-
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders May 2024Despite their continued use, the effectiveness and safety of vasopressors in post-cardiac arrest patients remain controversial. This study examined the efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE
Despite their continued use, the effectiveness and safety of vasopressors in post-cardiac arrest patients remain controversial. This study examined the efficacy of various vasopressors in cardiac arrest patients in terms of clinical, morbidity, and mortality outcomes.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed using online databases (MeSH terms: MEDLINE (Ovid), CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, Scopus, and Google Scholar) from 1997 to 2023 for relevant English language studies. The primary outcomes of interest for this study included short-term survival leading to death, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital discharge, neurological outcomes, survival to hospital admission, myocardial infarction, and incidence of arrhythmias.
RESULTS
In this meta-analysis, 26 studies, including 16 RCTs and ten non-RCTs, were evaluated. The focus was on the efficacy of epinephrine, vasopressin, methylprednisolone, dopamine, and their combinations in medical emergencies. Epinephrine treatment was associated with better odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 1.52, 95%CI [1.20, 1.94]; p < 0.001) and achieving ROSC (OR = 3.60, 95% CI [3.45, 3.76], P < 0.00001)) over placebo but not in other outcomes of interest such as short-term survival/ death at 28-30 days, survival to hospital admission, or neurological function. In addition, our analysis indicates non-superiority of vasopressin or epinephrine vasopressin-plus-epinephrine therapy over epinephrine monotherapy except for survival to hospital admission where the combinatorial therapy was associated with better outcome (0.76, 95%CI [0.64, 0.92]; p = 0.004). Similarly, we noted the non-superiority of vasopressin-plus-methylprednisolone versus placebo. Finally, while higher odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 3.35, 95%CI [1.81, 6.2]; p < 0.001) and ROSC (OR = 2.87, 95%CI [1.97, 4.19]; p < 0.001) favoring placebo over VSE therapy were observed, the risk of lethal arrhythmia was not statistically significant. There was insufficient literature to assess the effects of dopamine versus other treatment modalities meta-analytically.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis indicated that only epinephrine yielded superior outcomes among vasopressors than placebo, albeit limited to survival to hospital discharge and ROSC. Additionally, we demonstrate the non-superiority of vasopressin over epinephrine, although vasopressin could not be compared to placebo due to the paucity of data. The addition of vasopressin to epinephrine treatment only improved survival to hospital admission.
Topics: Humans; Vasoconstrictor Agents; Treatment Outcome; Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest; Risk Factors; Return of Spontaneous Circulation; Male; Middle Aged; Female; Aged; Time Factors; Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation; Epinephrine; Recovery of Function; Risk Assessment; Vasopressins; Patient Discharge; Adult
PubMed: 38816786
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-024-03962-4 -
Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine... Jul 2024We aimed to comprehensively assess the safety and efficacy of mavacamten in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
We aimed to comprehensively assess the safety and efficacy of mavacamten in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) patients.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, and efficacy [changes in postexercise left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) gradient, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), peak oxygen consumption (pVO 2 ), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ CSS), and the proportion of patients exhibiting an improvement of at least one New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class from baseline)], safety (total count of treatment-emergent adverse events and SAEs, as well as the proportion of patients experiencing at least one adverse event or SAE), and cardiac biomarkers (NT-proBNP and cTnI) outcomes were evaluated.
RESULTS
We incorporated data from four randomized controlled trials, namely EXPLORER-HCM, VALOR-HCM, MAVERICK-HCM, and EXPLORER-CN. Mavacamten demonstrated significant efficacy in reducing the postexercise LVOT gradient by 49.44 mmHg ( P = 0.0001) and LVEF by 3.84 ( P < 0.0001) and improving pVO 2 by 0.69 ml/kg/min ( P = 0.4547), KCCQ CSS by 8.11 points ( P < 0.0001), and patients with at least one NYHA functional class improvement from baseline by 2.20 times ( P < 0.0001). Importantly, mavacamten increased 1.11-fold adverse events ( P = 0.0184) 4.24-fold reduced LVEF to less than 50% ( P = 0.0233) and 1.06-fold SAEs ( P = 0.8631). Additionally, mavacamten decreased NT-proBNP by 528.62 ng/l ( P < 0.0001) and cTnI by 8.28 ng/l ( P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION
Mavacamten demonstrates both safety and efficacy in patients with HCM, suggesting its potential as a promising therapeutic strategy for this condition. Further research is warranted to confirm these results and explore its long-term effects.
Topics: Humans; Cardiomyopathy, Hypertrophic; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ventricular Function, Left; Stroke Volume; Middle Aged; Male; Female; Natriuretic Peptide, Brain; Pyrimidines; Exercise Tolerance; Biomarkers; Adult; Recovery of Function; Oxygen Consumption; Aged; Benzylamines; Uracil
PubMed: 38814051
DOI: 10.2459/JCM.0000000000001638 -
Annals of Medicine Dec 2024Tension-type headache is the most common type of primary headache and results in a huge socioeconomic burden. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Tension-type headache is the most common type of primary headache and results in a huge socioeconomic burden. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of simple analgesics for the treatment of episodic tension-type headache (ETTH) in adults.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Chinese BioMedical Literature database and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform databases for eligible randomized clinical trials reporting the efficacy and/or safety of simple analgesics. A Bayesian NMA was performed to compare relative efficacy and safety. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated to rank interventions. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018090554.
RESULTS
We highlighted six studies including 3507 patients. For the 2 h pain-free rate, the SUCRA ranking was ibuprofen > diclofenac-K > ketoprofen > acetaminophen > naproxen > placebo. All drugs except naproxen reported a higher 2 h pain-free rate than placebo, with a risk ratio (RR) of 2.86 (95% credible interval, CrI: 1.62-5.42) for ibuprofen and 2.61 (1.53-4.88) for diclofenac-K. For adverse events rate, the SUCRA ranking was: metamizol > diclofenac-K > ibuprofen > lumiracoxib > placebo > aspirin > acetaminophen > naproxen > ketoprofen. The adverse event rates of all analgesics were no higher than those of placebo, except for ketoprofen. Moreover, all drugs were superior to placebo in the global assessment of efficacy. In particular, the RR of lumiracoxib was 2.47 (1.57-4.57). Global heterogeneity between the studies was low.
CONCLUSIONS
Simple analgesics are considered more effective and safe as a placebo for ETTH in adults. Our results suggest that ibuprofen and diclofenac-K may be the two best treatment options for patients with ETTH from a comprehensive point of view (both high-quality evidence).
Topics: Humans; Tension-Type Headache; Analgesics; Adult; Network Meta-Analysis; Ibuprofen; Acetaminophen; Bayes Theorem; Treatment Outcome; Diclofenac; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Naproxen; Ketoprofen; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Female; Male
PubMed: 38813682
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2024.2357235 -
Journal of Medicine and Life Feb 2024Surgical interventions, such as laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), are frequently associated with significant weight loss. However, the initiation and maintenance of... (Review)
Review
Surgical interventions, such as laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), are frequently associated with significant weight loss. However, the initiation and maintenance of this weight reduction are multifaceted processes influenced by genetic, psychological, behavioral, dietary, and metabolic factors. This review examined the role of metabolic hormones, specifically serotonin, in sustaining weight loss post-LSG. A systematic evaluation of six research articles obtained from Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane was conducted, focusing on the role of serotonin in weight loss maintenance. We included randomized controlled trials involving adults over 18 years. Studies lacking an intensive weight regulation approach were excluded. Information was systematically extracted and analyzed from the selected studies, with data on intervention and control groups summarized in tables to compare outcomes one year post-LSG. The findings revealed a complex interplay between serotonin and its role in weight maintenance after sleeve gastrectomy. While some studies demonstrated successful weight loss maintenance with serotonin intervention, the systematic review found no association between serotonin and weight loss maintenance. Factors beyond serotonin levels, including individual motivation, behavioral strategies, and physical activity, were identified as crucial contributors to sustained weight loss. While the results may not demonstrate a recognizable association between serotonin and weight loss maintenance, the significance of this review lies in its contribution to the existing body of knowledge. By synthesizing current evidence, the study adds a nuanced perspective to understanding factors influencing post-LSG outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Serotonin; Gastrectomy; Weight Loss
PubMed: 38813365
DOI: 10.25122/jml-2023-0356 -
Obesity Surgery Jul 2024This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of pre and intraoperative lidocaine infusion on short-term recovery quality after laparoscopic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of pre and intraoperative lidocaine infusion on short-term recovery quality after laparoscopic bariatric surgeries. In the search across MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases, we considered randomized controlled trials comparing intravenous lidocaine vs placebo (saline) for patients with obesity undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Seven studies (640 patients) were included. The lidocaine group had a significantly higher recovery quality score, a lower morphine consumption, and a notably reduced rate of nausea and vomiting compared with the placebo group. Additionally, Lidocaine infusion was associated with a shorter hospital stay, while no significant difference was observed in the time to bowel function recovery between both groups. In conclusion, lidocaine infusion before and during laparoscopic bariatric surgery contributes to an enhanced quality of recovery.
Topics: Humans; Anesthetics, Local; Bariatric Surgery; Infusions, Intravenous; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Lidocaine; Obesity, Morbid; Pain, Postoperative; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recovery of Function; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38780836
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-024-07300-7 -
BMJ Paediatrics Open May 2024There exists limited agreement on the recommendations for the treatment of transitional circulatory instability (TCI) in preterm neonates OBJECTIVE: To compare the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Comparative efficacy of volume expansion, inotropes and vasopressors in preterm neonates with probable transitional circulatory instability in the first week of life: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
There exists limited agreement on the recommendations for the treatment of transitional circulatory instability (TCI) in preterm neonates OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of various interventions used to treat TCI METHODS: Medline and Embase were searched from inception to 21 July 2023. Two authors extracted the data independently. A Bayesian random effects network meta-analysis was used. Recommendations were formulated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework.
INTERVENTIONS
Dopamine, dobutamine, epinephrine, hydrocortisone, vasopressin, milrinone, volume and placebo.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Mortality, major brain injury (MBI) (intraventricular haemorrhage > grade 2 or cystic periventricular leukomalacia), necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) ≥stage 2 and treatment response (as defined by the author).
RESULTS
15 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) were included from the 1365 titles and abstracts screened. Clinical benefit or harm could not be ruled out for the critical outcome of mortality. For the outcome of MBI, epinephrine possibly decreased the risk when compared to dobutamine and milrinone (very low certainty). Epinephrine was possibly associated with a lesser risk of NEC when compared with dopamine, dobutamine, hydrocortisone and milrinone (very low certainty). Dopamine was possibly associated with a lesser risk of NEC when compared with dobutamine (very low certainty). Vasopressin possibly decreased the risk of NEC compared with dopamine, dobutamine, hydrocortisone and milrinone (very low certainty). Clinical benefit or harm could not be ruled out for the outcome response to treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
Epinephrine may be used as the first-line drug in preterm neonates with TCI, the evidence certainty being very low. We suggest future trials evaluating the management of TCI with an emphasis on objective criteria to define it.
Topics: Humans; Infant, Newborn; Cardiotonic Agents; Vasoconstrictor Agents; Infant, Premature; Network Meta-Analysis; Infant, Premature, Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Dobutamine
PubMed: 38769048
DOI: 10.1136/bmjpo-2024-002500 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2024Acute traumatic stress symptoms may develop in people who have been exposed to a traumatic event. Although they are usually self-limiting in time, some people develop... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute traumatic stress symptoms may develop in people who have been exposed to a traumatic event. Although they are usually self-limiting in time, some people develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a severe and debilitating condition. Pharmacological interventions have been proposed for acute symptoms to act as an indicated prevention measure for PTSD development. As many individuals will spontaneously remit, these interventions should balance efficacy and tolerability.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and acceptability of early pharmacological interventions for prevention of PTSD in adults experiencing acute traumatic stress symptoms.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trial Register (CCMDCTR), CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two other databases. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and relevant systematic reviews. The search was last updated on 23 January 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials on adults exposed to any kind of traumatic event and presenting acute traumatic stress symptoms, without restriction on their severity. We considered comparisons of any medication with placebo, or with another medication. We excluded trials that investigated medications as an augmentation to psychotherapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Using a random-effects model, we analysed dichotomous data as risk ratios (RR) and calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial/harmful outcome (NNTB/NNTH). We analysed continuous data as mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD). Our primary outcomes were PTSD severity and dropouts due to adverse events. Secondary outcomes included PTSD rate, functional disability and quality of life.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight studies that considered four interventions (escitalopram, hydrocortisone, intranasal oxytocin, temazepam) and involved a total of 779 participants. The largest trial contributed 353 participants and the next largest, 120 and 118 participants respectively. The trials enrolled participants admitted to trauma centres or emergency departments. The risk of bias in the included studies was generally low except for attrition rate, which we rated as high-risk. We could meta-analyse data for two comparisons: escitalopram versus placebo (but limited to secondary outcomes) and hydrocortisone versus placebo. One study compared escitalopram to placebo at our primary time point of three months after the traumatic event. There was inconclusive evidence of any difference in terms of PTSD severity (mean difference (MD) on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS, score range 0 to 136) -11.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) -24.56 to 1.86; 1 study, 23 participants; very low-certainty evidence), dropouts due to adverse events (no participant left the study early due to adverse events; 1 study, 31 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and PTSD rates (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.03 to 13.08; NNTB 37, 95% CI NNTB 15 to NNTH 1; 1 study, 23 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not assess functional disability or quality of life. Three studies compared hydrocortisone to placebo at our primary time point of three months after the traumatic event. We found inconclusive evidence on whether hydrocortisone was more effective in reducing the severity of PTSD symptoms compared to placebo (MD on CAPS -7.53, 95% CI -25.20 to 10.13; I = 85%; 3 studies, 136 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and whether it reduced the risk of developing PTSD (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.38; NNTB 14, 95% CI NNTB 8 to NNTH 5; I = 36%; 3 studies, 136 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Evidence on the risk of dropping out due to adverse events is inconclusive (RR 3.19, 95% CI 0.13 to 75.43; 2 studies, 182 participants; low-certainty evidence) and it is unclear whether hydrocortisone might improve quality of life (MD on the SF-36 (score range 0 to 136, higher is better) 19.70, 95% CI -1.10 to 40.50; 1 study, 43 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No study assessed functional disability.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review provides uncertain evidence regarding the use of escitalopram, hydrocortisone, intranasal oxytocin and temazepam for people with acute stress symptoms. It is therefore unclear whether these pharmacological interventions exert a positive or negative effect in this population. It is important to note that acute traumatic stress symptoms are often limited in time, and that the lack of data prevents the careful assessment of expected benefits against side effects that is therefore required. To yield stronger conclusions regarding both positive and negative outcomes, larger sample sizes are required. A common operational framework of criteria for inclusion and baseline assessment might help in better understanding who, if anyone, benefits from an intervention. As symptom severity alone does not provide the full picture of the impact of exposure to trauma, assessment of quality of life and functional impairment would provide a more comprehensive picture of the effects of the interventions. The assessment and reporting of side effects may facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of tolerability.
Topics: Humans; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Bias; Adult; Stress Disorders, Traumatic, Acute; Quality of Life; Citalopram; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Placebos
PubMed: 38767196
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013613.pub2 -
Progress in Neuro-psychopharmacology &... Jul 2024There are currently no reliable biomarkers to predict clinical response to pharmacological treatments of depressive disorders. Peripheral blood 5-hydroxytryptamine... (Review)
Review
There are currently no reliable biomarkers to predict clinical response to pharmacological treatments of depressive disorders. Peripheral blood 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT; serotonin) has been suggested as a biomarker of antidepressant treatment response, but there has not been an attempt to systematically summarize and evaluate the scientific evidence of this hypothesis. In this systematic review we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Twenty-six relevant studies investigating peripheral 5-HT as an antidepressant biomarker were identified. In all, we did not find robust support for an association between baseline 5-HT and treatment response. Several larger studies with lower risk of bias, however, showed that higher baseline 5-HT was associated with a greater antidepressant response to SSRIs, prompting future studies to investigate this hypothesis. Our results also confirm previous reports that SSRI treatment is associated with a decrease in peripheral 5-HT levels; however, we were not able to confirm that larger decreases of 5-HT are associated with better treatment outcome as results were inconclusive.
Topics: Humans; Serotonin; Antidepressive Agents; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Biomarkers; Treatment Outcome; Depressive Disorder
PubMed: 38762162
DOI: 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2024.111031 -
The Journal of Clinical Pediatric... May 2024Postoperative pain is generally a novel experience among paediatric patients. Topical anaesthetics, distraction procedures, and buffering of anaesthetic solutions have...
Postoperative pain is generally a novel experience among paediatric patients. Topical anaesthetics, distraction procedures, and buffering of anaesthetic solutions have been used in reducing the postoperative pain. In this review, the authors assessed various modalities used to alleviate postoperative pain in children's dental treatment under general anaesthesia. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) protocol were strictly adhered to in this systematic review. Specific keywords including postoperative pain, general anaesthesia, children, and dental extraction were used in the search for relevant randomized control trial studies in Web of Science, Scopus and PubMed, and included articles published until June 2021. From a total of 191 abstracts, 21 were reviewed. From the six studies with the usage of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) alone or in combination with paracetamol, four observed that the preoperative use of NSAIDs alone or in combination was better than paracetamol alone, one discovered preoperative intravenous paracetamol was better than postoperative intravenous paracetamol, and the remaining study found no difference among various groups. Of two studies comparing the usage of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with opioid analgesics, one stated intravenous fentanyl in combination was better, while the other study found no difference among groups. The results obtained in this review can be utilized by physicians to control postoperative pain in children undergoing dental treatment under general anaesthesia.
Topics: Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Anesthesia, General; Child; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Dental Care for Children; Acetaminophen; Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthesia, Dental; Tooth Extraction
PubMed: 38755977
DOI: 10.22514/jocpd.2024.054 -
PloS One 2024Recently, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of fluvoxamine have been successfully conducted for the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Recently, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of fluvoxamine have been successfully conducted for the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluvoxamine in patients with COVID-19.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for RCTs which were performed to evaluate fluvoxamine and placebo up to January 31, 2024. Review Manager 5.3 was used to perform meta-analysis. The risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) was analyzed and calculated with a random effect model.
RESULTS
We pooled 4,711 participants from six RCTs (2,382 in the fluvoxamine group and 2,329 in the placebo group). Compared to the placebo group, the fluvoxamine group had a significantly lower rate of clinical deterioration (RR, 0.73; P = 0.004; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.90; I2 = 0%) and hospitalization (RR, 0.76; P = 0.04; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.99; I2 = 0%). In the meantime, compared with the placebo group, fluvoxamine group did not show any higher risk of AEs (P = 0.13 and 0.91, respectively) in safety outcomes analysis. The subgroup analysis showed that fluvoxamine treatment performed more than 200 mg daily appears to be more effective than those performed less than 200 mg daily in reducing clinical deterioration and hospitalization risks, while not exhibiting higher AE and SAE risks than placebo group.
CONCLUSION
Fluvoxamine for patients with COVID-19, especially those who take 200 mg or more daily, is superior to the placebo group in reducing clinical deterioration and hospitalization, and did not show any higher risk of AEs and SAEs in safety concerns, which might be a promising intervention for COVID-19.
Topics: Fluvoxamine; Humans; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Treatment Outcome; Hospitalization
PubMed: 38753761
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300512