-
Clinical Transplantation and Research Jun 2024Tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Tix/Cil) shows promise as a prophylactic treatment against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs). This...
BACKGROUND
Tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Tix/Cil) shows promise as a prophylactic treatment against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs). This study was performed to assess the effectiveness of Tix/Cil for preexposure prophylaxis against COVID-19 in this population.
METHODS
We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase databases to identify articles relevant to our study up to December 15, 2023. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (ver. 3.0) was used for data analysis.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included seven eligible retrospective studies, encompassing a total of 4,026 SOTRs. The analysis revealed significant differences in SOTRs who received Tix/Cil preexposure prophylaxis relative to those who did not. Specifically, these differences were observed in the incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (odds ratio [OR], 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.60), hospitalization (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.08-0.70), and intensive care unit admission (OR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.02-0.22). However, mortality rate did not differ significantly between the two groups (P=0.06).
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence supporting the effectiveness of Tix/Cil as preexposure prophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2 in SOTRs is of a low to moderate level. Further high-quality research is necessary to understand its effects on this population.
PubMed: 38904088
DOI: 10.4285/ctr.24.0015 -
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Jun 2024Postoperative neurocognitive dysfunction (PNCD) commonly occurs after surgery and prolongs hospital stays. Both direct noxious stimuli to the central nervous system and...
Effect of prophylactic corticosteroids on postoperative neurocognitive dysfunction in the adult population: An updated systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Postoperative neurocognitive dysfunction (PNCD) commonly occurs after surgery and prolongs hospital stays. Both direct noxious stimuli to the central nervous system and systemic inflammation have been implicated. Due to their potent anti-inflammatory effects, corticosteroids have been utilised to attenuate the incidence and severity of PNCD. This systematic review and meta-analysis strived to evaluate the prophylactic role of perioperative corticosteroids for PNCD.
METHODS
A search was run in pre-defined databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the role of corticosteroids in preventing PNCD. The incidence of PNCD within 1 month was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the use of antipsychotic medications for the treatment, postoperative infection, and hospital length of stay. The results are exhibited as odds ratio (OR) and the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
Fifteen RCTs comprising 15,398 patients were included. The incidence of PNCD was significantly lower in the corticosteroid group than in the control group, with a pooled OR of 0.75 (95% CI 0.58, 0.96; = 0.02; I = 66%). Trial sequential analysis showed the clinical benefit of corticosteroids in preventing PNCD; however, the requisite information size is still inadequate. The sub-group analysis supported the prophylactic effect of corticosteroids on delirium prevention but not on delayed neurocognitive recovery.
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analysis revealed statistically significant protective effects of corticosteroids on the incidence of PNCD. However, further studies are still needed to confirm the protective role of this commonly used and relatively safe strategy for preventing PNCD.
PubMed: 38903252
DOI: 10.4103/ija.ija_149_24 -
Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia =... Jun 2024Online video sharing platforms like YouTube (Google LLC, San Bruno, CA, USA) have become a substantial source of health information. We sought to conduct a systematic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Online video sharing platforms like YouTube (Google LLC, San Bruno, CA, USA) have become a substantial source of health information. We sought to conduct a systematic review of studies assessing the overall quality of perioperative anesthesia videos on YouTube.
METHODS
We searched Embase, MEDLINE, and Ovid for articles published from database inception to 1 May 2023. We included primary studies evaluating YouTube videos as a source of information regarding perioperative anesthesia. We excluded studies not published in English and studies assessing acute or chronic pain. Studies were screened and data were extracted in duplicate by two reviewers. We appraised the quality of studies according to the social media framework published in the literature. We used descriptive statistics to report the results using mean, standard deviation, range, and n/total N (%).
RESULTS
Among 8,908 citations, we identified 14 studies that examined 796 videos with 59.7 hr of content and 47.5 million views. Among the 14 studies that evaluated the video content quality, 17 different quality assessment tools were used, only three of which were externally validated (Global Quality Score, modified DISCERN score, and JAMA score). Per global assessment rating of video quality, 11/13 (85%) studies concluded the overall video quality as poor.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, the educational content quality of YouTube videos evaluated in the literature accessible as an educational resource regarding perioperative anesthesia was poor. While these videos are in demand, their impact on patient and trainee education remains unclear. A standardized methodology for evaluating online videos is merited to improve future reporting. A peer-reviewed approach to online open-access videos is needed to support patient and trainee education in anesthesia.
STUDY REGISTRATION
Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/ajse9 ); first posted, 1 May 2023.
PubMed: 38902576
DOI: 10.1007/s12630-024-02791-5 -
The Journal of Hospital Infection Jun 2024We aimed to compare which suture devices could reduce the incidence of incisional surgical site infections (SSIs) after gastrointestinal surgery using a systematic... (Review)
Review
AIM
We aimed to compare which suture devices could reduce the incidence of incisional surgical site infections (SSIs) after gastrointestinal surgery using a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
METHODS
The CENTRAL, PubMed, and ICHUSHI-Web databases were searched from January 1st, 2000, to December 31st, 2022, for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the incidence of incisional SSI after gastrointestinal surgery among patients treated with different surgical suture devices, including non-absorbable sutures, absorbable sutures, skin staplers, and tissue adhesives (last searched in August 23th 2023). The risk of bias was assessed using the criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. To estimate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) for each comparison, we employed a fixed-effect inverse-variance model based on the Mantel-Haenszel approach. This study was registered in PROSPERO and supported in part by the Japan Surgical Infection Society.
RESULTS
A total of 18 RCTs with 5,496 patients were included in this study. The overall SSIs in absorbable sutures were significantly lower than the ones in skin staplers (OR: 0.77; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.63-0.95) and non-absorbable sutures (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.39-0.99). On the other hand, SSIs in absorbable sutures were not statistically different from the SSIs in tissue adhesive. The highest P-score was 0.91 for absorbable sutures. A funnel plot for estimating the heterogeneity of the studies revealed that a publication bias would be minimal (Egger test, P = 0.271).
CONCLUSION
This study showed that absorbable sutures reduced incisional SSIs in gastrointestinal surgical operations compared to any other suture devices.
PubMed: 38901769
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2024.04.029 -
Journal of Critical Care Jun 2024To evaluate the efficacy of the novel oXiris® membrane in critically ill adult patients. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy of the novel oXiris® membrane in critically ill adult patients.
METHODS
We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from inception to 01/06/2023 for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of intervention (NRSI). The primary outcome was overall mortality. Random effect meta-analyses were conducted in RevMan 5.4.1. Study quality was evaluated using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. (PROSPERO: CRD42023389198).
RESULTS
Ten studies (2 RCTs and 8 NRSIs) with 481 patients were included. None had low risk of bias. Treatment using oXiris® was associated with reduced overall mortality (RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.62-0.98; p = 0.03; 6 NRSI). One RCT reported 28-day mortality, finding no significant difference between groups. Besides, pooled NRSIs results showed significant reductions in SOFA scores, norepinephrine dosage, and several inflammatory biomarkers (C-reactive protein [CRP], lactate, and interleukin-6 [IL-6]) post oXiris® treatment. However, other clinical outcomes (ICU and hospital length of stay, mechanical ventilation duration) were similar between groups.
CONCLUSION
In critically ill patients, the use of oXiris® membrane was associated with reduced overall mortality, norepinephrine dosage, CRP, IL-6, lactate levels, along with improved organ function. However, the certainty of evidence was very low, necessitating high-quality RCTs to further evaluate its efficacy in this population.
PubMed: 38901069
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2024.154844 -
Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology :... Jun 2024Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity amongst trauma patients. Its treatment is focused on minimizing progression to secondary... (Review)
Review
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity amongst trauma patients. Its treatment is focused on minimizing progression to secondary injury. Administration of propranolol for TBI maydecrease mortality and improve functional outcomes. However, it is our sense that its use has not been universally adopted due to low certainty evidence. The literature was reviewed to explore the mechanism of propranolol as a therapeutic intervention in TBI to guide future clinical investigations. Medline, Embase, and Scopus were searched for studies that investigated the effect of propranolol on TBI in animal models from inception until June 6, 2023. All routes of administration for propranolol were included and the following outcomes were evaluated: cognitive functions, physiological and immunological responses. Screening and data extraction were done independently and in duplicate. The risk of bias for each individual study was assessed using the SYCLE's risk of bias tool for animal studies. Three hundred twenty-three citations were identified and 14 studies met our eligibility criteria. The data suggests that propranolol may improve post-TBI cognitive and motor function by increasing cerebral perfusion, reducing neural injury, cell death, leukocyte mobilization and p-tau accumulation in animal models. Propranolol may also attenuate TBI-induced immunodeficiency and provide cardioprotective effects by mitigating damage to the myocardium caused by oxidative stress. This systematic review demonstrates that propranolol may be therapeutic in TBI by improving cognitive and motor function while regulating T lymphocyte response and levels of myocardial reactive oxygen species. Oral or intravenous injection of propranolol following TBI is associated with improved cerebral perfusion, reduced neuroinflammation, reduced immunodeficiency, and cardio-neuroprotection in preclinical studies.
Topics: Propranolol; Animals; Brain Injuries, Traumatic; Neuroprotective Agents; Humans; Disease Models, Animal; Drug Evaluation, Preclinical; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists
PubMed: 38900343
DOI: 10.1007/s11481-024-10121-1 -
Cureus May 2024Malaria remains a significant global health challenge, with Plasmodium parasites transmitted by Anopheles mosquitoes causing substantial morbidity and mortality. Despite... (Review)
Review
Malaria remains a significant global health challenge, with Plasmodium parasites transmitted by Anopheles mosquitoes causing substantial morbidity and mortality. Despite historical efforts, malaria continues to affect millions worldwide, particularly in tropical regions. This systematic review aimed to assess the acceptability of the RTS, S/AS01 malaria vaccine among diverse populations. A comprehensive search strategy was employed across databases such as Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar, and Medline. Studies were included based on specific criteria, including observational and cross-sectional designs involving adults. Data extraction and analysis were conducted meticulously, encompassing key variables related to vaccine acceptance rates and influencing factors. Analysis of 18 studies involving 18,561 participants revealed an overall malaria vaccine acceptance rate of 87.51%, ranging from 32.26% to 99.30%. Significant variations were observed based on demographics, with Ghana and Nigeria reporting high acceptance rates. Factors influencing acceptance included knowledge levels, past vaccination experiences, community preferences, and engagement in malaria prevention behaviors. Concerns about adverse reactions and regional disparities were noted as potential barriers to acceptance. This review highlights the importance of understanding public perceptions and concerns regarding malaria vaccines to enhance vaccine coverage and uptake. Tailored communication strategies, advocacy efforts, and targeted education interventions are crucial for addressing misconceptions and increasing vaccine acceptance. Policy recommendations should consider demographic and regional factors to ensure effective implementation of malaria vaccination programs, ultimately contributing to global malaria prevention efforts and public health initiatives.
PubMed: 38899238
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.60678 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Jun 2024In recent years, the zero-profile implant (Zero-p) has emerged as a promising internal fixation technique. Although studies have indicated its potential superiority over... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Comparative efficacy of zero-profile implant and conventional cage-plate implant in the treatment of single-level degenerative cervical spondylosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
In recent years, the zero-profile implant (Zero-p) has emerged as a promising internal fixation technique. Although studies have indicated its potential superiority over conventional cage-plate implant (Cage-plate) in the treatment of degenerative cervical spondylosis, there remains a lack of definitive comparative reports regarding its indications, safety, and efficacy.
METHODS
A computerized search was conducted on English and Chinese databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CNKI, Wanfang and VIP. Additionally, a manual search was meticulously carried out on Chinese medical journals, spanning from the inception of the respective databases until August 2023. The meta-analysis utilized a case-control study approach and was executed through the utilization of RevMan 5.3 software. Stringent quality evaluation and data extraction procedures were implemented to guarantee the reliability and validity of the findings.
RESULTS
Nine high-quality studies with 808 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that the operation time (MD = - 13.28; 95% CI (- 17.53, - 9.04), P < 0.00001), intraoperative blood loss (MD = - 6.61; 95% CI (- 10.47, - 2.75), P = 0.0008), incidence of postoperative dysphagia at various time points: within the first month after surgery (OR = 0.36; 95% CI (0.22, 0.58), P < 0.0001), 1-3 months after surgery (OR = 0.20; 95% CI (0.08, 0.49), P = 0.0004), the final follow-up (OR = 0.21; 95% CI (0.05, 0.83), P = 0.003) and the rate of postoperative adjacent disc degeneration (OR = 0.46; 95% CI (0.25, 0.84), P = 0.01) were significantly lower in the Zero-p group than in the Cage-plate group. Additionally, was also significantly lower in the Zero-p group. However, there were no significant differences in the JOA score, the final follow-up NDI score, surgical segmental fusion rate, postoperative height of adjacent vertebrae, or postoperative subsidence rate between the two groups.
CONCLUSION
In summary, when treating single-segment degenerative cervical spondylosis, both internal fixation techniques are reliable and effective. However, Zero-P implant offer several advantages over cage-plate implant, including shorter operation duration, less intraoperative blood loss, reduced postoperative dysphagia, and slower adjacent disc degeneration. Additionally, Zero-P implant has a broader application space, making them a preferred choice in certain cases.
Topics: Humans; Cervical Vertebrae; Spondylosis; Bone Plates; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications; Operative Time; Spinal Fusion; Male; Blood Loss, Surgical; Female; Internal Fixators
PubMed: 38898517
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-04729-5 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2024Several regional anesthesia (RA) techniques have been described for distal upper limb surgery. However, the best approach in terms of RA block success rate and safety... (Review)
Review
Several regional anesthesia (RA) techniques have been described for distal upper limb surgery. However, the best approach in terms of RA block success rate and safety is not well recognized. To assess and compare the surgical anesthesia and efficacy of axillary brachial plexus block with other RA techniques for hand and wrist surgery. The attainment of adequate surgical anesthesia 30 min after block placement was considered a primary outcome measure. Additionally, successful block outcomes were required without the use of supplemental local anesthetic injection, systemic opioid analgesia, or the need to convert to general anesthesia. We performed a systematic search in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CENTRAL. RCTs comparing axillary blocks with other brachial plexus block techniques, distal peripheral forearm nerve block, intravenous RA, and the wide-awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) technique were included. In total, 3070 records were reviewed, of which 28 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of adequate surgical anesthesia showed no significant difference between ultrasound-guided axillary block and supraclavicular block (RR: 0.94 [0.89, 1.00]; = 0.06; I = 60.00%), but a statistically significant difference between ultrasound-guided axillary block and infraclavicular block (RR: 0.92 [0.88, 0.97]; < 0.01; I = 53.00%). Ultrasound-guided infraclavicular blocks were performed faster than ultrasound-guided axillary blocks (SMD: 0.74 [0.30, 1.17]; < 0.001; I = 85.00%). No differences in performance time between ultrasound-guided axillary and supraclavicular blocks were demonstrated. Additionally, adequate surgical anesthesia onset time was not significantly different between ultrasound-guided block approaches: ultrasound-guided axillary blocks versus ultrasound-guided supraclavicular blocks (SMD: 0.52 [-0.14, 1.17]; = 0.12; I = 86.00%); ultrasound-guided axillary blocks versus ultrasound-guided infraclavicular blocks (SMD: 0.21 [-0.49, 0.91]; = 0.55; I = 92.00%). The RA choice should be individualized depending on the patient, procedure, and operator-specific parameters. Compared to ultrasound-guided supraclavicular and infraclavicular block, ultrasound-guided axillary block may be preferred for patients with significant concerns of block-related side effects/complications. High heterogeneity between studies shows the need for more robust RCTs.
PubMed: 38892896
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13113185 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2024: Our understanding of dexmedetomidine, as an adjuvant to nerve blocks in cancer surgery, is characterized by a current lack of compelling evidence, and it remains... (Review)
Review
: Our understanding of dexmedetomidine, as an adjuvant to nerve blocks in cancer surgery, is characterized by a current lack of compelling evidence, and it remains unknown whether the potential benefits of use outweigh the risks. The aim of the study was to evaluate the benefit and safety profiles of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to nerve blocks in cancer surgery. : Systematic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Springer, medRxiv, and Scopus up to 17 May 2024. Risk ratios (RR) for binary outcomes and standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes were quantified. : Twenty studies were identified. In breast cancer surgery, the use of dexmedetomidine reduced 24 h total morphine consumption (SMD = -1.99 [95% CI -3.01 to -0.98], = 0.0001, I2 = 91%, random effects) and prolonged the requirement for morphine rescue analgesia (SMD = 2.98 [95% CI 0.01 to 5.95], = 0.05, I2 = 98%, random effects). In abdominal cancer surgery, the dexmedetomidine group had lower total sufentanil consumption (SMD = -1.34 [95% CI -2.29 to -0.40], = 0.005, I2 = 84%, random effects). Dexmedetomidine reduced the VAS score and decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). No studies using dexmedetomidine reported serious adverse events. : Using dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to nerve blocks in cancer surgery could lower the VAS pain score and prolong the regional anesthesia duration, which would lead to a decrease in total opioid consumption and possibly contribute to fewer PONV events. Furthermore, the reports of no serious adverse events indicate its good safety profile.
PubMed: 38892876
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13113166