-
Journal of the American College of... Dec 2022Healthy dietary patterns are rich in micronutrients, but their influence on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risks has not been systematically quantified.
BACKGROUND
Healthy dietary patterns are rich in micronutrients, but their influence on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risks has not been systematically quantified.
OBJECTIVES
The goal of this study was to provide a comprehensive and most up-to-date evidence-based map that systematically quantifies the impact of micronutrients on CVD outcomes.
METHODS
This study comprised a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled intervention trials of micronutrients on CVD risk factors and clinical events.
RESULTS
A total of 884 randomized controlled intervention trials evaluating 27 types of micronutrients among 883,627 participants (4,895,544 person-years) were identified. Supplementation with n-3 fatty acid, n-6 fatty acid, l-arginine, l-citrulline, folic acid, vitamin D, magnesium, zinc, α-lipoic acid, coenzyme Q10, melatonin, catechin, curcumin, flavanol, genistein, and quercetin showed moderate- to high-quality evidence for reducing CVD risk factors. Specifically, n-3 fatty acid supplementation decreased CVD mortality (relative risk [RR]: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.88-0.97), myocardial infarction (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.78-0.92), and coronary heart disease events (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.80-0.93). Folic acid supplementation decreased stroke risk (RR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72-0.97), and coenzyme Q10 supplementation decreased all-cause mortality events (RR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.49-0.94). Vitamin C, vitamin D, vitamin E, and selenium showed no effect on CVD or type 2 diabetes risk. β-carotene supplementation increased all-cause mortality (RR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.05-1.15), CVD mortality events (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.06-1.18), and stroke risk (RR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.01-1.17).
CONCLUSIONS
Supplementation of some but not all micronutrients may benefit cardiometabolic health. This study highlights the importance of micronutrient diversity and the balance of benefits and risks to promote and maintain cardiovascular health in diverse populations. (Antioxidant Supplementation in the Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular Diseases; CRD42022315165).
Topics: Humans; Cardiovascular Diseases; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Risk Factors; Heart Disease Risk Factors; Vitamin D; Folic Acid; Stroke
PubMed: 36480969
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2022.09.048 -
Immunity, Inflammation and Disease Mar 2023Since publishing successful clinical trial results of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in December 2020, multiple reports have arisen about... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Since publishing successful clinical trial results of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in December 2020, multiple reports have arisen about cardiovascular complications following the mRNA vaccination. This study provides an in-depth account of various cardiovascular adverse events reported after the mRNA vaccines' first or second dose including pericarditis/myopericarditis, myocarditis, hypotension, hypertension, arrhythmia, cardiogenic shock, stroke, myocardial infarction/STEMI, intracranial hemorrhage, thrombosis (deep vein thrombosis, cerebral venous thrombosis, arterial or venous thrombotic events, portal vein thrombosis, coronary thrombosis, microvascular small bowel thrombosis), and pulmonary embolism.
METHODS
A systematic review of original studies reporting confirmed cardiovascular manifestations post-mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was performed. Following the PRISMA guidelines, electronic databases (PubMed, PMC NCBI, and Cochrane Library) were searched until January 2022. Baseline characteristics of patients and disease outcomes were extracted from relevant studies.
RESULTS
A total of 81 articles analyzed confirmed cardiovascular complications post-COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in 17,636 individuals and reported 284 deaths with any mRNA vaccine. Of 17,636 cardiovascular events with any mRNA vaccine, 17,192 were observed with the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine, 444 events with mRNA-1273 (Moderna). Thrombosis was frequently reported with any mRNA vaccine (n = 13,936), followed by stroke (n = 758), myocarditis (n = 511), myocardial infarction (n = 377), pulmonary embolism (n = 301), and arrhythmia (n = 254). Stratifying the results by vaccine type showed that thrombosis (80.8%) was common in the BNT162b2 cohort, while stroke (39.9%) was common with mRNA-1273 for any dose. The time between the vaccination dosage and the first symptom onset averaged 5.6 and 4.8 days with the mRNA-1273 vaccine and BNT162b2, respectively. The mRNA-1273 cohort reported 56 deaths compared to the 228 with BNT162b2, while the rest were discharged or transferred to the ICU.
CONCLUSION
Available literature includes more studies with the BNT162b2 vaccine than mRNA-1273. Future studies must report mortality and adverse cardiovascular events by vaccine types.
Topics: Humans; 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273; BNT162 Vaccine; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Myocardial Infarction; Myocarditis; Pulmonary Embolism; Stroke; Thrombocytopenia; Thrombosis
PubMed: 36988252
DOI: 10.1002/iid3.807 -
Acta Neurologica Scandinavica Jan 2022Cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) is caused by partial or complete occlusion of the major cerebral venous sinuses or the smaller feeding cortical veins which predispose... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) is caused by partial or complete occlusion of the major cerebral venous sinuses or the smaller feeding cortical veins which predispose to the risk of venous infarction and hemorrhage. Current guidelines recommend treating CVT with either low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH) followed by an oral vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for 3-12 months. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have already established benefit over warfarin as a long-term treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolic disorder like deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE) given its equal efficacy and better safety profile. The benefit of DOACs over warfarin as a long-term anticoagulation for CVT has likewise been extensively studied, yet it has not been approved as first-line therapy in the current practice. We therefore performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of relevant studies to generate robust evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of DOACs in CVT. This meta-analysis demonstrates that the use of DOACs in CVT has similar efficacy and safety compared to VKAs with better recanalization rate.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Heparin; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Venous Thromboembolism; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 34287841
DOI: 10.1111/ane.13506 -
Circulation Mar 2024Device-detected atrial fibrillation (also known as subclinical atrial fibrillation or atrial high-rate episodes) is a common finding in patients with an implanted... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Device-detected atrial fibrillation (also known as subclinical atrial fibrillation or atrial high-rate episodes) is a common finding in patients with an implanted cardiac rhythm device and is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke. Whether oral anticoagulation is effective and safe in this patient population is unclear.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE and Embase for randomized trials comparing oral anticoagulation with antiplatelet or no antithrombotic therapy in adults with device-detected atrial fibrillation recorded by a pacemaker, implantable cardioverter defibrillator, cardiac resynchronization therapy device, or implanted cardiac monitor. We used random-effects models for meta-analysis and rated the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework (GRADE). The review was preregistered (PROSPERO CRD42023463212).
RESULTS
From 785 citations, we identified 2 randomized trials with relevant clinical outcome data: NOAH-AFNET 6 (Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial High Rate Episodes; 2536 participants) evaluated edoxaban, and ARTESiA (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients With Device-Detected Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation; 4012 participants) evaluated apixaban. Meta-analysis demonstrated that oral anticoagulation with these agents reduced ischemic stroke (relative risk [RR], 0.68 [95% CI, 0.50-0.92]; high-quality evidence). The results from the 2 trials were consistent (I statistic for heterogeneity=0%). Oral anticoagulation also reduced a composite of cardiovascular death, all-cause stroke, peripheral arterial embolism, myocardial infarction, or pulmonary embolism (RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.73-0.99]; I=0%; moderate-quality evidence). There was no reduction in cardiovascular death (RR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.76-1.17]; I=0%; moderate-quality evidence) or all-cause mortality (RR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.96-1.21]; I=0%; moderate-quality evidence). Oral anticoagulation increased major bleeding (RR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.05-2.50]; I²=61%; high-quality evidence).
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA trials are consistent with each other. Meta-analysis of these 2 large randomized trials provides high-quality evidence that oral anticoagulation with edoxaban or apixaban reduces the risk of stroke in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation and increases the risk of major bleeding.
Topics: Humans; Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Embolism; Hemorrhage; Ischemic Stroke; Pyridines; Stroke; Thiazoles; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37952187
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.067512 -
The European Respiratory Journal Feb 2023Accumulated high-quality data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) combination... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Accumulated high-quality data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) combination therapy significantly improves clinical symptoms and health status in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and reduces exacerbation risk. However, there is a growing concern that LAMA/LABA therapy may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD. The aim of this paper is to determine whether the use of LAMA/LABA combination therapy modifies the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with COPD.
METHODS
Two reviewers independently searched Embase, PubMed and Cochrane Library to identify relevant RCTs of LAMA/LABA or LABA/LAMA/inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for the management of patients with COPD that reported on cardiovascular end-points. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke.
RESULTS
A total of 51 RCTs enrolling 91 021 subjects were analysed. Both dual LAMA/LABA (1.6% 1.3%; relative risk 1.42, 95% CI 1.11-1.81) and triple therapy (1.6% 1.4%; relative risk 1.29, 95% CI 1.03-1.61) significantly increased the risk of MACE compared with ICS/LABA. The excess risk was most evident in RCTs in which the average underlying baseline risk for MACE was >1% per year. Compared with LAMA only, LABA only or placebo, dual LAMA/LABA therapy did not significantly increase the risk of MACE, though these comparisons may have lacked sufficient statistical power.
CONCLUSION
Compared with ICS/LABA, dual LAMA/LABA or triple therapy increases cardiovascular risk in patients with COPD. This should be considered in the context of the incremental benefits of these therapies for symptoms and exacerbation rates in patients with COPD, especially in those with a MACE risk of >1% per year.
Topics: Humans; Bronchodilator Agents; Cardiovascular Diseases; Administration, Inhalation; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Muscarinic Antagonists; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Drug Therapy, Combination; Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists
PubMed: 36137586
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00302-2022 -
Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia =... Dec 2022To compare the relative efficacy of supportive therapies (inotropes, vasopressors, and mechanical circulatory support [MCS]) for adult patients with cardiogenic shock... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Inotropes, vasopressors, and mechanical circulatory support for treatment of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
To compare the relative efficacy of supportive therapies (inotropes, vasopressors, and mechanical circulatory support [MCS]) for adult patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction.
SOURCE
We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis and searched six databases from inception to December 2021 for randomized clinical trials (RCTs). We evaluated inotropes, vasopressors, and MCS in separate networks. Two reviewers performed screening, full-text review, and extraction. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to rate the certainty in findings. The critical outcome of interest was 30-day all-cause mortality.
PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
We included 17 RCTs. Among inotropes (seven RCTs, 1,145 patients), levosimendan probably reduces mortality compared with placebo (odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33 to 0.87; moderate certainty), but primarily in lower severity shock. Milrinone (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.19 to 1.39; low certainty) and dobutamine (OR, 0.67, 95% CI, 0.30 to 1.49; low certainty) may have no effect on mortality compared with placebo. With regard to MCS (eight RCTs, 856 patients), there may be no effect on mortality with an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.28; low certainty) or percutaneous MCS (pMCS) (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.98; low certainty), compared with a strategy involving no MCS. Intra-aortic balloon pump use was associated with less major bleeding compared with pMCS. We found only two RCTs evaluating vasopressors, yielding insufficient data for meta-analysis.
CONCLUSION
The results of this systematic review and network meta-analysis indicate that levosimendan reduces mortality compared with placebo among patients with low severity cardiogenic shock. Intra-aortic balloon pump and pMCS had no effect on mortality compared with a strategy of no MCS, but pMCS was associated with higher rates of major bleeding.
STUDY REGISTRATION
Center for Open Science ( https://osf.io/ky2gr ); registered 10 November 2020.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Shock, Cardiogenic; Network Meta-Analysis; Simendan; Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumping; Myocardial Infarction; Hemorrhage; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36195825
DOI: 10.1007/s12630-022-02337-7 -
JAMA Surgery Apr 2021Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an efficient antifibrinolytic agent; however, concerns remain about the potential adverse effects, particularly vascular occlusive events, that...
IMPORTANCE
Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an efficient antifibrinolytic agent; however, concerns remain about the potential adverse effects, particularly vascular occlusive events, that may be associated with its use.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the association between intravenous TXA and total thromboembolic events (TEs) and mortality in patients of all ages and of any medical disciplines.
DATA SOURCE
Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and MEDLINE were searched for eligible studies investigating intravenous TXA and postinterventional outcome published between 1976 and 2020.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials comparing intravenous TXA with placebo/no treatment. The electronic database search yielded a total of 782 studies, and 381 were considered for full-text review. Included studies were published in English, German, French, and Spanish. Studies with only oral or topical tranexamic administration were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Meta-analysis, subgroup and sensitivity analysis, and meta-regression were performed. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Vascular occlusive events and mortality.
RESULTS
A total of 216 eligible trials including 125 550 patients were analyzed. Total TEs were found in 1020 (2.1%) in the group receiving TXA and 900 (2.0%) in the control group. This study found no association between TXA and risk for total TEs (risk difference = 0.001; 95% CI, -0.001 to 0.002; P = .49) for venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, venous TEs, myocardial infarction or ischemia, and cerebral infarction or ischemia. Sensitivity analysis using the risk ratio as an effect measure with (risk ratio = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94-1.11; P = .56) and without (risk ratio = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.95-1.12; P = .52) studies with double-zero events revealed robust effect size estimates. Sensitivity analysis with studies judged at low risk for selection bias showed similar results. Administration of TXA was associated with a significant reduction in overall mortality and bleeding mortality but not with nonbleeding mortality. In addition, an increased risk for vascular occlusive events was not found in studies including patients with a history of thromboembolism. Comparison of studies with sample sizes of less than or equal to 99 (risk difference = 0.004; 95% CI, -0.006 to 0.014; P = .40), 100 to 999 (risk difference = 0.004; 95% CI, -0.003 to 0.011; P = .26), and greater than or equal to 1000 (risk difference = -0.001; 95% CI, -0.003 to 0.001; P = .44) showed no association between TXA and incidence of total TEs. Meta-regression of 143 intervention groups showed no association between TXA dosing and risk for venous TEs (risk difference, -0.005; 95% CI, -0.021 to 0.011; P = .53).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Findings from this systematic review and meta-analysis of 216 studies suggested that intravenous TXA, irrespective of dosing, is not associated with increased risk of any TE. These results help clarify the incidence of adverse events associated with administration of intravenous TXA and suggest that TXA is safe for use with undetermined utility for patients receiving neurological care.
PubMed: 33851983
DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.0884 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2022Anaemia occurs in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is more prevalent with lower levels of kidney function. Anaemia in CKD is associated with death related to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Anaemia occurs in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is more prevalent with lower levels of kidney function. Anaemia in CKD is associated with death related to cardiovascular (CV) disease and infection. Established treatments include erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), iron supplementation and blood transfusions. Oral hypoxia-inducible factors (HIF) stabilisers are now available to manage anaemia in people with CKD.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to assess the benefits and potential harms of HIF stabilisers for the management of anaemia in people with CKD.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 22 November 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to our review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised studies evaluating hypoxia-inducible factors stabilisers compared to placebo, standard care, ESAs or iron supplementation in people with CKD were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Five authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Treatment estimates were summarised using random effects pair-wise meta-analysis and expressed as a relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD), with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Evidence certainty was assessed using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 51 studies randomising 30,994 adults. These studies compared HIF stabilisers to either placebo or an ESA. Compared to placebo, HIF stabiliser therapy had uncertain effects on CV death (10 studies, 1114 participants): RR 3.68, 95% CI 0.19 to 70.21; very low certainty evidence), and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) (3 studies, 822 participants): RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.36; I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence), probably decreases the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusion (8 studies, 4329 participants): RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.60; I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), and increases the proportion of patients reaching the target haemoglobin (Hb) (10 studies, 5102 participants): RR 8.36, 95% CI 6.42 to 10.89; I² = 37%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to ESAs, HIF stabiliser therapy may make little or no difference to CV death (17 studies, 10,340 participants): RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.26; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), nonfatal MI (7 studies, 7765 participants): RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.10; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), and nonfatal stroke (5 studies, 7285 participants): RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.56; I² = 8%; low certainty evidence), and had uncertain effects on fatigue (2 studies, 3471 participants): RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.16; I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence). HIF stabiliser therapy probably decreased the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusion (11 studies, 10,786 participants): RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.00; I² = 25%; moderate certainty evidence), but may make little or no difference on the proportion of patients reaching the target Hb (14 studies, 4601 participants): RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.07; I² = 70%; low certainty evidence), compared to ESA. The effect of HIF stabilisers on hospitalisation for heart failure, peripheral arterial events, loss of unassisted dialysis vascular access patency, access intervention, cancer, infection, pulmonary hypertension and diabetic nephropathy was uncertain. None of the included studies reported life participation. Adverse events were rarely and inconsistently reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
HIF stabiliser management of anaemia had uncertain effects on CV death, fatigue, death (any cause), CV outcomes, and kidney failure compared to placebo or ESAs. Compared to placebo or ESAs, HIF stabiliser management of anaemia probably decreased the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusions, and probably increased the proportion of patients reaching the target Hb when compared to placebo.
Topics: Adult; Anemia; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cause of Death; Fatigue; Humans; Hypoxia; Iron; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic
PubMed: 36005278
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013751.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022Arthroscopic knee surgery remains a common treatment for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, including for degenerative meniscal tears, despite guidelines strongly... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Arthroscopic knee surgery remains a common treatment for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, including for degenerative meniscal tears, despite guidelines strongly recommending against its use. This Cochrane Review is an update of a non-Cochrane systematic review published in 2017.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of arthroscopic surgery, including debridement, partial menisectomy or both, compared with placebo surgery or non-surgical treatment in people with degenerative knee disease (osteoarthritis, degenerative meniscal tears, or both).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers up to 16 April 2021, unrestricted by language.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or trials using quasi-randomised methods of participant allocation, comparing arthroscopic surgery with placebo surgery or non-surgical interventions (e.g. exercise, injections, non-arthroscopic lavage/irrigation, drug therapy, and supplements and complementary therapies) in people with symptomatic degenerative knee disease (osteoarthritis or degenerative meniscal tears or both). Major outcomes were pain, function, participant-reported treatment success, knee-specific quality of life, serious adverse events, total adverse events and knee surgery (replacement or osteotomy).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. The primary comparison was arthroscopic surgery compared to placebo surgery for outcomes that measured benefits of surgery, but we combined data from all control groups to assess harms and knee surgery (replacement or osteotomy).
MAIN RESULTS
Sixteen trials (2105 participants) met our inclusion criteria. The average age of participants ranged from 46 to 65 years, and 56% of participants were women. Four trials (380 participants) compared arthroscopic surgery to placebo surgery. For the remaining trials, arthroscopic surgery was compared to exercise (eight trials, 1371 participants), a single intra-articular glucocorticoid injection (one trial, 120 participants), non-arthroscopic lavage (one trial, 34 participants), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (one trial, 80 participants) and weekly hyaluronic acid injections for five weeks (one trial, 120 participants). The majority of trials without a placebo control were susceptible to bias: in particular, selection (56%), performance (75%), detection (75%), attrition (44%) and selective reporting (75%) biases. The placebo-controlled trials were less susceptible to bias and none were at risk of performance or detection bias. Here we limit reporting to the main comparison, arthroscopic surgery versus placebo surgery. High-certainty evidence indicates arthroscopic surgery leads to little or no difference in pain or function at three months after surgery, moderate-certainty evidence indicates there is probably little or no improvement in knee-specific quality of life three months after surgery, and low-certainty evidence indicates arthroscopic surgery may lead to little or no difference in participant-reported success at up to five years, compared with placebo surgery. Mean post-operative pain in the placebo group was 40.1 points on a 0 to 100 scale (where lower score indicates less pain) compared to 35.5 points in the arthroscopic surgery group, a difference of 4.6 points better (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 better to 9 better; I = 0%; 4 trials, 309 participants). Mean post-operative function in the placebo group was 75.9 points on a 0 to 100 rating scale (where higher score indicates better function) compared to 76 points in the arthroscopic surgery group, a difference of 0.1 points better (95% CI 3.2 worse to 3.4 better; I = 0%; 3 trials, 302 participants). Mean post-operative knee-specific health-related quality of life in the placebo group was 69.7 points on a 0 to 100 rating scale (where higher score indicates better quality of life) compared with 75.3 points in the arthroscopic surgery group, a difference of 5.6 points better (95% CI 0.36 better to 10.68 better; I = 0%; 2 trials, 188 participants). We downgraded this evidence to moderate certainty as the 95% confidence interval does not rule in or rule out a clinically important change. After surgery, 74 out of 100 people reported treatment success with placebo and 82 out of 100 people reported treatment success with arthroscopic surgery at up to five years (risk ratio (RR) 1.11, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.86; I = 53%; 3 trials, 189 participants). We downgraded this evidence to low certainty due to serious indirectness (diversity in definition and timing of outcome measurement) and serious imprecision (small number of events). We are less certain if the risk of serious or total adverse events increased with arthroscopic surgery compared to placebo or non-surgical interventions. Serious adverse events were reported in 6 out of 100 people in the control groups and 8 out of 100 people in the arthroscopy groups from eight trials (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.83; I = 47%; 8 trials, 1206 participants). Fifteen out of 100 people reported adverse events with control interventions, and 17 out of 100 people with surgery at up to five years (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.70; I = 48%; 9 trials, 1326 participants). The certainty of the evidence was low, downgraded twice due to serious imprecision (small number of events) and possible reporting bias (incomplete reporting of outcome across studies). Serious adverse events included death, pulmonary embolism, acute myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis and deep infection. Subsequent knee surgery (replacement or high tibial osteotomy) was reported in 2 out of 100 people in the control groups and 4 out of 100 people in the arthroscopy surgery groups at up to five years in four trials (RR 2.63, 95% CI 0.94 to 7.34; I = 11%; 4 trials, 864 participants). The certainty of the evidence was low, downgraded twice due to the small number of events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Arthroscopic surgery provides little or no clinically important benefit in pain or function, probably does not provide clinically important benefits in knee-specific quality of life, and may not improve treatment success compared with a placebo procedure. It may lead to little or no difference, or a slight increase, in serious and total adverse events compared to control, but the evidence is of low certainty. Whether or not arthroscopic surgery results in slightly more subsequent knee surgery (replacement or osteotomy) compared to control remains unresolved.
Topics: Aged; Arthroscopy; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35238404
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014328 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Mar 2023To determine the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBO) in the treatment of necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTI), we conducted a meta-analysis of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
To determine the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBO) in the treatment of necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTI), we conducted a meta-analysis of the available evidence.
METHODS
Data sources were PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and reference lists. The study included observational trials that compared HBO with non-HBO, or standard care. The primary outcome was the mortality rate. Secondary outcomes were the number of debridement, amputation rate and complication rate. Relative risks or standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively.
RESULTS
A total of retrospective cohort and case-control studies were included, including 49,152 patients, 1448 who received HBO and 47,704 in control. The mortality rate in the HBO group was significantly lower than that in the non-HBO group [RR = 0.522, 95% CI (0.403, 0.677), p < 0.05]. However, the number of debridements performed in the HBO group was higher than in the non-HBO group [SMD = 0.611, 95% CI (0.012, 1.211), p < 0.05]. There was no significant difference in amputation rates between the two groups [RR = 0.836, 95% CI (0.619, 1.129), p > 0.05]. In terms of complications, the incidence of MODS was lower in the HBO group than in the non-HBO group [RR = 0.205, 95% CI (0.164, 0.256), p < 0.05]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of other complications, such as sepsis, shock, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, and pneumonia, between the two groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
The current evidence suggests that the use of HBO in the treatment of NSTI can significantly reduce the mortality rates and the incidence rates of complications. However, due to the retrospective nature of the studies, the evidence is weak, and further research is needed to establish its efficacy. It is also important to note that HBO is not available in all hospitals, and its use should be carefully considered based on the patient's individual circumstances. Additionally, it is still worthwhile to stress the significance of promptly evaluating surgical risks to prevent missing the optimal treatment time.
Topics: Humans; Soft Tissue Infections; Hyperbaric Oxygenation; Retrospective Studies; Debridement; Combined Modality Therapy
PubMed: 36966323
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-023-00490-y