-
BMC Ophthalmology Jun 2024The purpose of this review was to examine if dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i) use affects the risk of diabetic retinopathy (DR). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this review was to examine if dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i) use affects the risk of diabetic retinopathy (DR).
METHODS
Cohort studies published up to 20th July 2023 in the databases of PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched. The adjusted effect size was pooled to calculate the odds ratio (OR).
RESULTS
Seven studies were included. Meta-analysis showed that the use of DPP4i was not associated with any significant change in the risk of DR (OR: 0.86 95% CI: 0.70, 1.06 I = 78%). The pooled analysis also found that DPP4i use was not associated with any significant risk of progression of DR (OR: 0.87 95% CI: 0.47, 1.59 I = 86%). The results did not change during sensitivity analysis.
CONCLUSION
Present evidence from a limited number of real-world studies shows that DPP4i may not affect the incidence and progression of DR. There is a need for further studies from different countries using accurate definitions of DR and its progression to validate the current results.
Topics: Humans; Diabetic Retinopathy; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Incidence; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Risk Factors; Disease Progression
PubMed: 38943083
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-024-03535-1 -
Scientific Reports Dec 2023We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of nafamostat on the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy of nafamostat mesylate in the prevention of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of nafamostat on the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). PubMed, Web of Science, and Ichushi Web were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using nafamostat to prevent PEP. In subgroup analyses, we studied the preventive effects of nafamostat according to the severity of PEP, risk category, and dose. A random-effects model was adopted; heterogeneity between studies was examined using the chi-squared test and I statistics. This analysis uses the PRISMA statement as general guidance. 9 RCTs involving 3321 patients were included. The risk of PEP was lower in the nafamostat group than in the control group [4.4% vs. 8.3%, risk ratio (RR): 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.68]. In subgroup analyses, the protective effects were evident in low-risk patients for PEP before ERCP (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.21-0.55). The association between PEP and nafamostat was significant only in patients who developed mild PEP (RR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.36-0.69). The benefits were independent of the dose. The prophylactic use of nafamostat resulted in a lower risk of PEP. The subgroup analyses suggested uncertain benefits for severe PEP or high-risk patients for PEP. This warrants further investigation through additional RCTs.
Topics: Humans; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pancreatitis; Guanidines
PubMed: 38155200
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-50181-6 -
Cardiology Journal 2024Bivalirudin is associated with fewer major bleeding events than heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but confounding effects of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Bivalirudin is associated with fewer major bleeding events than heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but confounding effects of concomitant glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, routine femoral artery access, and less potent effects of clopidogrel limits meaningful comparisons. The present study is a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare bivalirudin to heparin in contemporary practice.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and Ovid MEDLINE databases were searched for relevant studies, including comparisons between bivalirudin and heparin in the current medical era from inception to December 23, 2021. Studies reporting incidences of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and net adverse clinical events (NACE) in patients undergoing PCI and meeting the inclusion criteria were retained. Data extraction was performed by three independent reviewers.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included 8 studies. Compared to heparin, bivalirudin during PCI was associated with a lower NACE risk, lower all-cause death, and similar MACE risk, with a pooled risk ratio of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.97, p = 0.02), 0.83 (95% CI 0.74-0.94, p = 0.002), and 0.93 (95% CI 0.78-1.10, p = 0.38), respectively. Moreover, the reduction in NACE was mainly attributed to reduced bleeding (22% reduction in the risk of major bleeding, 95% CI 0.63-0.97, p = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
These findings suggest that bivalirudin use during PCI reduced the risk of NACE and all-cause death but did not reduce the risk of MACE compared with heparin use in PCI. More studies specifically designed for anticoagulation strategies and a personalized anticoagulation regimen to comprehensively balance bleeding and ischemia risks are required.
Topics: Humans; Hirudins; Heparin; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Peptide Fragments; Acute Coronary Syndrome; Recombinant Proteins; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Hemorrhage; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37964648
DOI: 10.5603/cj.90956 -
Scientific Reports Oct 2023Antithrombin (AT) deficiency increases the risk for venous thromboembolism, therefore, a highly sensitive assay to identify this condition is crucial. The aim of this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Antithrombin (AT) deficiency increases the risk for venous thromboembolism, therefore, a highly sensitive assay to identify this condition is crucial. The aim of this paper was to perform a meta-analysis comparing AT activities measured by different AT activity assays in patients with heparin binding site AT deficiency. In addition, the diagnostic sensitivity of selected assays was compared depending on the available data. An extensive literature search was performed considering results with publication date up to July 10, 2021. Seven relevant English-language observational studies, comparing AT activity measured by different AT activity assays in Caucasian Europeans with either the AT Budapest III or AT Padua I mutation were included in meta-analyses. There was no significant difference in AT activity between Labexpert and Innovance in patients with AT Budapest III (P = 0.567) and AT Padua I (P = 0.265), while AT activity determined by HemosIL was significantly higher compared to Innovance for both mutations (AT Budapest III: P < 0.001; AT Padua I: P < 0.001). These results are in line with the results of comparison of diagnostic sensitivity. In patients with AT Budapest III, the AT activity was also higher when measured with Berichrom compared to Innovance (P = 0.002), however, the results of comparison of diagnostic sensitivity across studies were variable. No significant difference (P = 0.117) in AT activity as well as diagnostic sensitivity was observed between Sta-Stachrom and Innovance. The results of our study suggest that Innovance, Labexpert and Sta-Stachrom are the most sensitive activity assays for detection of AT Budapest III and AT Padua I, whereas HemosIL showed considerably lower sensitivity for these two variants. As revealed in our study, the diagnostic sensitivity of AT activity assays to type II heparin binding site AT deficiency is different, and in some assays mutation dependent.
Topics: Humans; Heparin; Anticoagulants; Blood Coagulation Tests; Antithrombin III Deficiency; Binding Sites; Antithrombins
PubMed: 37794095
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-43941-x -
Clinical Cardiology May 2024The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is associated with complex hemostatic changes. Systemic anticoagulation is initiated to prevent clotting in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is associated with complex hemostatic changes. Systemic anticoagulation is initiated to prevent clotting in the ECMO system, but this comes with an increased risk of bleeding. Evidence on the use of anti-Xa-guided monitoring to prevent bleeding during ECMO support is limited. Therefore, we aimed to analyze the association between anti-factor Xa-guided anticoagulation and hemorrhage during ECMO.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed (up to August 2023).
PROSPERO
CRD42023448888.
RESULTS
Twenty-six studies comprising 2293 patients were included in the analysis, with six works being part of the meta-analysis. The mean anti-Xa values did not show a significant difference between patients with and without hemorrhage (standardized mean difference -0.05; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.19; 0.28, p = .69). We found a positive correlation between anti-Xa levels and unfractionated heparin dose (UFH; pooled estimate of correlation coefficients 0.44; 95% CI: 0.33; 0.55, p < .001). The most frequent complications were any type of hemorrhage (pooled 36%) and thrombosis (33%). Nearly half of the critically ill patients did not survive to hospital discharge (47%).
CONCLUSIONS
The most appropriate tool for anticoagulation monitoring in ECMO patients is uncertain. Our analysis did not reveal a significant difference in anti-Xa levels in patients with and without hemorrhagic events. However, we found a moderate correlation between anti-Xa and the UFH dose, supporting its utilization in monitoring UFH anticoagulation. Given the limitations of time-guided monitoring methods, the role of anti-Xa is promising and further research is warranted.
Topics: Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Humans; Hemorrhage; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Anticoagulants; Blood Coagulation; Factor Xa; Risk Factors
PubMed: 38693831
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24273 -
Heart & Lung : the Journal of Critical... 2024Given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial to prioritize the management of underlying diseases in infected patients, with hypertension being one of the most... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial to prioritize the management of underlying diseases in infected patients, with hypertension being one of the most common conditions. However, there lies a complicated correlation between antihypertensive agents and COVID-19 infection.
OBJECTIVES
This study is to systematically evaluate the impact of continuing or discontinuing antihypertensive agents on mortality and infection severity in hospitalized patients with both hypertension and COVID-19.
METHODS
A systematic electronic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify relevant clinical trials published between 1948 and September 2022. Two independent reviewers assessed the quality of the included studies and extracted relevant data. The primary outcome of interest was the relationship between in-hospital mortality and administration of antihypertensive agents.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis revealed that continuous administration of antihypertensive agents, compared with discontinuation, significantly reduced in-hospital mortality among hypertension patients with COVID-19 infection [OR=0.49, 95 %CI (0.38, 0.65), p < 0.001, I=65.3 %]. Specifically, patients receiving ACEI/ARB type agents had even lower mortality rates. Meta-regression analyses were conducted to examine the impact of publication date, sample size, study design, and mean age of the patients, and the results showed that the number of participants in the included studies was the primary source of heterogeneity (p = 0.032). The findings indicated a clear association between the use of antihypertensive agents and reduced mortality in these patients.
CONCLUSION
nder the current circumstance of the sustained COVID-19 pandemic, it is recommended to continue the use of antihypertensive agents for patients with hypertension during COVID-19 infection, as it can help reduce the risk of mortality.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; COVID-19; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Pandemics; Hypertension
PubMed: 37826924
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2023.10.001 -
Lipids in Health and Disease May 2024About 20-40% patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) had an increased risk of developing diabetic nephropathy (DN). Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) were... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
About 20-40% patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) had an increased risk of developing diabetic nephropathy (DN). Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) were recommended for treatment of T2DM, while the impact of DPP-4i on renal function remained unclear. This study aimed to explore the effect of DPP-4i on renal parameter of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) in T2DM.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed across PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library. A fixed or random-effects model was used for quantitative synthesis according to the heterogeneity, which was assessed with I index. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias were performed with standard methods, respectively.
RESULTS
A total of 17 randomized controlled trials were identified. Administration of DPP-4i produced no significant effect on eGFR (WMD, -0.92 mL/min/1.73m, 95% CI, -2.04 to 0.19) in diabetic condition. DPP-4i produced a favorable effect on attenuating ACR (WMD, -2.76 mg/g, 95% CI, -5.23 to -0.29) in patients with T2DM. The pooled estimate was stable based on the sensitivity test. No publication bias was observed according to Begg's and Egger's tests.
CONCLUSIONS
Treatment with DPP-4i preserved the renal parameter of eGFR in diabetic condition. Available evidences suggested that administration of DPP-4i produced a favorable effect on attenuating ACR in patients with T2DM. INTERNATIONAL PROSPECTIVE REGISTER FOR SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (PROSPERO) NUMBER: CRD.42020144642.
Topics: Humans; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Diabetic Nephropathies; Kidney; Creatinine
PubMed: 38796440
DOI: 10.1186/s12944-024-02132-x -
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy Feb 2024Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an irregular heart rhythm which is becoming more and more common in this new era. Obesity is a risk factor for cardiovascular events, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparing the Clinical Outcomes Observed with Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin for the Management of Obese Patients with Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an irregular heart rhythm which is becoming more and more common in this new era. Obesity is a risk factor for cardiovascular events, and obese patients are more at risk for stroke. The Framingham Heart Study demonstrated an increase in the developmental risk of AF by 4% for every unit (kg/m) increase in body mass index (BMI). An anticoagulant is often required for the management of such patients. In this analysis, we aimed to systematically compare the clinical outcomes which were associated with rivaroxaban versus warfarin for the treatment of obese patients with non-valvular AF.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, http://www.
CLINICALTRIALS
gov , Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central were the searched databases. Clinical outcomes including stroke, systemic embolism, and major bleeding were the endpoints. In this study, dichotomous data were analyzed by the RevMan software version 5.4. Risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used for result interpretation.
RESULTS
Ten studies consisting of a total number of 168,081 obese participants were included whereby 81,332 participants were treated with rivaroxaban and 86,749 participants were treated with warfarin. The risks of ischemic (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.74-0.84; P = 0.00001) and hemorrhagic stroke (RR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.76; P = 0.0001) as well as systemic embolism (RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.62-0.87; P = 0.0004) were significantly lower with rivaroxaban compared to warfarin for the management of these obese patients with non-valvular AF. Rivaroxaban was also associated with a significantly lower risk of major bleeding (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65-0.87; P = 0.0001).
CONCLUSION
Based on this analysis, rivaroxaban seemed to be a better option in comparison to warfarin, due to its association with significantly lower risks of stroke and bleeding outcomes in obese patients with non-valvular AF. However, this hypothesis should further be confirmed in larger clinical trials.
Topics: Humans; Warfarin; Rivaroxaban; Atrial Fibrillation; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Anticoagulants; Stroke; Hemorrhage; Obesity; Embolism; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35763193
DOI: 10.1007/s10557-022-07361-9 -
PloS One 2024The effectiveness of administering argatroban as a treatment approach following antiplatelet therapy or alteplase thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute stroke is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Can the combination of antiplatelet or alteplase thrombolytic therapy with argatroban benefit patients suffering from acute stroke? a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.
BACKGROUND
The effectiveness of administering argatroban as a treatment approach following antiplatelet therapy or alteplase thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute stroke is presently uncertain. However, it is important to highlight the potential benefits of combining this medication with known thrombolytics or antiplatelet therapy. One notable advantage of argatroban is its short half-life, which helps minimize excessive anticoagulation and risk of bleeding complications in inadvertent cases of hemorrhagic stroke. By conducting a meticulous review and meta-analysis, we aim to further explore the common use of argatroban and examine the plausible advantages of combining this medication with established thrombolytic and antiplatelet therapies.
METHOD
In this study, we performed a rigorous and methodical search for both randomized controlled trials and retrospective analyses. Our main objective was to analyze the impact of argatroban on the occurrence of hemorrhagic events and the mRS scores of 0-2. We utilized a meta-analysis to assess the relative risk (RR) associated with using argatroban versus not using it.
RESULTS
In this study, we analyzed data from 11 different studies, encompassing a total of 8,635 patients. Out of these patients, 3999(46.3%) received argatroban treatment while the remaining 4636(53.7%)did not. The primary outcome of 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin scale (mRS) score≤2) showed that the risk ratio (RR) for patients using argatroban after alteplase thrombolytic therapy compared to those not using argatroban was(RR, 1.00 ([95% CI, 0.92-1.09]; P = 0.97), indicating no statistical significance. However, for patients using argatroban after antiplatelet therapy, was (RR,1.09 [95% CI, 1.04-1.14]; P = 0.0001), which was statistically significant. In terms of hemorrhagic events, the RR for patients using argatroban compared to those not using argatroban was (RR,1.08 [95% CI, 0.88-1.33]; P = 0.46), indicating no statistical significance.
CONCLUSION
The results of this study suggest that further research into combination therapy with argatroban and antiplatelet agents may be warranted, however more rigorous RCTs are needed to definitively evaluate the effects of combination treatment.
Topics: Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Tissue Plasminogen Activator; Retrospective Studies; Stroke; Hemorrhage; Fibrinolytic Agents; Thrombolytic Therapy; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Arginine; Pipecolic Acids; Sulfonamides
PubMed: 38412157
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298226