-
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2024Dysphagia commonly affects older adults, making them nutritionally vulnerable. There is significant variation in the reported prevalence of dysphagia in aged care. The... (Review)
Review
Dysphagia commonly affects older adults, making them nutritionally vulnerable. There is significant variation in the reported prevalence of dysphagia in aged care. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the prevalence of dysphagia in individuals living in residential aged care facilities using appropriate assessment methods, and in four subgroups at higher risk: individuals with nervous system diseases, dementia, malnutrition, and poor dentition. Scopus, Web of Science, Medline, and CINAHL Plus were searched, and study selection was conducted in Covidence. Meta-analysis using a random effects model was used to obtain the pooled prevalence of dysphagia. Seven studies were eligible for inclusion. Dysphagia prevalence ranged from 16 to 69.6%. The pooled prevalence of dysphagia was 56.11% (95% CI 39.363-72.172, < 0.0001, I = 98.61%). Sensitivity analysis examining the prevalence of dysphagia using only the CSE indicated a pooled prevalence of 60.90% (95% CI 57.557-64.211, = 0.9994, I = 0%). Only one study each reported on dysphagia prevalence in individuals with nervous system diseases (31%), poor dentition (92%), and dementia (68.4%), meaning that meta-analysis could not be completed. No studies reported on the prevalence of dysphagia in individuals with malnutrition. The prevalence of dysphagia is high amongst residents of aged care facilities. This evidence should be used to guide improvements in the health outcomes and quality of life of aged care residents. Future research should explore the prevalence in the subgroups at higher risk.
PubMed: 38540613
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12060649 -
Toxins Mar 2024Cancer pain is one of the most disabling symptoms complained by cancer patients, with a crucial impact on physical and psychological well-being. Botulinum neurotoxins... (Review)
Review
Cancer pain is one of the most disabling symptoms complained by cancer patients, with a crucial impact on physical and psychological well-being. Botulinum neurotoxins (BoNTs) type A and B have emerged as potential interventions for chronic pain; however, their role in these patients is still debated. Thus, this systematic review of randomized controlled trials aimed at assessing the effects of BoNT treatment for cancer pain to guide physicians in an evidence-based approach integrating BoNT in cancer care. Out of 5824 records, 10 RCTs satisfied our eligibility criteria and were included in the present work for a total of 413 subjects with several cancer types (breast, head and neck, esophageal, and thoracic/gastric cancers). While some studies demonstrated significant pain reduction and improved quality of life post-BoNT-A injections, outcomes across different cancer types were inconclusive. Additionally, several effects were observed in functioning, dysphagia, salivary outcomes, esophageal strictures, gastric emptying, and expansions. This review emphasizes the need for further standardized research to conclusively establish the efficacy of BoNT in comprehensive cancer pain management.
Topics: Humans; Pain Management; Cancer Pain; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomach Neoplasms; Chronic Pain
PubMed: 38535819
DOI: 10.3390/toxins16030153 -
Pediatric Surgery International Mar 2024Sandifer syndrome (SS), which combines gastroesophageal reflux (GER) and a neurological or psychiatric disorder, is an uncommon condition that often takes a long time to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Sandifer syndrome (SS), which combines gastroesophageal reflux (GER) and a neurological or psychiatric disorder, is an uncommon condition that often takes a long time to diagnosis. We aimed to systematically review available papers regarding SS.
METHODS
After presenting our two cases of SS, we systematically reviewed articles published in MEDILINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included 54 reported cases and 2 of our own cases. Our results showed that all cases achieved symptom improvement with appropriate treatment for GER. Notably, 19 of the 56 cases exhibited anatomical anomalies, such as hiatal hernia and malrotation. Significantly more patients with than without anatomical anomalies required surgery (p < 0.001). However, 23 of the 29 patients without anatomical anomalies (79%) achieved symptom improvement without surgery. Patients who did not undergo surgery had a median (interquartile range) duration to symptom resolution of 1 (1-1) month.
CONCLUSION
The primary care providers should keep SS in the differential diagnosis of patients presenting with abnormal posturing and no apparent neuromuscular disorders. Fundoplication may be effective especially for patients with anatomical anomalies or those whose symptoms do not improve after more than 1 month with nonsurgical treatment.
Topics: Child; Humans; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Torticollis; Fundoplication; Hernia, Hiatal; Treatment Outcome; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 38526644
DOI: 10.1007/s00383-024-05683-3 -
Pain Physician Mar 2024Glossopharyngeal neuralgia (GPN) is a rare cause of facial pain that has an incidence of less than one per 100,000 people. The excruciating stabbing pain experienced by...
BACKGROUND
Glossopharyngeal neuralgia (GPN) is a rare cause of facial pain that has an incidence of less than one per 100,000 people. The excruciating stabbing pain experienced by patients with GPN can be debilitating, leading to difficulties in activities of daily living, such as eating and speaking. As a result, there has been a recent increase in research on the effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for treating GPN.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of (RFA for treating GPN while examining its impact on patients' quality of life and assesses for any associated side effects.
STUDY DESIGN
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) model was employed to identify articles from 2 comprehensive medical databases. The patient outcomes and numbers from each article were aggregated and calculated in order to determine the percent efficacy of RFA for treating pain associated with GPN.
METHODS
In this systematic review, the PRISMA review model was utilized to search through the PubMed and EMBASE databases. A comprehensive literature review was conducted. Of the initial 1,580 articles identified, 18 articles were included for analysis. Studies included in this systematic review encompassed idiopathic cases and secondary causes, such as an elongated styloid process, oropharyngeal cancers, and postsurgical/traumatic pain.
RESULTS
Of the 288 patients treated with RFA, 231 experienced relief or complete resolution of pain, yielding an efficacy rate of 80.2%. Most of the patients experienced immediate pain relief after RFA; however, some patients reported numbness, dysphagia, and changes in taste. Our study examines the potential use of RFA as a minimally invasive and effective treatment for GPN.
LIMITATIONS
Limitations of our study include the absence of comparisons between different types, modes, and settings of RFA procedures. The use of only 2 medical databases is another limitation. Finally, our systematic review does not include any randomized controlled trials.
CONCLUSION
RFA is efficacious in treating GPN with over 80% of patients experiencing postprocedure pain relief. However, further research in the form of clinical and controlled trials is needed to contribute to a better understanding of RFA's long-term outcomes for patients with GPN.
Topics: Humans; Activities of Daily Living; Quality of Life; Radiofrequency Ablation; Facial Pain; Glossopharyngeal Nerve Diseases; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 38506675
DOI: No ID Found -
Complementary Medicine Research 2024For centuries, spring and other natural waters have been recommended as external or internal remedies for numerous diseases. For studies that examined the effects of...
How Effective Is Drinking Natural Mineral Water against Heartburn from Functional Dyspepsia, Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease, or Other Causes? A Systematic Review of Clinical Intervention Studies.
BACKGROUND
For centuries, spring and other natural waters have been recommended as external or internal remedies for numerous diseases. For studies that examined the effects of drinking mineral waters against heartburn, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), or functional dyspepsia, a systematic review is lacking.
OBJECTIVES
The main aim of this systematic review was to examine the effects of drinking natural mineral waters on heartburn from various causes by identifying all published intervention studies and critically appraising their methods as well as summarizing their results.
METHODS
We systematically searched the largest medical literature database MEDLINE, further relevant web sources, and gray literature for randomized and nonrandomized trials, with or without control groups, up to September 2021 and no language restrictions. Further inclusion criteria were adult patients with heartburn, drinking cure with natural mineral water as the intervention, compared to no or other interventions (care-as-usual, waiting list). We defined the reduction of heartburn symptoms and duration of disease episodes as primary and quality of life as secondary outcomes. Two reviewers independently carried out the study quality assessments (risk of bias) using the National Institutes of Health-Study Quality Assessment Tools.
RESULTS
Nine trials comprising 393 patients from Italy, Russia, Ukraine, and Germany fulfilled all inclusion criteria. We identified three randomized controlled trials (all with poor methodological quality), plus six before-after (pre/post) intervention studies without a control group. The intervention groups of the three comparative trials seemed to show a stronger reduction of self-reported heartburn symptoms, and duration of heartburn episodes than the respective control groups; however, they all had poor methodological quality.
CONCLUSION
Based on the best available evidence of clinical studies, we cannot recommend or advise against drinking natural mineral waters as a treatment for heartburn. The potential benefits of natural mineral waters that were reported in some studies with a lower evidence level (e.g., lacking a control group) should be verified by good quality randomized clinical trials with adequate comparison groups and longer follow-up periods.
UNLABELLED
Hintergrund Seit Jahrhunderten werden Quell- und andere natürliche Wässer als äußerliche oder innerliche Heilmittel für zahlreiche Krankheiten empfohlen. Für Studien, die die Wirkung des Trinkens von Mineralwasser gegen Sodbrennen, gastroösophageale Refluxkrankheit (GERD) oder funktionelle Dyspepsie untersuchten, fehlt eine systematische Übersicht.Zielsetzung Das Hauptziel dieser systematischen Übersichtsarbeit war es, die Auswirkungen von Trinkkuren mit natürlichen Mineralwässern auf Sodbrennen verschiedener Ursachen zu untersuchen, indem alle veröffentlichten Interventionsstudien identifiziert und ihre Methoden kritisch bewertet sowie ihre Ergebnisse zusammengefasst wurden.Methoden Wir durchsuchten systematisch die größte medizinische Literaturdatenbank MEDLINE, weitere relevante Internetquellen und graue Literatur nach randomisierten und nicht-randomisierten Studien, mit oder ohne Kontrollgruppen, bis September 2021 und ohne sprachliche Einschränkungen. Weitere Einschlusskriterien waren erwachsene Patienten mit Sodbrennen, Trinkkur mit natürlichem Mineralwasser als Intervention, im Vergleich zu keiner oder anderen Interventionen (care-as-usual, Warteliste). Wir definierten die Abnahme der Symptome des Sodbrennens und die Dauer der Krankheitsepisoden als primäre und die Lebensqualität als sekundäre Endpunkte. Zwei Gutachter bewerteten unabhängig voneinander die Qualität der Studien (Verzerrungsrisiko) anhand der National Institutes of Health-Study Quality Assessment Tools.Ergebnisse Neun Studien mit 393 Patienten aus Italien, Russland, der Ukraine und Deutschland erfüllten alle Einschlusskriterien. Wir identifizierten drei randomisierte kontrollierte Studien (alle mit schlechter methodischer Qualität) sowie sechs Vorher-Nachher-Studien (Prä-/Post-Studien) ohne Kontrollgruppe. Die Interventionsgruppen der drei randomisierten Vergleichsstudien schienen eine stärkere Verringerung der selbstberichteten Symptome und der Dauer der Episoden des Sodbrennens zu zeigen als die jeweiligen Kontrollgruppen, allerdings waren sie alle von schlechter methodischer Qualität.Schlussfolgerung Auf der Grundlage der besten verfügbaren Belege aus klinischen Studien können wir das Trinken natürlicher Mineralwässer zur Behandlung von Sodbrennen weder empfehlen noch davon abraten. Die potenziellen Vorteile natürlicher Mineralwässer, die in einigen Studien mit geringerer Evidenz (z. B. ohne Kontrollgruppe) berichtet wurden, sollten durch qualitativ hochwertige randomisierte klinische Studien mit angemessenen Vergleichsgruppen und längeren Nachbeobachtungszeiträumen überprüft werden.Topics: Humans; Mineral Waters; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Heartburn; Dyspepsia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38471489
DOI: 10.1159/000536528 -
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology 2024To compare the oncological results and the functional outcomes of patients undergoing Total Laryngectomy (TL) with the non-surgical treatment (organ preservation... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
OBJECTIVE
To compare the oncological results and the functional outcomes of patients undergoing Total Laryngectomy (TL) with the non-surgical treatment (organ preservation protocol) in the treatment of advanced laryngeal carcinomas through systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
A literature survey strategy was employed in order to perform a systematic review of the available evidence. Success rate and functional outomes after oncological treatment of patients with advanced laryngeal carcinomas was evaluated through systematic review and metanalysis, comparing TL and organ preservation protocol.
RESULTS
The surgical treatment was associated with better survival outcomes. When stratifying by T stage, while patients with T4 staging have less risk of mortality with TL, there is no difference between the different treatments for patients with T3 tumors. Surgery is related to a lower chance of recurrence, late dysphagia and feeding tube dependence.
CONCLUSION
Patients with T4 tumors should undergo TL as their treatment of choice. For patients with T3 tumors, there is no differences on the risk of mortality according to the therapeutic option, however, there is a greater chance of recurrence and dysphagia when surgery is not performed.
Topics: Humans; Laryngeal Neoplasms; Laryngectomy; Neoplasm Staging; Organ Sparing Treatments; Treatment Outcome; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
PubMed: 38461656
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2024.101404 -
Medicine Mar 2024Endoscopic treatment is increasingly used for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (rGERD). Unlike the mechanism of conventional surgical fundoplication,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of endoscopic cardia peripheral tissue scar formation (ECSF) for the treatment of refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review with meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Endoscopic treatment is increasingly used for refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (rGERD). Unlike the mechanism of conventional surgical fundoplication, gastroesophageal junction ligation, anti-reflux mucosal intervention, and radiofrequency ablation have extremely similar anti-reflux mechanisms; hence, we collectively refer to them as endoscopic cardia peripheral tissue scar formation (ECSF). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of ECSF in treating rGERD.
METHODS
We performed a comprehensive search of several databases, including PubMed, Embase, Medline, China Knowledge Network, and Wanfang, to ensure a systematic approach for data collection between January 2011 and July 2023. Forest plots were used to summarize and combine the GERD-health-related quality of life (HRQL), gastroesophageal reflux questionnaire score, and DeMeester scores, acid exposure time, lower esophageal sphincter pressure, esophagitis, proton pump inhibitors use, and patient satisfaction.
RESULTS
This study comprised 37 studies, including 1732 patients. After ECSF, significant improvement in gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life score (mean difference [MD] = 18.27 95% CI: 14.81-21.74), gastroesophageal reflux questionnaire score (MD = 4.85 95% CI: 3.96-5.75), DeMeester score (MD = 42.34, 95% CI: 31.37-53.30), acid exposure time (MD = 7.98, 95% CI: 6.03-9.92), and lower esophageal sphincter pressure was observed (MD = -5.01, 95% CI: -8.39 to 1.62). The incidence of serious adverse effects after ECSF was 1.1% (95% CI: 0.9%-1.2%), and postoperatively, 67.4% (95% CI: 66.4%-68.2%) of patients could discontinue proton pump inhibitor-like drugs, and the treatment outcome was observed to be satisfactory in over 80% of the patients. Subgroup analyses of the various procedures showed that all 3 types improved several objective or subjective patient indicators.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the current meta-analysis, we conclude that rGERD can be safely and effectively treated with ECSF as an endoscopic procedure.
Topics: Humans; Cardia; Quality of Life; Cicatrix; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Endoscopy; Fundoplication; Treatment Outcome; Proton Pump Inhibitors
PubMed: 38457552
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000037062 -
Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia... 2024Magnetic ring (MSA) implantation in the esophagus is an alternative surgical procedure to fundoplication for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
MAGNETIC SPHINCTER AUGMENTATION DEVICE FOR GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE: EFFECTIVE, BUT POSTOPERATIVE DYSPHAGIA AND RISK OF EROSION SHOULD NOT BE UNDERESTIMATED. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.
BACKGROUND
Magnetic ring (MSA) implantation in the esophagus is an alternative surgical procedure to fundoplication for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease.
AIMS
The aim of this study was to analyse the effectiveness and safety of magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).
METHODS
A systematic literature review of articles on MSA was performed using the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (Medline) database between 2008 and 2021, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A random-effect model was used to generate a pooled proportion with 95% confidence interval (CI) across all studies.
RESULTS
A total of 22 studies comprising 4,663 patients with MSA were analysed. Mean follow-up was 27.3 (7-108) months. The weighted pooled proportion of symptom improvement and patient satisfaction were 93% (95%CI 83-98%) and 85% (95%CI 78-90%), respectively. The mean DeMeester score (pre-MSA: 34.6 vs. post-MSA: 8.9, p=0.03) and GERD-HRQL score (pre-MSA: 25.8 vs. post-MSA: 4.4, p<0.0001) improved significantly after MSA. The proportion of patients taking proton pump inhibitor (PPIs) decreased from 92.8 to 12.4% (p<0.0001). The weighted pooled proportions of dysphagia, endoscopic dilatation and gas-related symptoms were 18, 13, and 3%, respectively. Esophageal erosion occurred in 1% of patients, but its risk significantly increased for every year of MSA use (odds ratio - OR 1.40, 95%CI 1.11-1.77, p=0.004). Device removal was needed in 4% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Although MSA is a very effective treatment modality for GERD, postoperative dysphagia is common and the risk of esophageal erosion increases over time. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term safety of MSA placement in patients with GERD.
Topics: Humans; Deglutition Disorders; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Fundoplication; Magnetic Phenomena
PubMed: 38451590
DOI: 10.1590/0102-672020230063e1781 -
General Hospital Psychiatry 2024Long COVID can include impaired cognition ('brain fog'; a term encompassing multiple symptoms) and mental health conditions. We performed a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Long COVID can include impaired cognition ('brain fog'; a term encompassing multiple symptoms) and mental health conditions. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate their prevalence and to explore relevant factors associated with the incidence of impaired cognition and mental health conditions.
METHODS
Searches were conducted in Medline and PsycINFO to cover the start of the pandemic until August 2023. Included studies reported prevalence of mental health conditions and brain fog in adults with long COVID after clinically-diagnosed or PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection.
FINDINGS
17 studies were included, reporting 41,249 long COVID patients. Across all timepoints (3-24 months), the combined prevalence of mental health conditions and brain fog was 20·4% (95% CI 11·1%-34·4%), being lower among those previously hospitalised than in community-managed patients(19·5 vs 29·7% respectively; p = 0·047). The odds of mental health conditions and brain fog increased over time and when validated instruments were used. Odds of brain fog significantly decreased with increasing vaccination rates (p = ·000).
CONCLUSIONS
Given the increasing prevalence of mental health conditions and brain fog over time, preventive interventions and treatments are needed. Research is needed to explore underlying mechanisms that could inform further research in development of effective treatments. The reduced risk of brain fog associated with vaccination emphasizes the need for ongoing vaccination programs.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome; Mental Health; Prevalence; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Mental Fatigue
PubMed: 38447388
DOI: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2024.02.009 -
United European Gastroenterology Journal May 2024Achalasia poses a significant socioeconomic burden, yet global trends remain undocumented. This study aims to describe the worldwide trends in the incidence and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Achalasia poses a significant socioeconomic burden, yet global trends remain undocumented. This study aims to describe the worldwide trends in the incidence and prevalence of achalasia from 1925 to 2021 and explore their correlation with various factors through a comprehensive systematic review.
METHODS
We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception to 30 June 2023, to identify studies reporting the incidence or prevalence of achalasia in the general population. This study utilized pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to estimate the incidence and prevalence of achalasia, and conducted various subgroup analyses.
RESULTS
A total of 26 eligible studies covering approximately 269 million participants and 20,873 patients from 14 countries across five continents were included. Global pooled incidence and prevalence of achalasia were estimated to be 0.78 cases per 100,000 person-years (95% CI, 0.64-0.93; number of studies, 26; sample population, 269,315,171) and 10.82 cases per 100,000 person-years (95% CI, 8.15-13.48; number of studies, 14; sample population, 192,176,076), respectively. The incidence of achalasia was higher in Oceania (than Asia and Africa) and in adults (than children) after the introduction of the Chicago classification. Prevalence followed a similar pattern. The pooled incidence of achalasia showed an overall upward trend from 1925 to 2021 (1925-1999; 0.40 [0.32-0.49] vs. 2018-2021; 1.64 [1.33-1.95] cases per 100,000 person-years).
CONCLUSIONS
The incidence and prevalence of achalasia have notably increased, particularly with advancements in diagnosis, and show significant variation worldwide, despite the large heterogeneity within the sample population. Further studies are necessary to accurately assess the global incidence and prevalence of achalasia.
Topics: Esophageal Achalasia; Humans; Incidence; Prevalence; Global Health
PubMed: 38430514
DOI: 10.1002/ueg2.12555