-
EBioMedicine Aug 2022The causal association between cigarette smoking and several diseases remains equivocal. The purpose of this study was to appraise the causal role of smoking in a wide... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The causal association between cigarette smoking and several diseases remains equivocal. The purpose of this study was to appraise the causal role of smoking in a wide range of diseases by summarizing the evidence from Mendelian randomization (MR) studies.
METHODS
MR studies on genetic liability to smoking initiation or lifetime smoking (composite of smoking initiation, heaviness, duration, and cessation) in relation to circulatory system, digestive system, nervous system, musculoskeletal system, endocrine, metabolic, and eye diseases, and neoplasms published until February 15, 2022, were identified in PubMed. De novo MR analyses were performed using summary statistics data from genome-wide association studies. Meta-analysis was applied to combine study-specific estimates.
FINDINGS
Meta-analyses of findings of 29 published MR studies and 123 de novo MR analyses of 57 distinct primary outcomes showed that genetic liability to smoking (smoking initiation or lifetime smoking) was associated with increased risk of 13 circulatory system diseases, several digestive system diseases (including diverticular, gallstone, gastroesophageal reflux, and Crohn's disease, acute pancreatitis, and periodontitis), epilepsy, certain musculoskeletal system diseases (including fracture, osteoarthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis), endocrine (polycystic ovary syndrome), metabolic (type 2 diabetes) and eye diseases (including age-related macular degeneration and senile cataract) as well as cancers of the lung, head and neck, esophagus, pancreas, bladder, kidney, cervix, and ovaries, and myeloid leukemia. Smoking liability was associated with decreased risk of Parkinson's disease and prostate cancer.
INTERPRETATION
This study found robust evidence that cigarette smoking causes a wide range of diseases.
FUNDING
This work was supported by research grants from the Swedish Cancer Society (Cancerfonden), the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation (Hjärt-Lungfonden, 20210351), the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (Forte, 2018-00123), and the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet, 2019-00977). Stephen Burgess is supported by Sir Henry Dale Fellowship jointly funded by the Wellcome Trust and the Royal Society (204623/Z/16/Z) and the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Topics: Acute Disease; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Genome-Wide Association Study; Humans; Male; Mendelian Randomization Analysis; Neoplasms; Pancreatitis; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Smoking
PubMed: 35816897
DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.104154 -
Movement Disorders : Official Journal... Dec 2022The incidence and prevalence of Huntington's disease (HD) based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of 20 studies published from 1985 to 2010 was estimated at 0.38... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The incidence and prevalence of Huntington's disease (HD) based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of 20 studies published from 1985 to 2010 was estimated at 0.38 per 100,000 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16-0.94) and 2.71 per 100,000 persons (95% CI, 1.55-4.72), respectively. Since 2010, there have been many new epidemiological studies of HD. We sought to update the global estimates of HD incidence and prevalence using data published up to February 2022 and perform additional analyses based on study continent. Medline and Embase were searched for epidemiological studies of HD published between 2010 and 2022. Risk of bias was assessed using a quality assessment tool. Estimated pooled prevalence or incidence was calculated using a random-effects meta-analysis. A total of 33 studies published between 2010 and 2022 were included. Pooled incidence was 0.48 cases per 100,000 person-years (95% CI, 0.33-0.63). Subgroup analysis by continent demonstrated a significantly higher incidence of HD in Europe and North America than in Asia. Pooled prevalence was 4.88 per 100,000 (95% CI, 3.38-7.06). Subanalyses by continent demonstrated that the prevalence of HD was significantly higher in Europe and North America than in Africa. The minor increase in prevalence (more so than incidence) demonstrated in this updated review could relate to the enhanced availability of molecular testing, earlier diagnosis, increased life expectancy, and de novo mutations. Limitations include variable case ascertainment methods and lacking case validation data. © 2022 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society. Reproduced with the permission of the Minister of Public Health Agency of Canada.
Topics: Humans; Female; Incidence; Prevalence; Huntington Disease; Europe; North America
PubMed: 36161673
DOI: 10.1002/mds.29228 -
European Urology Dec 2022Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examined the role of adding androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs), including abiraterone acetate (ABI), apalutamide,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Androgen Receptor Signaling Inhibitors in Addition to Docetaxel with Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
CONTEXT
Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examined the role of adding androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs), including abiraterone acetate (ABI), apalutamide, darolutamide (DAR), and enzalutamide (ENZ), to docetaxel (DOC) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).
OBJECTIVE
To analyze the oncologic benefit of triplet combination therapies using ARSI + DOC + ADT, and comparing them with available treatment regimens in patients with mHSPC.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Three databases and meetings abstracts were queried in April 2022 for RCTs analyzing patients treated with first-line combination systemic therapy for mHSPC. The primary interests of measure were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the differential outcomes in patients with low- and high-volume disease as well as de novo and metachronous metastasis.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Overall, 11 RCTs were included for meta-analyses and network meta-analyses (NMAs). We found that the triplet combinations outperformed DOC + ADT in terms of OS (pooled hazard ratio [HR]: 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-0.84) and PFS (pooled HR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.42-0.58). There was no statistically significant difference between patients with low- and high-volume disease in terms of an OS benefit from adding an ARSI to DOC +ADT (both HR: 0.79; p = 1). Based on NMAs, triplet therapy also outperformed ARSI + ADT in terms of OS (DAR + DOC + ADT: pooled HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.55-0.99) and PFS (ABI + DOC + ADT: HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.51-0.91, and ENZ + DOC + ADT: HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.93). An analysis of treatment ranking among de novo mHSPC patients showed that triplet therapy had the highest likelihood of improved OS in patients with high-volume disease; however, doublet therapy using ARSI + ADT had the highest likelihood of improved OS in patients with low-volume disease.
CONCLUSIONS
We found that the triplet combination therapy improves survival endpoints in mHSPC patients compared with currently available doublet treatment regimens. Our findings need to be confirmed in further head-to-head trials with longer follow-up and among various patient populations.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Our study suggests that triplet therapy with androgen receptor signaling inhibitor, docetaxel, androgen deprivation therapy prolongs survival in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer compared with the current standard doublet therapy.
Topics: Humans; Male; Docetaxel; Androgen Antagonists; Androgens; Receptors, Androgen; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 35995644
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.08.002 -
European Urology Oncology Dec 2022Multiple treatments for metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) are available, but their effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and benefit-harm... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Multiple treatments for metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) are available, but their effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and benefit-harm balance remain unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To assess clinical effectiveness regarding survival and HRQoL, safety, and benefit-harm balance of mHSPC treatments.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov until March 1, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, apalutamide, darolutamide, and radiotherapy combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) mutually or with ADT alone were eligible. Three reviewers independently performed screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment in duplicate.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Across ten RCTs, we found relevant survival benefits for ADT + docetaxel (high certainty according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation [GRADE]), ADT + abiraterone (moderate certainty), ADT + enzalutamide (low certainty), ADT + apalutamide (high certainty), and ADT + docetaxel + darolutamide (high certainty) compared with ADT alone. ADT + radiotherapy appeared effective only in low-volume de novo mHSPC. We found a short-term HRQoL decrease lasting 3-6 mo for ADT + docetaxel (moderate certainty) and a potential HRQoL benefit for ADT + abiraterone up to 24 mo of follow-up (moderate certainty) compared with ADT alone. There was no difference in HRQoL for ADT + enzalutamide, ADT + apalutamide, or ADT + radiotherapy over ADT alone (low-high certainty). Grade 3-5 adverse effect rates were increased with all systemic combination treatments. A benefit-harm assessment showed high probabilities (>60%) for a net clinical benefit with ADT + abiraterone, ADT + enzalutamide, and ADT + apalutamide, while ADT + docetaxel and ADT + docetaxel + darolutamide appeared unlikely (<40%) to be beneficial.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite substantial survival benefits, no systemic combination treatment showed a clear HRQoL improvement compared with ADT alone. We found evidence for a short-term HRQoL decline with ADT + docetaxel and a higher net clinical benefit with ADT + abiraterone, ADT + apalutamide and ADT + enzalutamide. While individualized decision-making remains important and economic factors need to be considered, the evidence may support a general preference for the combination of ADT with androgen receptor axis-targeted therapies over docetaxel-containing strategies.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We assessed different combination treatments for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. While survival was better with all systemic combination treatments, there was no clear improvement in health-related quality of life compared with androgen deprivation therapy alone. Novel hormonal combination treatments had a more favorable benefit-harm balance than combination treatments that include chemotherapy.
Topics: Male; Humans; Docetaxel; Network Meta-Analysis; Androgens; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 35599144
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2022.04.007 -
BMC Medicine Dec 2021Obesity is a worldwide epidemic that has been associated with a plurality of diseases in observational studies. The aim of this study was to summarize the evidence from... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Obesity is a worldwide epidemic that has been associated with a plurality of diseases in observational studies. The aim of this study was to summarize the evidence from Mendelian randomization (MR) studies of the association between body mass index (BMI) and chronic diseases.
METHODS
PubMed and Embase were searched for MR studies on adult BMI in relation to major chronic diseases, including diabetes mellitus; diseases of the circulatory, respiratory, digestive, musculoskeletal, and nervous systems; and neoplasms. A meta-analysis was performed for each disease by using results from published MR studies and corresponding de novo analyses based on summary-level genetic data from the FinnGen consortium (n = 218,792 individuals).
RESULTS
In a meta-analysis of results from published MR studies and de novo analyses of the FinnGen consortium, genetically predicted higher BMI was associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus, 14 circulatory disease outcomes, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, five digestive system diseases, three musculoskeletal system diseases, and multiple sclerosis as well as cancers of the digestive system (six cancer sites), uterus, kidney, and bladder. In contrast, genetically predicted higher adult BMI was associated with a decreased risk of Dupuytren's disease, osteoporosis, and breast, prostate, and non-melanoma cancer, and not associated with Alzheimer's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or Parkinson's disease.
CONCLUSIONS
The totality of the evidence from MR studies supports a causal role of excess adiposity in a plurality of chronic diseases. Hence, continued efforts to reduce the prevalence of overweight and obesity are a major public health goal.
Topics: Adiposity; Adult; Body Mass Index; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Genome-Wide Association Study; Humans; Male; Mendelian Randomization Analysis; Multiple Chronic Conditions; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide
PubMed: 34906131
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-021-02188-x -
JAMA Network Open Oct 2022The benefits and disadvantages of different pretransplant dialysis modalities and their posttransplant outcomes remain unclear in contemporary kidney transplant care. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
The benefits and disadvantages of different pretransplant dialysis modalities and their posttransplant outcomes remain unclear in contemporary kidney transplant care.
OBJECTIVE
To summarize the available evidence of the association of different pretransplant dialysis modalities, including hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis (PD), with posttransplant outcomes.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, CINAHL, and gray literature were searched from inception to March 18, 2022 (updated to April 1, 2022), for relevant studies and with no language restrictions.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized observational (case-control and cohort) studies that investigated the association between pretransplant dialysis modality and posttransplant outcomes regardless of age or donor sources (living or deceased) were abstracted independently by 2 reviewers.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology reporting guidelines, 2 reviewers independently extracted relevant information using a standardized approach. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate pooled adjusted hazard ratio (HR) or odds ratio and 95% CI.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, overall graft failure, death-censored graft failure, and delayed graft function. Secondary outcomes included acute rejection, graft vessel thrombosis, oliguria, de novo heart failure, and new-onset diabetes after transplant.
RESULTS
The study analyzed 26 nonrandomized studies (1 case-control and 25 cohort), including 269 715 patients (mean recipient age range, 14.5-67.0 years; reported proportions of female individuals, 29.4%-66.9%) whose outcomes associated with pretransplant hemodialysis vs pretransplant PD were compared. No significant difference, with very low certainty of evidence, was observed between pretransplant PD and all-cause mortality (13 studies; n = 221 815; HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.84-1.01]; P = .08) as well as death-censored graft failure (5 studies; n = 96 439; HR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.85-1.14]; P = .81). However, pretransplant PD was associated with a lower risk for overall graft failure (10 studies; n = 209 287; HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.92-0.99]; P = .02; very low certainty of evidence) and delayed graft function (6 studies; n = 47 118; odds ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.70-0.76]; P < .001; low certainty of evidence). Secondary outcomes were inconclusive due to few studies with available data.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Results of the study suggest that pretransplant PD is a preferred dialysis modality option during the transition to kidney transplant. Future studies are warranted to address shared decision-making between health care professionals, patients, and caregivers as well as patient preferences.
Topics: Humans; Female; Adolescent; Young Adult; Adult; Middle Aged; Aged; Kidney Transplantation; Renal Dialysis; Delayed Graft Function; Peritoneal Dialysis; Odds Ratio
PubMed: 36264575
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.37580 -
Annals of Internal Medicine Nov 2019This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a Supplement.
UNLABELLED
This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a Supplement.
DESCRIPTION
Dietary guideline recommendations require consideration of the certainty in the evidence, the magnitude of potential benefits and harms, and explicit consideration of people's values and preferences. A set of recommendations on red meat and processed meat consumption was developed on the basis of 5 de novo systematic reviews that considered all of these issues.
METHODS
The recommendations were developed by using the Nutritional Recommendations (NutriRECS) guideline development process, which includes rigorous systematic review methodology, and GRADE methods to rate the certainty of evidence for each outcome and to move from evidence to recommendations. A panel of 14 members, including 3 community members, from 7 countries voted on the final recommendations. Strict criteria limited the conflicts of interest among panel members. Considerations of environmental impact or animal welfare did not bear on the recommendations. Four systematic reviews addressed the health effects associated with red meat and processed meat consumption, and 1 systematic review addressed people's health-related values and preferences regarding meat consumption.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The panel suggests that adults continue current unprocessed red meat consumption (weak recommendation, low-certainty evidence). Similarly, the panel suggests adults continue current processed meat consumption (weak recommendation, low-certainty evidence).
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE
None. (PROSPERO 2017: CRD42017074074; PROSPERO 2018: CRD42018088854).
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Diet; Humans; Meat Products; Neoplasms; Nutrition Policy; Red Meat
PubMed: 31569235
DOI: 10.7326/M19-1621 -
Annals of Surgery Feb 2020The aim of this study was to appraise the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), esophagitis, and Barrett's esophagus (BE) after sleeve gastrectomy (SG)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to appraise the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), esophagitis, and Barrett's esophagus (BE) after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The precise prevalence of new-onset or worsening GERD after SG is controversial. Subsequent esophagitis and BE can be a serious unintended sequalae. Their postoperative prevalence remains unclear.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies evaluating postoperative outcomes in primary SG for morbid obesity. The primary outcome was prevalence of GERD, esophagitis, and BE after SG. Meta-analysis was performed to calculate combined prevalence.
RESULTS
A total of 46 studies totaling 10,718 patients were included. Meta-analysis found that the increase of postoperative GERD after sleeve (POGAS) was 19% and de novo reflux was 23%. The long-term prevalence of esophagitis was 28% and BE was 8%. Four percent of all patients required conversion to RYGB for severe reflux.
CONCLUSIONS
The postoperative prevalence of GERD, esophagitis, and BE following SG is significant. Symptoms do not always correlate with the presence of pathology. As the surgical uptake of SG continues to increase, there is a need to ensure that surgical decision-making and the consent process for this procedure consider these long-term complications while also ensuring their postoperative surveillance through endoscopic and physiological approaches. The long-term outcomes of this commonly performed bariatric procedure should be considered alongside its weight loss and metabolic effects.
Topics: Barrett Esophagus; Esophagitis; Gastrectomy; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Humans; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 30921053
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003275 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Apr 2023This study aimed to determine the incremental yield of prenatal exome sequencing over chromosomal microarray or G-banding karyotype in fetuses with: (1) intrauterine... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to determine the incremental yield of prenatal exome sequencing over chromosomal microarray or G-banding karyotype in fetuses with: (1) intrauterine growth restriction related to placental insufficiency or (2) short long bones, in isolated and nonisolated instances for both scenarios.
DATA SOURCES
Data were collected via electronic searches for relevant citations from January 2010 to April 10, 2022 in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane, and using relevant bibliographies and data generated in-house.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Included were prospective or retrospective cohort studies and/or case series with: (1) n>5 cases of short long bones and/or intrauterine growth restriction undergoing prenatal sequencing with a clearly defined phenotype including assessment of placental function; (2) testing based on prenatal phenotype only; (3) a nondiagnostic chromosomal microarray/karyotype; and (4) known results of genetic testing.
METHODS
Incremental yield was calculated for each study and as a pooled value for the aforementioned groups using a random-effects model. Results were displayed in forest plots with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed statistically using Higgins' I. Publication bias was assessed graphically using funnel plots. Quality assessment was performed using modified Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy criteria (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews registration number CRD42022324680).
RESULTS
Nineteen studies were included (n=452 cases). The apparent incremental yields with prenatal sequencing were: (1) 4% (95% confidence interval, -5.0 to 12; I=0%) in isolated intrauterine growth restriction with evidence of placental insufficiency, (2) 30% (95% confidence interval, 13-47; I=1%) in intrauterine growth restriction with additional structural anomalies, (3) 48% (95% confidence interval, 26-70; I=73%) in isolated short long bones, and (4) 68% (95% confidence interval, 58-77; I=51%) in short long bones with additional skeletal anomalies. Of the 37 short long bone cases with a diagnosis, 32 had a skeletal dysplasia, with thanatophoric dysplasia and osteogenesis imperfecta being the most common (both 21.6% [n=8/37]). In fetuses with short long bones and additional skeletal features, osteogenesis imperfecta was the most common diagnosis (28% [n=57/204]). Where documented, the inheritance patterns were de novo in 75.4% (n=150) of cases.
CONCLUSION
Prenatal sequencing adds substantially to incremental yield over chromosomal microarray in fetuses with short long bones or multisystem intrauterine growth restriction. Robust studies are required to assess the utility of fetal sequencing in isolated intrauterine growth restriction with evidence of placental insufficiency, which cannot be recommended on the basis of current evidence.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Fetal Growth Retardation; Placental Insufficiency; Exome Sequencing; Retrospective Studies; Osteogenesis Imperfecta; Placenta; Prenatal Diagnosis; Ultrasonography, Prenatal
PubMed: 36209938
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.09.045 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2020Pelvic organ prolapse is a common problem in women. About 40% of women will experience prolapse in their lifetime, with the proportion expected to rise in line with an...
BACKGROUND
Pelvic organ prolapse is a common problem in women. About 40% of women will experience prolapse in their lifetime, with the proportion expected to rise in line with an ageing population. Women experience a variety of troublesome symptoms as a consequence of prolapse, including a feeling of 'something coming down' into the vagina, pain, urinary symptoms, bowel symptoms and sexual difficulties. Treatment for prolapse includes surgery, pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) and vaginal pessaries. Vaginal pessaries are passive mechanical devices designed to support the vagina and hold the prolapsed organs back in the anatomically correct position. The most commonly used pessaries are made from polyvinyl-chloride, polythene, silicone or latex. Pessaries are frequently used by clinicians with high numbers of clinicians offering a pessary as first-line treatment for prolapse. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2003 and last published in 2013.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of pessaries (mechanical devices) for managing pelvic organ prolapse in women; and summarise the principal findings of relevant economic evaluations of this intervention.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 28 January 2020). We searched the reference lists of relevant articles and contacted the authors of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials which included a pessary for pelvic organ prolapse in at least one arm of the study.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed abstracts, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and carried out GRADE assessments with arbitration from a third review author if necessary.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four studies involving a total of 478 women with various stages of prolapse, all of which took place in high-income countries. In one trial, only six of the 113 recruited women consented to random assignment to an intervention and no data are available for those six women. We could not perform any meta-analysis because each of the trials addressed a different comparison. None of the trials reported data about perceived resolution of prolapse symptoms or about psychological outcome measures. All studies reported data about perceived improvement of prolapse symptoms. Generally, the trials were at high risk of performance bias, due to lack of blinding, and low risk of selection bias. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for imprecision resulting from the low numbers of women participating in the trials. Pessary versus no treatment: at 12 months' follow-up, we are uncertain about the effect of pessaries compared with no treatment on perceived improvement of prolapse symptoms (mean difference (MD) in questionnaire scores -0.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.61 to 0.55; 27 women; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), and cure or improvement of sexual problems (MD -0.29, 95% CI -1.67 to 1.09; 27 women; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). In this comparison we did not find any evidence relating to prolapse-specific quality of life or to the number of women experiencing adverse events (abnormal vaginal bleeding or de novo voiding difficulty). Pessary versus pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT): at 12 months' follow-up, we are uncertain if there is a difference between pessaries and PFMT in terms of women's perceived improvement in prolapse symptoms (MD -9.60, 95% CI -22.53 to 3.33; 137 women; low-certainty evidence), prolapse-specific quality of life (MD -3.30, 95% CI -8.70 to 15.30; 1 study; 116 women; low-certainty evidence), or cure or improvement of sexual problems (MD -2.30, 95% -5.20 to 0.60; 1 study; 48 women; low-certainty evidence). Pessaries may result in a large increase in risk of adverse events compared with PFMT (RR 75.25, 95% CI 4.70 to 1205.45; 1 study; 97 women; low-certainty evidence). Adverse events included increased vaginal discharge, and/or increased urinary incontinence and/or erosion or irritation of the vaginal walls. Pessary plus PFMT versus PFMT alone: at 12 months' follow-up, pessary plus PFMT probably leads to more women perceiving improvement in their prolapse symptoms compared with PFMT alone (RR 2.15, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.94; 1 study; 260 women; moderate-certainty evidence). At 12 months' follow-up, pessary plus PFMT probably improves women's prolapse-specific quality of life compared with PFMT alone (median (interquartile range (IQR)) POPIQ score: pessary plus PFMT 0.3 (0 to 22.2); 132 women; PFMT only 8.9 (0 to 64.9); 128 women; P = 0.02; moderate-certainty evidence). Pessary plus PFMT may slightly increase the risk of abnormal vaginal bleeding compared with PFMT alone (RR 2.18, 95% CI 0.69 to 6.91; 1 study; 260 women; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is uncertain if pessary plus PFMT has any effect on the risk of de novo voiding difficulty compared with PFMT alone (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.54 to 3.19; 1 study; 189 women; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are uncertain if pessaries improve pelvic organ prolapse symptoms for women compared with no treatment or PFMT but pessaries in addition to PFMT probably improve women's pelvic organ prolapse symptoms and prolapse-specific quality of life. However, there may be an increased risk of adverse events with pessaries compared to PFMT. Future trials should recruit adequate numbers of women and measure clinically important outcomes such as prolapse specific quality of life and resolution of prolapse symptoms. The review found two relevant economic evaluations. Of these, one assessed the cost-effectiveness of pessary treatment, expectant management and surgical procedures, and the other compared pessary treatment to PFMT.
Topics: Bias; Female; Humans; Muscle Strength; Pelvic Floor; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Pessaries; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rectal Prolapse; Urethral Diseases; Urinary Bladder Diseases; Uterine Prolapse
PubMed: 33207004
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004010.pub4