-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2022Anaemia occurs in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is more prevalent with lower levels of kidney function. Anaemia in CKD is associated with death related to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Anaemia occurs in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is more prevalent with lower levels of kidney function. Anaemia in CKD is associated with death related to cardiovascular (CV) disease and infection. Established treatments include erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), iron supplementation and blood transfusions. Oral hypoxia-inducible factors (HIF) stabilisers are now available to manage anaemia in people with CKD.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to assess the benefits and potential harms of HIF stabilisers for the management of anaemia in people with CKD.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 22 November 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to our review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised studies evaluating hypoxia-inducible factors stabilisers compared to placebo, standard care, ESAs or iron supplementation in people with CKD were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Five authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Treatment estimates were summarised using random effects pair-wise meta-analysis and expressed as a relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD), with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Evidence certainty was assessed using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 51 studies randomising 30,994 adults. These studies compared HIF stabilisers to either placebo or an ESA. Compared to placebo, HIF stabiliser therapy had uncertain effects on CV death (10 studies, 1114 participants): RR 3.68, 95% CI 0.19 to 70.21; very low certainty evidence), and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) (3 studies, 822 participants): RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.36; I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence), probably decreases the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusion (8 studies, 4329 participants): RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.60; I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), and increases the proportion of patients reaching the target haemoglobin (Hb) (10 studies, 5102 participants): RR 8.36, 95% CI 6.42 to 10.89; I² = 37%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to ESAs, HIF stabiliser therapy may make little or no difference to CV death (17 studies, 10,340 participants): RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.26; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), nonfatal MI (7 studies, 7765 participants): RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.10; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), and nonfatal stroke (5 studies, 7285 participants): RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.56; I² = 8%; low certainty evidence), and had uncertain effects on fatigue (2 studies, 3471 participants): RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.16; I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence). HIF stabiliser therapy probably decreased the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusion (11 studies, 10,786 participants): RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.00; I² = 25%; moderate certainty evidence), but may make little or no difference on the proportion of patients reaching the target Hb (14 studies, 4601 participants): RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.07; I² = 70%; low certainty evidence), compared to ESA. The effect of HIF stabilisers on hospitalisation for heart failure, peripheral arterial events, loss of unassisted dialysis vascular access patency, access intervention, cancer, infection, pulmonary hypertension and diabetic nephropathy was uncertain. None of the included studies reported life participation. Adverse events were rarely and inconsistently reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
HIF stabiliser management of anaemia had uncertain effects on CV death, fatigue, death (any cause), CV outcomes, and kidney failure compared to placebo or ESAs. Compared to placebo or ESAs, HIF stabiliser management of anaemia probably decreased the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusions, and probably increased the proportion of patients reaching the target Hb when compared to placebo.
Topics: Adult; Anemia; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cause of Death; Fatigue; Humans; Hypoxia; Iron; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic
PubMed: 36005278
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013751.pub2 -
Ibrain 2022Whether restarting anticoagulation (RA) treatment after intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is still controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to... (Review)
Review
Whether restarting anticoagulation (RA) treatment after intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is still controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the relationship between anticoagulation after ICH with the recurrence of hemorrhagic events, ischemic events, and long-term mortality. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to November 2020. We searched the published medical literature to ensure cohort studies involving ICH associated with anticoagulation in adults. Primary outcomes were long-term mortality, hemorrhagic events, and ischemic events (myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, ischemic stroke, or systemic embolization). We concluded seven retrospective cohorts, including 1876 intracranial hemorrhage patients with indications of anticoagulation. The ratio of the anticoagulant restart was 35.3% (664n). RA was associated with a significantly lower incidence of recurrent ischemic events (pooled odds ratio [OR] 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19% to 0.45%, = 0.97) and death events (pooled OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40%-0.79%, = 0.27). There is no evidence that early recovery of anticoagulation (within 2 weeks or 1 month) is associated with the occurrence of hemorrhagic events (within 2 weeks: pooled OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.3-2.12, = 0.52 vs. within 1 month: pooled OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.77-1.68, = 0.82). Based on these, recovery of anticoagulation after ICH is beneficial for long-term mortality and recurrence of ischemic events. The meta-analysis showed a resumption of oral anticoagulation within 2 weeks or 1 month in patients who had a cerebral hemorrhage was beneficial and did not increase the risk of hemorrhagic events and reduced the occurrence of ischemic and fatal endpoint events.
PubMed: 37786745
DOI: 10.1002/ibra.12060 -
European Heart Journal Open Mar 2022Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) is a rare cardiovascular condition characterized by reversible ventricular dysfunction and a presentation resembling that of acute myocardial... (Review)
Review
Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) is a rare cardiovascular condition characterized by reversible ventricular dysfunction and a presentation resembling that of acute myocardial infarction. An increasing number of studies has shown the association of respiratory diseases with TTS. Here, we comprehensively reviewed the literature and examined the available evidence for this association. After searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, two investigators independently reviewed 3117 studies published through May 2021. Of these studies, 99 met the inclusion criteria ( = 108 patients). In patients with coexisting respiratory disease and TTS, the most common TTS symptom was dyspnoea (70.48%), followed by chest pain (24.76%) and syncope (2.86%). The most common type of TTS was apical, accounting for 81.13% of cases, followed by the midventricular (8.49%), basal (8.49%), and biventricular (1.89%) types. Among the TTS cases, 39.82% were associated with obstructive lung disease and 38.89% were associated with pneumonia. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has been increasingly reported in patients with TTS, was identified in 29 of 42 (69.05%) patients with pneumonia. The overall mortality rate for patients admitted for respiratory disease complicated by TTS was 12.50%. Obstructive lung disease and pneumonia are the most frequently identified respiratory triggers of TTS. Medications and invasive procedures utilized in managing respiratory diseases may also contribute to the development of TTS. Furthermore, the diagnosis of TTS triggered by these conditions can be challenging due to its atypical presentation. Future prospective studies are needed to establish appropriate guidelines for managing respiratory disease with concurrent TTS.
PubMed: 35919117
DOI: 10.1093/ehjopen/oeac009 -
Therapeutic Advances in Respiratory... 2022The majority of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) suffer from comorbid cardiovascular (CV) disease. Accumulating evidence suggests a temporal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The majority of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) suffer from comorbid cardiovascular (CV) disease. Accumulating evidence suggests a temporal association between COPD exacerbations and acute CV events, possibly due to lung hyperinflation, increased hypoxemia and systemic inflammation. The aims of the study were to estimate the risk of (1) acute CV events [acute myocardial infarction (AMI), CV-related death] or stroke in the months following a COPD exacerbation and (2) COPD exacerbation in the months following an acute CV event.
METHODS
A systematic literature review of observational studies published since 2000 was conducted by searching literature databases (Medline and Embase). Studies were eligible if conducted in adults with COPD, exposed to either COPD exacerbation or acute CV events, with outcomes of acute CV events or COPD exacerbation reported. Studies were appraised for relevance, bias and quality. Meta-analyses, using random-effect models, were performed for each outcome of interest, thus providing a pooled relative risk (RR) and its 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS
Eight studies were identified, of which seven were used for the meta-analyses examining the risk of CV events 1-3 months after an exacerbation compared with none. For stroke (six studies), RR was 1.68 (95% CI = 1.19-2.38). For AMI (six studies), RR was 2.43 (95% CI = 1.40-4.20). No studies exploring risk of exacerbation following an acute CV event were identified.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis identified a markedly increased risk of stroke or AMI within a relatively short period of time following a COPD exacerbation. Although the underlying mechanisms are not fully elucidated, patients with COPD should be monitored for risk of CV outcomes after exacerbations. In addition, preventing exacerbations may decrease the risk of subsequent acute CV events.
REGISTRATION
The study protocol was published via PROSPERO: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (#CRD42020211055).
Topics: Adult; Cardiovascular Diseases; Disease Progression; Humans; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Stroke
PubMed: 35894441
DOI: 10.1177/17534666221113647 -
Journal of Cardiovascular Development... Jul 2022Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in women. Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the third most-common cause of cardiovascular death, after myocardial... (Review)
Review
Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in women. Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the third most-common cause of cardiovascular death, after myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. We aimed to evaluate the attributes and outcomes of PE specifically in women and explore sex-based differences. We conducted a systematic review of the literature using electronic databases PubMed and Embase up to 1 April 2022 to identify studies investigating PE in women. Of the studies found, 93 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included. The risk of PE in older women (especially >40 years of age) superseded that of age-matched men, although the overall age- and sex-adjusted incidence of PE was found to be lower in women. Risk factors for PE in women included age, rheumatologic disorders, hormone replacement therapy or oral contraceptive pills, pregnancy and postpartum period, recent surgery, immobilization, trauma, increased body mass index, obesity, and heart failure. Regarding pregnancy, a relatively higher incidence of PE has been observed in the immediate postpartum period compared to the antenatal period. Women with PE tended to be older, presented more often with dyspnea, and were found to have higher NT-proBNP levels compared to men. No sex-based differences in in-hospital mortality and 30-day all-cause mortality were found. However, PE-related mortality was higher in women, particularly in hemodynamically stable patients. These differences form the basis of future research and outlets for reducing the incidence, morbidity, and mortality of PE in women.
PubMed: 35893223
DOI: 10.3390/jcdd9080234 -
Acta Ortopedica Mexicana 2021Iron deficiency anaemia in orthopaedic surgery is common and there is increased risk of blood transfusion and associated adverse reactions. The management involves... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Iron deficiency anaemia in orthopaedic surgery is common and there is increased risk of blood transfusion and associated adverse reactions. The management involves administration of iron (oral or intravenous) and erythropoietin stimulating agents.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We searched for PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar and Cochrane database to identify the studies from inception to April 2021. Randomized controlled trials with adult patients undergoing orthopedic surgery were included. The metanalysis compared patients who were administered combination of erythropoietin stimulating agents and iron in one group and iron alone. The primary outcome was the rate of blood transfusion and the secondary outcome studied were postoperative hemoglobin concentration, after treatment hemoglobin levels, and complications like mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism and renal dysfunction.
RESULTS
Eleven studies were included. The combination of ESA and iron decreased number of patients who required blood transfusion in comparison to patients treated with iron therapy alone (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.91, I.
CONCLUSION
2 = 65%; p = 0.005). In subgroup analysis with oral and intravenous iron, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.24). Administration of erythropoietin either in high ( 80,000 IU) or low dose ( 80,000 IU) resulted in lower blood transfusion rates (p = 0.0007) with no significant difference between groups. The risk of mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism did not significantly increase. Combined administration of ESA and iron versus iron only reduces the number of red blood cell transfusions in the postoperative period in orthopedic procedures with minimal risk of complications.
Topics: Adult; Drug Combinations; Erythropoietin; Hemoglobins; Humans; Iron; Myocardial Infarction; Orthopedic Procedures; Pulmonary Embolism; Stroke; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 35793256
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022The primary manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is respiratory insufficiency that can also be related to diffuse pulmonary microthrombosis and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The primary manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is respiratory insufficiency that can also be related to diffuse pulmonary microthrombosis and thromboembolic events, such as pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, or arterial thrombosis. People with COVID-19 who develop thromboembolism have a worse prognosis. Anticoagulants such as heparinoids (heparins or pentasaccharides), vitamin K antagonists and direct anticoagulants are used for the prevention and treatment of venous or arterial thromboembolism. Besides their anticoagulant properties, heparinoids have an additional anti-inflammatory potential. However, the benefit of anticoagulants for people with COVID-19 is still under debate.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of anticoagulants versus active comparator, placebo or no intervention in people hospitalised with COVID-19.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and IBECS databases, the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and medRxiv preprint database from their inception to 14 April 2021. We also checked the reference lists of any relevant systematic reviews identified, and contacted specialists in the field for additional references to trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cluster-RCTs and cohort studies that compared prophylactic anticoagulants versus active comparator, placebo or no intervention for the management of people hospitalised with COVID-19. We excluded studies without a comparator group and with a retrospective design (all previously included studies) as we were able to include better study designs. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and necessity for additional respiratory support. Secondary outcomes were mortality related to COVID-19, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, major bleeding, adverse events, length of hospital stay and quality of life.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We used Cochrane RoB 1 to assess the risk of bias for RCTs, ROBINS-I to assess risk of bias for non-randomised studies (NRS) and GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. We meta-analysed data when appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven studies (16,185 participants) with participants hospitalised with COVID-19, in either intensive care units, hospital wards or emergency departments. Studies were from Brazil (2), Iran (1), Italy (1), and the USA (1), and two involved more than country. The mean age of participants was 55 to 68 years and the follow-up period ranged from 15 to 90 days. The studies assessed the effects of heparinoids, direct anticoagulants or vitamin K antagonists, and reported sparse data or did not report some of our outcomes of interest: necessity for additional respiratory support, mortality related to COVID-19, and quality of life. Higher-dose versus lower-dose anticoagulants (4 RCTs, 4647 participants) Higher-dose anticoagulants result in little or no difference in all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.16, 4489 participants; 4 RCTs) and increase minor bleeding (RR 3.28, 95% CI 1.75 to 6.14, 1196 participants; 3 RCTs) compared to lower-dose anticoagulants up to 30 days (high-certainty evidence). Higher-dose anticoagulants probably reduce pulmonary embolism (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.70, 4360 participants; 4 RCTs), and slightly increase major bleeding (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.80, 4400 participants; 4 RCTs) compared to lower-dose anticoagulants up to 30 days (moderate-certainty evidence). Higher-dose anticoagulants may result in little or no difference in deep vein thrombosis (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.03, 3422 participants; 4 RCTs), stroke (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.03, 4349 participants; 3 RCTs), major adverse limb events (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.99, 1176 participants; 2 RCTs), myocardial infarction (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.55, 4349 participants; 3 RCTs), atrial fibrillation (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.70, 562 participants; 1 study), or thrombocytopenia (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.24, 2789 participants; 2 RCTs) compared to lower-dose anticoagulants up to 30 days (low-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether higher-dose anticoagulants have any effect on necessity for additional respiratory support, mortality related to COVID-19, and quality of life (very low-certainty evidence or no data). Anticoagulants versus no treatment (3 prospective NRS, 11,538 participants) Anticoagulants may reduce all-cause mortality but the evidence is very uncertain due to two study results being at critical and serious risk of bias (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.74, 8395 participants; 3 NRS; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain if anticoagulants have any effect on necessity for additional respiratory support, mortality related to COVID-19, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, major bleeding, stroke, myocardial infarction and quality of life (very low-certainty evidence or no data). Ongoing studies We found 62 ongoing studies in hospital settings (60 RCTs, 35,470 participants; 2 prospective NRS, 120 participants) in 20 different countries. Thirty-five ongoing studies plan to report mortality and 26 plan to report necessity for additional respiratory support. We expect 58 studies to be completed in December 2021, and four in July 2022. From 60 RCTs, 28 are comparing different doses of anticoagulants, 24 are comparing anticoagulants versus no anticoagulants, seven are comparing different types of anticoagulants, and one did not report detail of the comparator group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
When compared to a lower-dose regimen, higher-dose anticoagulants result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality and increase minor bleeding in people hospitalised with COVID-19 up to 30 days. Higher-dose anticoagulants possibly reduce pulmonary embolism, slightly increase major bleeding, may result in little to no difference in hospitalisation time, and may result in little to no difference in deep vein thrombosis, stroke, major adverse limb events, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, or thrombocytopenia. Compared with no treatment, anticoagulants may reduce all-cause mortality but the evidence comes from non-randomised studies and is very uncertain. It is unclear whether anticoagulants have any effect on the remaining outcomes compared to no anticoagulants (very low-certainty evidence or no data). Although we are very confident that new RCTs will not change the effects of different doses of anticoagulants on mortality and minor bleeding, high-quality RCTs are still needed, mainly for the other primary outcome (necessity for additional respiratory support), the comparison with no anticoagulation, when comparing the types of anticoagulants and giving anticoagulants for a prolonged period of time.
Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; COVID-19; Heparin; Humans; Middle Aged; SARS-CoV-2; Thromboembolism
PubMed: 35244208
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013739.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022Arthroscopic knee surgery remains a common treatment for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, including for degenerative meniscal tears, despite guidelines strongly... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Arthroscopic knee surgery remains a common treatment for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, including for degenerative meniscal tears, despite guidelines strongly recommending against its use. This Cochrane Review is an update of a non-Cochrane systematic review published in 2017.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of arthroscopic surgery, including debridement, partial menisectomy or both, compared with placebo surgery or non-surgical treatment in people with degenerative knee disease (osteoarthritis, degenerative meniscal tears, or both).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers up to 16 April 2021, unrestricted by language.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or trials using quasi-randomised methods of participant allocation, comparing arthroscopic surgery with placebo surgery or non-surgical interventions (e.g. exercise, injections, non-arthroscopic lavage/irrigation, drug therapy, and supplements and complementary therapies) in people with symptomatic degenerative knee disease (osteoarthritis or degenerative meniscal tears or both). Major outcomes were pain, function, participant-reported treatment success, knee-specific quality of life, serious adverse events, total adverse events and knee surgery (replacement or osteotomy).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. The primary comparison was arthroscopic surgery compared to placebo surgery for outcomes that measured benefits of surgery, but we combined data from all control groups to assess harms and knee surgery (replacement or osteotomy).
MAIN RESULTS
Sixteen trials (2105 participants) met our inclusion criteria. The average age of participants ranged from 46 to 65 years, and 56% of participants were women. Four trials (380 participants) compared arthroscopic surgery to placebo surgery. For the remaining trials, arthroscopic surgery was compared to exercise (eight trials, 1371 participants), a single intra-articular glucocorticoid injection (one trial, 120 participants), non-arthroscopic lavage (one trial, 34 participants), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (one trial, 80 participants) and weekly hyaluronic acid injections for five weeks (one trial, 120 participants). The majority of trials without a placebo control were susceptible to bias: in particular, selection (56%), performance (75%), detection (75%), attrition (44%) and selective reporting (75%) biases. The placebo-controlled trials were less susceptible to bias and none were at risk of performance or detection bias. Here we limit reporting to the main comparison, arthroscopic surgery versus placebo surgery. High-certainty evidence indicates arthroscopic surgery leads to little or no difference in pain or function at three months after surgery, moderate-certainty evidence indicates there is probably little or no improvement in knee-specific quality of life three months after surgery, and low-certainty evidence indicates arthroscopic surgery may lead to little or no difference in participant-reported success at up to five years, compared with placebo surgery. Mean post-operative pain in the placebo group was 40.1 points on a 0 to 100 scale (where lower score indicates less pain) compared to 35.5 points in the arthroscopic surgery group, a difference of 4.6 points better (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 better to 9 better; I = 0%; 4 trials, 309 participants). Mean post-operative function in the placebo group was 75.9 points on a 0 to 100 rating scale (where higher score indicates better function) compared to 76 points in the arthroscopic surgery group, a difference of 0.1 points better (95% CI 3.2 worse to 3.4 better; I = 0%; 3 trials, 302 participants). Mean post-operative knee-specific health-related quality of life in the placebo group was 69.7 points on a 0 to 100 rating scale (where higher score indicates better quality of life) compared with 75.3 points in the arthroscopic surgery group, a difference of 5.6 points better (95% CI 0.36 better to 10.68 better; I = 0%; 2 trials, 188 participants). We downgraded this evidence to moderate certainty as the 95% confidence interval does not rule in or rule out a clinically important change. After surgery, 74 out of 100 people reported treatment success with placebo and 82 out of 100 people reported treatment success with arthroscopic surgery at up to five years (risk ratio (RR) 1.11, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.86; I = 53%; 3 trials, 189 participants). We downgraded this evidence to low certainty due to serious indirectness (diversity in definition and timing of outcome measurement) and serious imprecision (small number of events). We are less certain if the risk of serious or total adverse events increased with arthroscopic surgery compared to placebo or non-surgical interventions. Serious adverse events were reported in 6 out of 100 people in the control groups and 8 out of 100 people in the arthroscopy groups from eight trials (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.83; I = 47%; 8 trials, 1206 participants). Fifteen out of 100 people reported adverse events with control interventions, and 17 out of 100 people with surgery at up to five years (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.70; I = 48%; 9 trials, 1326 participants). The certainty of the evidence was low, downgraded twice due to serious imprecision (small number of events) and possible reporting bias (incomplete reporting of outcome across studies). Serious adverse events included death, pulmonary embolism, acute myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis and deep infection. Subsequent knee surgery (replacement or high tibial osteotomy) was reported in 2 out of 100 people in the control groups and 4 out of 100 people in the arthroscopy surgery groups at up to five years in four trials (RR 2.63, 95% CI 0.94 to 7.34; I = 11%; 4 trials, 864 participants). The certainty of the evidence was low, downgraded twice due to the small number of events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Arthroscopic surgery provides little or no clinically important benefit in pain or function, probably does not provide clinically important benefits in knee-specific quality of life, and may not improve treatment success compared with a placebo procedure. It may lead to little or no difference, or a slight increase, in serious and total adverse events compared to control, but the evidence is of low certainty. Whether or not arthroscopic surgery results in slightly more subsequent knee surgery (replacement or osteotomy) compared to control remains unresolved.
Topics: Aged; Arthroscopy; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35238404
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014328 -
Medicine Dec 2021Long term management of patients with stable coronary artery disease of >1 year after myocardial infarction (MI) or percutaneous coronary intervention and atrial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Long term management of patients with stable coronary artery disease of >1 year after myocardial infarction (MI) or percutaneous coronary intervention and atrial fibrillation is unclear. Current guidelines recommend using oral anti-coagulation (OAC) alone although the recommendation is weak and there is low quality evidence. Two new randomized control trials (RCTs) were published recently. We conducted an updated meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of these studies on patient outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of published RCTs and observational studies to compare OAC alone versus OAC plus single anti-platelet therapy.
METHODS
Electronic searches were conducted using appropriate terms from 3 databases. Relevant studies included. Data extracted and analysis were performed using STATA.
MEASUREMENTS
Summary statistics were pooled and measured for primary and secondary outcomes of both treatment arms.
MAIN RESULTS
Eight studies involving 10,120 patients were included for the analysis. Five thousand two hundred thirty-seven patients were on combination therapy while 4883 were on OAC alone. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome of major adverse cardiac events (hazard ratio [HR] 1.067; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.912-1.249; P value .417). There was no statistically significant difference even in the measured secondary outcomes namely all cause mortality (HR 1.048; 95% CI 0.830-1.323; P value .695), cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.863; 95% CI 0.593-1.254; P value .439). However, we found statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in the incidence of MI with higher incidence in mono therapy group (HR 1.229; 95% CI 1.011-1.495; P value .039) and higher incidence of major bleeding in the combination therapy group in the subgroup analysis (HR 0.649; 95% CI 0.464-0.907; P value .011).
CONCLUSION
We found no reduction of major adverse cardiac event between combination therapy and mono therapy. Although mono therapy showed increased risk of major bleeding overall, subgroup analysis of the RCTs showed increased risk of major bleeding in the combination therapy group. MI was higher in the mono therapy group compared to the combination therapy group, however this outcome was not reproducible in the subgroup analysis of the RCTs.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Coronary Artery Disease; Hemorrhage; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Thrombosis
PubMed: 35049165
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000027498 -
Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.) Dec 2021Heart failure (HF) complicating acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a herald of adverse outcomes. In this systematic review, we investigated the prevalence of lung...
BACKGROUND
Heart failure (HF) complicating acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a herald of adverse outcomes. In this systematic review, we investigated the prevalence of lung ultrasound (LUS) findings and their prognostic utility among patients with ACS.
METHODS
We searched the online databases PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science for studies (full-text articles, published in English) that used LUS in adult patients with ACS [ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and unstable angina].
RESULTS
Of 462 studies screened, five prospective, observational investigations published between 2010 and 2021 including 1087 patients met our inclusion criteria. Two studies employed 28-zone imaging protocols whereas three used eight-zone protocols. The proportion of patients with a prior HF diagnosis was ≤ 5% in all studies. The prevalence of B-lines was examined prior to or within 12 hours after coronary angiogram and reporting varied between studies due to different imaging protocols or quantification methods. A higher number of B-lines on admission was associated with an increased risk for developing symptomatic HF during the baseline hospitalization and with a higher in-hospital mortality rate using either 8 or 28-zone protocols. A higher number of B-lines at baseline was also associated with an increased risk of subsequent HF hospitalization or all-cause death.
CONCLUSIONS
Pulmonary congestion by LUS performed on admission appears to be a common finding among patients hospitalized for ACS and is associated with adverse in-hospital and long-term outcomes. Further investigations using standardized LUS protocols are warranted and have the potential to improve risk stratification in ACS.
Topics: Acute Coronary Syndrome; Adult; Humans; Lung; Prevalence; Prognosis; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 34845749
DOI: 10.1111/echo.15262