-
Chest Feb 2022Critically ill adults are at increased risk of VTE, including DVT, and pulmonary embolism. Various agents exist for venous thromboprophylaxis in this population. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Critically ill adults are at increased risk of VTE, including DVT, and pulmonary embolism. Various agents exist for venous thromboprophylaxis in this population.
RESEARCH QUESTION
What is the comparative efficacy and safety of prophylaxis agents for prevention of VTE in critically ill adults?
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating efficacy of thromboprophylaxis agents among critically ill patients. We searched six databases (including PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline) from inception through January 2021 for RCTs of patients in the ICU receiving pharmacologic, mechanical, or combination therapy (pharmacologic agents and mechanical devices) for thromboprophylaxis. Two reviewers performed screening, full-text review, and extraction. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation to rate certainty of effect estimates.
RESULTS
We included 13 RCTs (9,619 patients). Compared with control treatment (a composite of no prophylaxis, placebo, or compression stockings only), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) reduced the incidence of DVT (OR, 0.59 [95% credible interval [CrI], 0.33-0.90]; high certainty) and unfractionated heparin (UFH) may reduce the incidence of DVT (OR, 0.82 [95% CrI, 0.47-1.37]; low certainty). LMWH probably reduces DVT compared with UFH (OR, 0.72 [95% CrI, 0.46-0.98]; moderate certainty). Compressive devices may reduce risk of DVT compared with control treatments; however, this is based on low-certainty evidence (OR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.50-1.50]). Combination therapy showed unclear effect on DVT compared with either therapy alone (very low certainty).
INTERPRETATION
Among critically ill adults, compared with control treatment, LMWH reduces incidence of DVT, whereas UFH and mechanical compressive devices may reduce the risk of DVT. LMWH is probably more effective than UFH in reducing incidence of DVT and should be considered the primary pharmacologic agent for thromboprophylaxis. The efficacy and safety of combination pharmacologic therapy and mechanical compressive devices were unclear.
TRIAL REGISTRY
Open Science Framework; URL: https://osf.io/694aj.
Topics: Adult; Anticoagulants; Critical Illness; Heparin; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Intermittent Pneumatic Compression Devices; Pulmonary Embolism; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 34419428
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2021.08.050 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2013Trauma is a leading causes of death and disability in young people. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a principal cause of death. Trauma patients are at high risk of deep... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Trauma is a leading causes of death and disability in young people. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a principal cause of death. Trauma patients are at high risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The incidence varies according to the method used to measure the DVT and the location of the thrombosis. Due to prolonged rest and coagulation abnormalities, trauma patients are at increased risk of thrombus formation. Thromboprohylaxis, either mechanical or pharmacological, may decrease mortality and morbidity in trauma patients who survive beyond the first day in hospital, by decreasing the risk of VTE in this population.A previous systematic review did not find evidence of effectiveness for either pharmacological or mechanical interventions. However, this systematic review was conducted 10 years ago and most of the included studies were of poor quality. Since then new trials have been conducted. Although current guidelines recommend the use of thromboprophylaxis in trauma patients, there has not been a comprehensive and updated systematic review since the one published.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of thromboprophylaxis in trauma patients on mortality and incidence of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. To compare the effects of different thromboprophylaxis interventions and their effects according to the type of trauma.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched The Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register (searched April 30 2009), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 2009, issue 2 (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (Ovid) 1950 to April (week 3) 2009, EMBASE (Ovid) 1980 to (week 17) April 2009, PubMed (searched 29 April 2009), ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) (1970 to April 2009), ISI Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) (1990 to April 2009).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled clinical trials involving people of any age with major trauma defined by one or more of the following criteria: physiological: penetrating or blunt trauma with more than two organs and unstable vital signs, anatomical: people with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) higher than 9, mechanism: people who are involved in a 'high energy' event with a risk for severe injury despite stable or normal vital signs. We excluded trials that only recruited outpatients, trials that recruited people with hip fractures only, or people with acute spinal injuries.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Four authors, in pairs (LB and CM, EF and RC), independently examined the titles and the abstracts, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias of the trials and analysed the data. PP resolved any disagreement between the authors.
MAIN RESULTS
Sixteen studies were included (n=3005). Four trials compared the effect of any type (mechanical and/or pharmacological) of prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis. Prophylaxis reduced the risk of DVT in people with trauma (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.84). Mechanical prophylaxis reduced the risk of DVT (RR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.73). Pharmacological prophylaxis was more effective than mechanical methods at reducing the risk of DVT (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.95). LMWH appeared to reduce the risk of DVT compared to UH (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.94). People who received both mechanical and pharmacological prophylaxis had a lower risk of DVT (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.60)
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not find evidence that thromboprophylaxis reduces mortality or PE in any of the comparisons assessed. However, we found some evidence that thromboprophylaxis prevents DVT. Although the strength of the evidence was not high, taking into account existing information from other related conditions such as surgery, we recommend the use of any DVT prophylactic method for people with severe trauma.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Compression Bandages; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Pulmonary Embolism; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Venous Thromboembolism; Venous Thrombosis; Wounds and Injuries
PubMed: 23543562
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008303.pub2 -
PloS One 2015Anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin and vitamin K antagonists is the current standard of care (SOC) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of the Novel Oral Anticoagulants Apixaban, Dabigatran, Edoxaban, and Rivaroxaban in the Initial and Long-Term Treatment and Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
Anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin and vitamin K antagonists is the current standard of care (SOC) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment and prevention. Although novel oral anti-coagulants (NOACs) have been compared with SOC in this indication, no head-to-head randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have directly compared NOACs. A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of NOACs for the initial and long-term treatment of VTE.
METHODS
Electronic databases (accessed July 2014) were systematically searched to identify RCTs evaluating apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban versus SOC. Eligible patients included adults with an objectively confirmed deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE) or both. A fixed-effect Bayesian NMA was conducted for outcomes of interest, and results were presented as relative risks (RR) and 95% credible intervals (Crl).
RESULTS
Six Phase III RCTs met criteria for inclusion: apixaban (one RCT; n = 5,395); rivaroxaban (two RCTs; n = 3,423/4,832); dabigatran (two RCTs; n = 2,539/2,568); edoxaban (one RCT; n = 8,240). There were no statistically significant differences between the NOACs with regard to the risk of 'VTE and VTE-related death. Apixaban treatment was associated with the most favourable safety profile of the NOACs, showing a statistically significantly reduced risk of 'major or clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleed' compared with rivaroxaban (0.47 [0.36, 0.61]), dabigatran (0.69 [0.51, 0.94]), and edoxaban (0.54 [0.41, 0.69]). Dabigatran was also associated with a significantly lower risk of 'major or CRNM bleed' compared with rivaroxaban (0.68 [0.53, 0.87]) and edoxaban (0.77 [0.60, 0.99]).
CONCLUSIONS
Indirect comparisons showed statistically similar reductions in the risk of 'VTE or VTE-related death for all NOACs. In contrast, reductions in 'major or CRNM bleed' for initial/long-term treatment were significantly better with apixaban compared with all other NOACs, and with dabigatran compared with rivaroxaban and edoxaban. Results from the current analysis indicate that the NOACs offer clinical benefit over conventional therapy while highlighting relative differences in their bleeding profile.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Dabigatran; Humans; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Thiazoles; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 26716830
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0144856 -
JAMA Internal Medicine Mar 2020Patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) receive venous thromboembolism (VTE) pharmacoprophylaxis. It is unclear which... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Clinical Effectiveness and Safety of Aspirin for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Total Hip and Knee Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.
IMPORTANCE
Patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) receive venous thromboembolism (VTE) pharmacoprophylaxis. It is unclear which anticoagulant is preferable. Observational data suggest aspirin provides effective VTE prophylaxis.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effectiveness and safety of aspirin for VTE prophylaxis after THR and TKR.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), with no language restrictions, from inception to September 19, 2019, using MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and bibliographic searches. The computer-based searches combined terms and combinations of keywords related to the population (eg, hip replacement, knee replacement, hip arthroplasty, and knee arthroplasty), drug intervention (eg, aspirin, heparin, clexane, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin), and outcome (eg, venous thromboembolism, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and bleeding) in humans.
STUDY SELECTION
This study included RCTs assessing the effectiveness and safety of aspirin for VTE prophylaxis compared with other anticoagulants in adults undergoing THR and TKR. The RCTs with a placebo control group were excluded. The searches and study selection were independently performed.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
This study followed PRISMA recommendations and used the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Data were screened and extracted independently by both reviewers. Study-specific relative risks (RRs) were aggregated using random-effects models. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was any postoperative VTE (asymptomatic or symptomatic). Secondary outcomes were adverse events associated with therapy, including bleeding.
RESULTS
Of 437 identified articles, 13 RCTs were included (6060 participants; 3466 [57.2%] women; mean age, 63.0 years). The RR of VTE after THR and TKR was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.78-1.62) for aspirin compared with other anticoagulants. Comparable findings were observed for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.72-1.51) and pulmonary embolism (PE) (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.68-1.48). The risk of adverse events, including major bleeding, wound hematoma, and wound infection, was not statistically significantly different in patients receiving aspirin vs other anticoagulants. When analyzing THRs and TKRs separately, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of VTE, DVT, and PE between aspirin and other anticoagulants. Aspirin had a VTE risk not statistically significantly different from low-molecular-weight heparin (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.37-1.56) or rivaroxaban (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.56-4.12). The quality of the evidence ranged from low to high.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In terms of clinical effectiveness and safety profile, aspirin did not differ statistically significantly from other anticoagulants used for VTE prophylaxis after THR and TKR. Future trials should focus on noninferiority analysis of aspirin compared with alternative anticoagulants and cost-effectiveness.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Aspirin; Fibrinolytic Agents; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 32011647
DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.6108 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Dec 2019COPD is associated with a progressive loss of muscle mass and function. However, there is an unmet need to define and standardise methods to estimate the prevalence of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
COPD is associated with a progressive loss of muscle mass and function. However, there is an unmet need to define and standardise methods to estimate the prevalence of sarcopenia in COPD patients.We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of this extrapulmonary manifestation in COPD patients. We searched Embase, Medline (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar for studies published up to January 17, 2019, assessing sarcopenia in COPD patients based on low muscle mass and decreased muscle function. Interventional studies, experiments, protocols or reviews and meta-analyses were excluded. We estimated heterogeneity (I) and assessed significance (Q) using a Chi-squared test for estimates obtained from random-effects models.4465 articles were initially identified. After removing the duplicates and applying the selection criteria, we reviewed 62 full-text articles. Finally, 10 articles (n=2565 COPD patients) were included in this systematic review and meta-analyses. Overall, the prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with COPD was 21.6% (95% CI 14.6-30.9%, I=94%), ranging from 8% in population-based to 21% in clinic-based studies, and 63% in COPD patients residing in nursing homes.Sarcopenia is frequently observed in COPD patients, with varying prevalence across population settings. Sarcopenia in COPD should be assessed using standardised tests and cut-off points from sarcopenia consensus criteria for clinical practice and international comparisons.
Topics: Humans; Prevalence; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Sarcopenia
PubMed: 31722892
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0049-2019 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Mar 2023It is unclear how the efficacy of tezepelumab, approved for the treatment of type 2 high and low asthma, compares to the efficacy of other biologics for type 2-high... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
It is unclear how the efficacy of tezepelumab, approved for the treatment of type 2 high and low asthma, compares to the efficacy of other biologics for type 2-high asthma.
OBJECTIVES
We sought to conduct an indirect comparison of tezepelumab to dupilumab, benralizumab, and mepolizumab in the treatment of eosinophilic asthma.
METHODS
The investigators conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analyses. They identified randomized controlled trials indexed in PubMed, Embase, or Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) between January 1, 2000, and August 12, 2022. Outcomes included exacerbation rates, prebronchodilator FEV, and the Asthma Control Questionnaire.
RESULTS
Ten randomized controlled trials (n = 9201) met eligibility. Tezepelumab (relative risk: 0.63; 95% credible interval [CI]: 0.46-0.86) was associated with significantly lower exacerbation rates than benralizumab and larger improvements in FEV compared to mepolizumab (mean difference [MD]: 66; 95% CI: -33 to 170) and benralizumab (MD: 62; 95% CI: -22 to 150), though the 95% CI crossed the null value of 0. Mepolizumab improved the Asthma Control Questionnaire score the most, but this improvement was not significantly different from that of tezepelumab (tezepelumab vs mepolizumab; MD: 0.14; 95% CI: -0.10 to 0.38). For efficacy by clinically important thresholds, tezepelumab, mepolizumab, and dupilumab achieved a >99% probability of reducing exacerbation rates by ≥50% compared to placebo, but benralizumab had only a 66% probability of doing so. Tezepelumab and dupilumab had a probability of 1.00 of improving prebronchodilator FEV by ≥100 mL above placebo. Compared to mepolizumab, dupilumab had >90% chance for improving FEV by ≥50 mL, but none of the differences between biologics exceeded 100 mL.
CONCLUSIONS
In individuals with eosinophilic asthma, tezepelumab and dupilumab were associated with greater improvements (although below clinical thresholds) in exacerbation rates and lung function than benralizumab or mepolizumab.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Asthma; Pulmonary Eosinophilia; Biological Products
PubMed: 36538979
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2022.11.021 -
Critical Care (London, England) Dec 2020Crystalloids and different component colloids, used for volume resuscitation, are sometimes associated with various adverse effects. Clinical trial findings for such... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Crystalloids and different component colloids, used for volume resuscitation, are sometimes associated with various adverse effects. Clinical trial findings for such fluid types in different patients' conditions are conflicting. Whether the mortality benefit of balanced crystalloid than saline can be inferred from sepsis to other patient group is uncertain, and adverse effect profile is not comprehensive. This study aims to compare the survival benefits and adverse effects of seven fluid types with network meta-analysis in sepsis, surgical, trauma, and traumatic brain injury patients.
METHODS
Searched databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL) and reference lists of relevant articles occurred from inception until January 2020. Studies on critically ill adults requiring fluid resuscitation were included. Intervention studies reported on balanced crystalloid, saline, iso-oncotic albumin, hyperoncotic albumin, low molecular weight hydroxyethyl starch (L-HES), high molecular weight HES, and gelatin. Network meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects model to calculate odds ratio (OR) and mean difference. Risk of Bias tool 2.0 was used to assess bias. Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) web application was used to rate confidence in synthetic evidence.
RESULTS
Fifty-eight trials (n = 26,351 patients) were identified. Seven fluid types were evaluated. Among patients with sepsis and surgery, balanced crystalloids and albumin achieved better survival, fewer acute kidney injury, and smaller blood transfusion volumes than saline and L-HES. In those with sepsis, balanced crystalloids significantly reduced mortality more than saline (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.74-0.95) and L-HES (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.69-0.95) and reduced acute kidney injury more than L-HES (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.65-0.99). However, they required the greatest resuscitation volume among all fluid types, especially in trauma patients. In patients with traumatic brain injury, saline and L-HES achieved lower mortality than albumin and balanced crystalloids; especially saline was significantly superior to iso-oncotic albumin (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35-0.87).
CONCLUSIONS
Our network meta-analysis found that balanced crystalloids and albumin decreased mortality more than L-HES and saline in sepsis patients; however, saline or L-HES was better than iso-oncotic albumin or balanced crystalloids in traumatic brain injury patients.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO website, registration number: CRD42018115641).
Topics: Colloids; Crystalloid Solutions; Fluid Therapy; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Resuscitation; Sepsis; Wounds and Injuries
PubMed: 33317590
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-020-03419-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2021Stroke is the third leading cause of early death worldwide. Most ischaemic strokes are caused by a blood clot blocking an artery in the brain. Patient outcomes might be... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Stroke is the third leading cause of early death worldwide. Most ischaemic strokes are caused by a blood clot blocking an artery in the brain. Patient outcomes might be improved if they are offered anticoagulants that reduce their risk of developing new blood clots and do not increase the risk of bleeding. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 1995, with updates in 2004, 2008, and 2015.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of early anticoagulation (within the first 14 days of onset) for people with acute presumed or confirmed ischaemic stroke. Our hypotheses were that, compared with a policy of avoiding their use, early anticoagulation would be associated with: • reduced risk of death or dependence in activities of daily living a few months after stroke onset; • reduced risk of early recurrent ischaemic stroke; • increased risk of symptomatic intracranial and extracranial haemorrhage; and • reduced risk of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (August 2021); the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2021, Issue 7), in the Cochrane Library (searched 5 August 2021); MEDLINE (2014 to 5 August 2021); and Embase (2014 to 5 August 2021). In addition, we searched ongoing trials registries and reference lists of relevant papers. For previous versions of this review, we searched the register of the Antithrombotic Trialists' (ATT) Collaboration, consulted MedStrategy (1995), and contacted relevant drug companies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials comparing early anticoagulant therapy (started within two weeks of stroke onset) with control in people with acute presumed or confirmed ischaemic stroke.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome using RoB1 and GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 28 trials involving 24,025 participants. Quality of the trials varied considerably. We considered some studies to be at unclear or high risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition, or reporting bias. Anticoagulants tested were standard unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparins, heparinoids, oral anticoagulants, and thrombin inhibitors. Over 90% of the evidence is related to effects of anticoagulant therapy initiated within the first 48 hours of onset. No evidence suggests that early anticoagulation reduced the odds of death or dependence at the end of follow-up (odds ratio (OR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.03; 12 RCTs, 22,428 participants; high-certainty evidence). Similarly, we found no evidence suggesting that anticoagulant therapy started within the first 14 days of stroke onset reduced the odds of death from all causes (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.09; 22 RCTs, 22,602 participants; low-certainty evidence) during the treatment period. Although early anticoagulant therapy was associated with fewer recurrent ischaemic strokes (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.88; 12 RCTs, 21,665 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), it was also associated with an increase in symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.90 to 3.21; 20 RCTs, 23,221 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Similarly, early anticoagulation reduced the frequency of symptomatic pulmonary emboli (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.81; 14 RCTs, 22,544 participants; high-certainty evidence), but this benefit was offset by an increase in extracranial haemorrhage (OR 2.99, 95% CI 2.24 to 3.99; 18 RCTs, 22,255 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Since the last version of this review, four new relevant studies have been published, and conclusions remain consistent. People who have early anticoagulant therapy after acute ischaemic stroke do not demonstrate any net short- or long-term benefit. Treatment with anticoagulants reduced recurrent stroke, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism but increased bleeding risk. Data do not support the routine use of any of the currently available anticoagulants for acute ischaemic stroke.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Anticoagulants; Brain Ischemia; Heparin; Humans; Ischemic Stroke; Stroke; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 34676532
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000024.pub5 -
Health Technology Assessment... Mar 2017Warfarin is effective for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF), but anticoagulation is underused in clinical care. The risk of venous thromboembolic disease... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Oral anticoagulants for primary prevention, treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolic disease, and for prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation: systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.
BACKGROUND
Warfarin is effective for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF), but anticoagulation is underused in clinical care. The risk of venous thromboembolic disease during hospitalisation can be reduced by low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH): warfarin is the most frequently prescribed anticoagulant for treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Warfarin-related bleeding is a major reason for hospitalisation for adverse drug effects. Warfarin is cheap but therapeutic monitoring increases treatment costs. Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have more rapid onset and offset of action than warfarin, and more predictable dosing requirements.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the best oral anticoagulant/s for prevention of stroke in AF and for primary prevention, treatment and secondary prevention of VTE.
DESIGN
Four systematic reviews, network meta-analyses (NMAs) and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of randomised controlled trials.
SETTING
Hospital (VTE primary prevention and acute treatment) and primary care/anticoagulation clinics (AF and VTE secondary prevention).
PARTICIPANTS
Patients eligible for anticoagulation with warfarin (stroke prevention in AF, acute treatment or secondary prevention of VTE) or LMWH (primary prevention of VTE).
INTERVENTIONS
NOACs, warfarin and LMWH, together with other interventions (antiplatelet therapy, placebo) evaluated in the evidence network.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Stroke, symptomatic VTE, symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis and symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Major bleeding, clinically relevant bleeding and intracranial haemorrhage. We also considered myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality and evaluated cost-effectiveness.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE and PREMEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library, reference lists of published NMAs and trial registries. We searched MEDLINE and PREMEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library. The stroke prevention in AF review search was run on the 12 March 2014 and updated on 15 September 2014, and covered the period 2010 to September 2014. The search for the three reviews in VTE was run on the 19 March 2014, updated on 15 September 2014, and covered the period 2008 to September 2014.
REVIEW METHODS
Two reviewers screened search results, extracted and checked data, and assessed risk of bias. For each outcome we conducted standard meta-analysis and NMA. We evaluated cost-effectiveness using discrete-time Markov models.
RESULTS
Apixaban (Eliquis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, USA; Pfizer, USA) [5 mg bd (twice daily)] was ranked as among the best interventions for stroke prevention in AF, and had the highest expected net benefit. Edoxaban (Lixiana, Daiichi Sankyo, Japan) [60 mg od (once daily)] was ranked second for major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Neither the clinical effectiveness analysis nor the CEA provided strong evidence that NOACs should replace postoperative LMWH in primary prevention of VTE. For acute treatment and secondary prevention of VTE, we found little evidence that NOACs offer an efficacy advantage over warfarin, but the risk of bleeding complications was lower for some NOACs than for warfarin. For a willingness-to-pay threshold of > £5000, apixaban (5 mg bd) had the highest expected net benefit for acute treatment of VTE. Aspirin or no pharmacotherapy were likely to be the most cost-effective interventions for secondary prevention of VTE: our results suggest that it is not cost-effective to prescribe NOACs or warfarin for this indication.
CONCLUSIONS
NOACs have advantages over warfarin in patients with AF, but we found no strong evidence that they should replace warfarin or LMWH in primary prevention, treatment or secondary prevention of VTE.
LIMITATIONS
These relate mainly to shortfalls in the primary data: in particular, there were no head-to-head comparisons between different NOAC drugs.
FUTURE WORK
Calculating the expected value of sample information to clarify whether or not it would be justifiable to fund one or more head-to-head trials.
STUDY REGISTRATION
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013005324, CRD42013005331 and CRD42013005330.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Topics: Age Distribution; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Pressure; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Electrocardiography; Female; Humans; Male; Markov Chains; Mass Screening; Models, Econometric; Network Meta-Analysis; Observational Studies as Topic; Primary Health Care; Pulse; Secondary Prevention; Sensitivity and Specificity; State Medicine; Stroke; United Kingdom; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 28279251
DOI: 10.3310/hta21090 -
Nutrients Mar 2023The purpose of this study was to summarize the evidence from epidemiological studies concerning associations between diet and the effectiveness of treatment for lung... (Review)
Review
The purpose of this study was to summarize the evidence from epidemiological studies concerning associations between diet and the effectiveness of treatment for lung cancer. For this review, a literature search has been conducted in the EMBASE and PubMed databases, including papers published between 1977 and June 2022. The term "lung cancer" was used in conjunction with "diet". Footnotes from the selected papers were also analyzed. The present study is in line with the recommendations included in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The review included studies involving adults, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort and observational studies. In total, 863 papers were found, with duplicates excluded. Ultimately, 20 papers were reviewed. The present systematic review indicates that vitamin A, ascorbic acid (vitamin C), vitamin E, selenium, and zinc-as antioxidants-can strengthen the body's antioxidant barrier. Furthermore, preoperative immunonutrition may not only improve perioperative nutritional status following induction chemoradiotherapy in lung cancer surgery patients but also reduce the severity of postoperative complications. Similarly, a protein supply may exert a beneficial effect on human health by increasing average body weight and muscle mass. Omega-3 fatty acid content in the diet and the consumption of their main source, fish, may have some regulatory effect on inflammation in patients with lung cancer treated with chemotherapy and radiotherapy. In addition, -3 fatty acids inhibit tumor cell proliferation and may reduce the toxicity of chemotherapy. Increased energy and protein intake are strongly associated with improved quality of life, functional outcomes, hand grip strength, symptoms, and performance in patients with lung cancer. The use of a supportive diet should be the standard of care, alongside pharmaceutical therapy, in treatment for patients with lung cancer.
Topics: Adult; Animals; Humans; Diet; Antioxidants; Vitamins; Ascorbic Acid; Lung Neoplasms; Fatty Acids, Omega-3; Lung
PubMed: 36986207
DOI: 10.3390/nu15061477