RESULTS
Our study, analysing 6 randomised controlled trials with 3665 patients, compares direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in adults aged 75 and over with acute venous thromboembolism. Edoxaban reduces VTE recurrence risk compared with VKAs (risk ratio [RR] .50, 95% CI 0.27 - .95), while apixaban significantly decreases bleeding risk compared with VKAs (RR .23, 95% CI 0.08 - .69), edoxaban (RR .28, 95% CI 0.09 - .86) and rivaroxaban (RR .28, 95% CI 0.09 - .86). Despite low overall evidence quality, apixaban consistently ranks highest for both efficacy and safety. Findings underscore the nuanced efficacy-safety balance in this population, emphasizing cautious interpretation due to evidence limitations.
CONCLUSION
Apixaban emerges as a favourable choice for acute VTE treatment in the elderly, displaying reduced bleeding risk compared to other treatments while maintaining comparable efficacy. Future studies should explore diverse anticoagulants efficacy and safety in older populations. Additionally, clinical prediction models tailored to geriatric cohorts are crucial for guiding treatment duration decisions.
Topics: Humans; Venous Thromboembolism; Network Meta-Analysis; Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Hemorrhage; Administration, Oral; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Recurrence; Age Factors; Female; Male; Aged, 80 and over; Risk Assessment; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Anticoagulants; Acute Disease
PubMed: 38706248
DOI: 10.1177/15385744241253201 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2024Balancing the risk of bleeding and thrombosis after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is challenging, and the optimal antithrombotic therapy remains uncertain. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Balancing the risk of bleeding and thrombosis after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is challenging, and the optimal antithrombotic therapy remains uncertain. The potential of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) to prevent ischaemic cardiovascular events is promising, but the evidence remains limited.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin-K-antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in addition to background antiplatelet therapy, compared with placebo, antiplatelet therapy, or both, after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in people without an indication for anticoagulation (i.e. atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, and two clinical trial registers in September 2022 with no language restrictions. We checked the reference lists of included studies for any additional trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated NOACs plus antiplatelet therapy versus placebo, antiplatelet therapy, or both, in people without an indication for anticoagulation after an AMI.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently checked the results of searches to identify relevant studies, assessed each included study, and extracted study data. We conducted random-effects pairwise analyses using Review Manager Web, and network meta-analysis using the R package 'netmeta'. We ranked competing treatments by P scores, which are derived from the P values of all pairwise comparisons and allow ranking of treatments on a continuous 0-to-1 scale.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified seven eligible RCTs, including an ongoing trial that we could not include in the analysis. Of the six RCTs involving 33,039 participants, three RCTs compared rivaroxaban with placebo, two RCTs compared apixaban with placebo, and one RCT compared dabigatran with placebo. All participants in the six RCTs received concomitant antiplatelet therapy. The available evidence suggests that rivaroxaban compared with placebo reduces the rate of all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.98; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 250; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; high certainty) and probably reduces cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.01; NNTB 250; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; moderate certainty). There is probably little or no difference between apixaban and placebo in all-cause mortality (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.35; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 334; 2 studies, 8638 participants; moderate certainty) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.27; number needed to treat not applicable; 2 studies, 8638 participants; moderate certainty). Dabigatran may reduce the rate of all-cause mortality compared with placebo (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.06; NNTB 63; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). Dabigatran compared with placebo may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, although the point estimate suggests benefit (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.52; NNTB 143; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). Two of the investigated NOACs were associated with an increased risk of major bleeding compared to placebo: apixaban (RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.06; NNTH 143; 2 studies, 8544 participants; high certainty) and rivaroxaban (RR 3.31, 95% CI 1.12 to 9.77; NNTH 125; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; high certainty). There may be little or no difference between dabigatran and placebo in the risk of major bleeding (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.22 to 14.12; NNTH 500; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). The results of the network meta-analysis were inconclusive between the different NOACs at all individual doses for all primary outcomes. However, low-certainty evidence suggests that apixaban (combined dose) may be less effective than rivaroxaban and dabigatran for preventing all-cause mortality after AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared with placebo, rivaroxaban reduces all-cause mortality and probably reduces cardiovascular mortality after AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation. Dabigatran may reduce the rate of all-cause mortality and may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality. There is probably no meaningful difference in the rate of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality between apixaban and placebo. Moreover, we found no meaningful benefit in efficacy outcomes for specific therapy doses of any investigated NOACs following AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation. Evidence from the included studies suggests that rivaroxaban and apixaban increase the risk of major bleeding compared with placebo. There may be little or no difference between dabigatran and placebo in the risk of major bleeding. Network meta-analysis did not show any superiority of one NOAC over another for our prespecified primary outcomes. Although the evidence suggests that NOACs reduce mortality, the effect size or impact is small; moreover, NOACs may increase major bleeding. Head-to-head trials, comparing NOACs against each other, are required to provide more solid evidence.
Topics: Humans; Dabigatran; Rivaroxaban; Network Meta-Analysis; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Anticoagulants; Myocardial Infarction; Hemorrhage
PubMed: 38264795
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014678.pub2 -
Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology... Mar 2024Various studies have shown that oropharyngeal colostrum application (OPCA) is beneficial to preterm neonates. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Various studies have shown that oropharyngeal colostrum application (OPCA) is beneficial to preterm neonates. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether OPCA reduces the incidence of culture-proven neonatal sepsis in preterm neonates. Randomized controlled trials comparing OPCA with placebo or standard care in preterm neonates were included. Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, and CENTRAL were searched for studies published up to June 15, 2023. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, version 2, for risk of bias assessment, the random-effects model (RevMan 5.4) for meta-analysis, and Gradepro software for assessing the certainty of evidence. Twenty-one studies involving 2393 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Four studies had a low risk of bias, whereas seven had a high risk. Oropharyngeal colostrum significantly reduced the incidence of culture-proven sepsis (18 studies, 1990 neonates, risk ratio [RR]: 0.78, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.65, 0.94), mortality (18 studies, 2117 neonates, RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.90), necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) (17 studies, 1692 neonates, RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.82), feeding intolerance episodes (four studies, 445 neonates, RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.38, 0.92), and the time to full enteral feeding (19 studies, 2142 neonates, mean difference: -2 to 21 days, 95% CI: -3.44, -0.99 days). There was no reduction in intraventricular hemorrhage, retinopathy of prematurity, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, ventilator-associated pneumonia, neurodevelopmental abnormalities, hospital stay duration, time to full oral feeding, weight at discharge, pneumonia, and duration of antibiotic therapy. The certainty of the evidence was high for the outcomes of culture-positive sepsis and mortality, moderate for NEC, low for time to full enteral feeding, and very low for feeding intolerance. OPCA reduces culture-positive sepsis and mortality (high certainty), NEC (moderate certainty), and time to full enteral feeding (low certainty) in preterm neonates. However, scarcity of data from extremely premature infants limits the generalizability of these results to this population.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Neonatal Sepsis; Colostrum; Infant, Premature; Sepsis; Enterocolitis, Necrotizing
PubMed: 38314925
DOI: 10.1002/jpn3.12085