-
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2024The benefits of low-dose esketamine for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy remain unclear. As such, the present study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of...
The benefits of low-dose esketamine for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy remain unclear. As such, the present study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of low-dose esketamine for this procedure. Seven common databases were searched for clinical studies investigating low-dose esketamine for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was performed to synthesize and analyze the data extracted from studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis revealed that, compared with propofol, low-dose esketamine in combination with propofol significantly reduced recovery time by 0.56 min (mean difference [MD] -0.56%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.08 to -0.05, = 0.03), induction time by 9.84 s (MD -9.84, 95% CI -12.93 to -6.75, < 0.00001), propofol dosage by 51.05 mg (MD -51.05, 95% CI -81.53 to -20.57, = 0.01), and increased mean arterial pressure by 6.23 mmHg (MD 6.23, 95% CI 1.37 to 11.08, = 0.01). Meanwhile, low-dose esketamine reduced injection pain by 63% (relative risk [RR] 0.37, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.49, < 0.00001), involuntary movements by 40% (RR 0.60, 95% Cl 0.42 to 0.85, < 0.005), choking by 42% (RR 0.58, 95% Cl 0.38 to 0.88, = 0.01), bradycardia by 68% (RR 0.32, 95% Cl 0.18 to 0.58, = 0.0002), hypotension by 71% (RR 0.29, 95% Cl 0.21 to 0.40, < 0.00001), respiratory depression by 63% (RR 0.37, 95% 0.26 to 0.51, < 0.00001), additional cases of propofol by 53% (RR 0.47, 95% Cl 0.29 to 0.77, = 0.002), and increased hypertension by 1000% (RR 11.00, 95% Cl 1.45 to 83.28, = 0.02). There were no significant differences in mean heart rate, mean oximetry saturation, delirium, dizziness, vomiting, tachycardia, and hypoxemia. Subgroup analyses revealed that, compared with other dose groups, 0.25 mg/kg esketamine afforded additional benefits in recovery and induction time, mean arterial pressure, involuntary movements, hypoxemia, and respiratory depression. Low-dose esketamine was found to be safe and effective for providing anesthesia during gastrointestinal endoscopy, with 0.25 mg/kg identified as the optimal dose within the dosage ranges examined. However, caution should be exercised when administering this drug to patients with inadequate preoperative blood pressure control.
PubMed: 38645560
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1364546 -
Medical Science Monitor : International... Apr 2024BACKGROUND Economic evaluation of the testing strategies to control transmission and monitor the severity of COVID-19 after the pandemic is essential. This study aimed...
BACKGROUND Economic evaluation of the testing strategies to control transmission and monitor the severity of COVID-19 after the pandemic is essential. This study aimed to review the economic evaluation of COVID-19 tests and to construct a model with outcomes in terms of cost and test acceptability for surveillance in the post-pandemic period in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries. MATERIAL AND METHODS We performed the systematic review following PRISMA guidelines through MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. We included the relevant studies that reported the economic evaluation of COVID-19 tests for surveillance. Also, we input current probability, sensitivity, and specificity for COVID-19 surveillance in the post-pandemic period. RESULTS A total of 104 articles met the eligibility criteria, and 8 articles were reviewed and assessed for quality. The specificity and sensitivity of COVID-19 screening tests were reported as 80% to 90% and 40% to 90%, respectively. The target population presented a mortality rate between 0.2% and 19.2% in the post-pandemic period. The implementation model of COVID-19 screening tests for surveillance with a cost mean for molecular and antigen tests was US$ 46.64 (min-max US $0.25-$105.39) and US $6.15 (min-max US $2-$10), respectively. CONCLUSIONS For the allocation budget for the COVID-19 surveillance test, it is essential to consider the incidence and mortality of the post-pandemic period in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries. A robust method to evaluate outcomes is needed to prevent increasing COVID-19 incidents earlier.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Developed Countries; Income; Poverty
PubMed: 38643358
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.943863 -
Frontiers in Microbiology 2024Hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS) is an acute infectious disease comprising five stages: fever, hypotension, oliguria, diuresis (polyuria), and convalescence....
INTRODUCTION
Hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS) is an acute infectious disease comprising five stages: fever, hypotension, oliguria, diuresis (polyuria), and convalescence. Increased vascular permeability, coagulopathy, and renal injury are typical clinical features of HFRS, which has a case fatality rate of 1-15%. Despite this, a comprehensive meta-analyses of the clinical characteristics of patients who died from HFRS is lacking.
METHODS
Eleven Chinese- and English-language research databases were searched, including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Wanfang Database, SinoMed, VIP Database, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Proquest, and Ovid, up to October 5, 2023. The search focused on clinical features of patients who died from HFRS. The extracted data were analyzed using STATA 14.0.
RESULTS
A total of 37 articles on 140,295 patients with laboratory-confirmed HFRS were included. Categorizing patients into those who died and those who survived, it was found that patients who died were older and more likely to smoke, have hypertension, and have diabetes. Significant differences were also observed in the clinical manifestations of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, shock, occurrence of overlapping disease courses, cerebral edema, cerebral hemorrhage, toxic encephalopathy, convulsions, arrhythmias, heart failure, dyspnea, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary infection, liver damage, gastrointestinal bleeding, acute kidney injury, and urine protein levels. Compared to patients who survived, those who died were more likely to demonstrate elevated leukocyte count; decreased platelet count; increased lactate dehydrogenase, alanine aminotransferase, and aspartate aminotransferase levels; prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time and prothrombin time; and low albumin and chloride levels and were more likely to use continuous renal therapy. Interestingly, patients who died received less dialysis and had shorter average length of hospital stay than those who survived.
CONCLUSION
Older patients and those with histories of smoking, hypertension, diabetes, central nervous system damage, heart damage, liver damage, kidney damage, or multiorgan dysfunction were at a high risk of death. The results can be used to assess patients' clinical presentations and assist with prognostication.https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, (CRD42023454553).
PubMed: 38638893
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2024.1329683 -
Biomedical Reports May 2024Abrocitinib is a highly selective Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor that can block a multitude of inflammatory signaling pathways that underlie atopic dermatitis (AD). In...
Effects of abrocitinib on pruritus and eczema symptoms and tolerance in patients with moderate‑to‑severe atopic dermatitis in randomized, double‑blind and placebo‑controlled trials: A systematic review and a meta‑analysis.
Abrocitinib is a highly selective Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor that can block a multitude of inflammatory signaling pathways that underlie atopic dermatitis (AD). In addition, abrocitinib inhibits JAK1 signaling in sensory neurons to alleviate acute and chronic pruritus during AD. However, substantial variations in efficacy and safety risks remain due to variations in doses applied in clinical use. Therefore for the present study, differences in the efficacy and tolerability of 100 and 200 mg abrocitinib for treating pruritus and eczema symptoms in patients with moderate-to-severe AD were evaluated compared with placebo. Specifically, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of abrocitinib compared with placebo for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD were searched on Pubmed, E.B. Stephens Company, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Medical network, Web of Science and related Clinical Trials Registry up to November 2023. In total, two researchers evaluated the quality of the included literature according to the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews. RevMan 5.3 software was used to conduct a meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety indicators in a cross-comparison of the effects exerted by placebo and 100 and 200 mg abrocitinib. A total of 1,825 patients with moderate-to-severe AD were included across five double-blind, placebo RCTs. Compared with the placebo group, during the double-blind trial period, significant improvements were observed in the investigator's global assessment score, response rate of eczema area and severity index (EASI)-50, EASI-75, EASI-90 and pruritus numerical rating scale (P-NRS) in the 100 and 200 mg abrocitinib groups (P<0.05). However, pairwise control analysis of the 100 and 200 mg group yielded significant differences (P<0.05) in all of the aforementioned therapeutic indicators except for the P-NRS score. In terms of safety, compared with the placebo group, there were significantly higher incidence of nausea, upper respiratory tract viral infection, infections and infestations in the 100 mg abrocitinib group (P<0.05). In addition, there were significantly higher incidence of nausea, gastrointestinal disorder, headache and dizziness in the 200 mg group (P<0.05). There were also significant differences in the incidence of nausea, gastrointestinal disorder and dizziness between the 100 and 200 mg groups (P<0.05). For patients with moderate-to-severe AD, oral administration of 100 or 200 mg abrocitinib once/day was concluded to ameliorate skin pruritus and eczema symptoms to varying degrees, with the efficacy significantly superior at the 200 mg dose. However, the risk of a number of adverse reactions, such as headache, dizziness, nausea and gastrointestinal dysfunction, is also significantly increased. Therefore, patients should be made aware of the risk of adverse drug effects prior to the administration of long-term high abrocitinib doses. Furthermore, large-scale, multi-center, rigorous clinical trials remain necessary to validate the findings from the present study.
PubMed: 38628626
DOI: 10.3892/br.2024.1772 -
Trends in Anaesthesia & Critical Care Jun 2023Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, which was first discovered in Wuhan, China. The disease has grown into a global... (Review)
Review
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, which was first discovered in Wuhan, China. The disease has grown into a global pandemic causing mild to moderate symptoms in most people. The disease can also exhibit serious illnesses, especially for patients with other chronic diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, or cancer. In such cases of severe illness, high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) has been used to provide oxygenation to COVID-19 patients. However, the efficiency of HFNO remains uncertain, prompting the conduction of this systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of the therapy. A thorough search for relevant and original articles was carried out on five electronic databases, including ScienceDirect, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar. No time limitation was placed during the search as it included all the articles related to COVID-19 from 2019 to 2022. The search strategy utilized in this systematic review yielded 504 articles, of which only 10 met the eligibility criteria and were included. Our meta-analysis reveals that HFNO success rate was higher than HFNO failure rates (0.52 (95% CI; 0.47, 0.56) and 0.48 (95% CI; 0.44, 0.53), respectively), however, the difference was statistically insignificant. HFNO was associated with a significant decrease in mortality and intubation rates (0.28 (95% CI; 0.19, 0.39) and 0.28 (95% CI; 0.18, 0.41), respectively). Our statistical analysis has shown that significantly lower ROX index (5.07 ± 1.66, p = 0.028) and PaO/FiO (100 ± 27.51, p = 0.031) are associated with HFNO failure, while a significantly lower respiratory rate (RR) (23.17 ± 4.167, p = 0.006) is associated with HFNO success. No statistically significant difference was observed in SpO/FiO ratio between the HFNO success and failure groups (154.23 ± 42.74 vs. 124.025 ± 28.50, p = 0.62, respectively). Based on the results from our meta-analysis, the success or failure of HFNO in treating COVID-19 adult patients remains uncertain. However, HFNO has been shown to be an effective treatment in reducing mortality and intubation rates. Therefore, HFNO can be recommended for COVID-19 patients but with close monitoring and should be carried out by experienced healthcare workers.
PubMed: 38620122
DOI: 10.1016/j.tacc.2023.101238 -
World Journal of Virology Mar 2024Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have shown clinical benefits against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2...
BACKGROUND
Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have shown clinical benefits against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Several studies have reported the use of bamlanivimab as a promising treatment option for COVID-19.
AIM
To synthesize the latest evidence for the efficacy and safety of bamlanivimab alone in the treatment of adult patients with COVID-19.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar using "SARS-CoV-2", "COVID-19", "LY-CoV555", and "Bamlanivimab" keywords up to January 25, 2023. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane bias tools. The Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 3.0 was used to analyze the data.
RESULTS
A total of 30 studies involving 47368 patients were included. A significant difference was observed between the bamlanivimab and standard of care/placebo groups in terms of mortality rate [risk ratio (RR) = 50, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.70], hospitalization rate (RR = 0.51; 95%CI: 0.39-0.68), and emergency department (ED) visits (RR = 0.69; 95%CI: 0.47-0.99); while the two groups exhibited no significant difference in terms of intensive care unit (ICU) admission ( > 0.05). Compared to other mAbs, bamlanivimab was associated with a higher rate of hospitalization (RR = 1.44; 95%CI: 1.07-1.94). However, no significant difference was detected between the bamlanivimab and other mAbs groups in terms of mortality rate, ICU admission, and ED ( > 0.05). The incidence of any adverse events was similar between the bamlanivimab and control groups ( > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Although the results suggest the efficacy and safety of bamlanivimab in COVID-19 patients, further research is required to confirm the efficacy of this drug for the current circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants.
PubMed: 38616851
DOI: 10.5501/wjv.v13.i1.88660 -
BMJ Evidence-based Medicine Apr 2024To compare the efficacy of influenza vaccines of any valency for adults 60 years and older.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy of influenza vaccines of any valency for adults 60 years and older.
DESIGN AND SETTING
Systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). MEDLINE, EMBASE, JBI Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Database, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Evidence -Based Medicine database were searched from inception to 20 June 20, 2022. Two reviewers screened, abstracted, and appraised articles (Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) 2.0 tool) independently. We assessed certainty of findings using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approaches. We performed random-effects meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA), and estimated odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for count outcomes along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and prediction intervals.
PARTICIPANTS
Older adults (≥60 years old) receiving an influenza vaccine licensed in Canada or the USA (vs placebo, no vaccine, or any other licensed vaccine), at any dose.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Laboratory-confirmed influenza (LCI) and influenza-like illness (ILI). Secondary outcomes were the number of vascular adverse events, hospitalisation for acute respiratory infection (ARI) and ILI, inpatient hospitalisation, emergency room (ER) visit for ILI, outpatient visit, and mortality, among others.
RESULTS
We included 41 RCTs and 15 companion reports comprising 8 vaccine types and 206 032 participants. Vaccines may prevent LCI compared with placebo, with high-dose trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3-HD) (NMA: 9 RCTs, 52 202 participants, OR 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.11 to 0.51), low certainty of evidence) and recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV) (OR 0.25, 95%CI (0.08 to 0.73), low certainty of evidence) among the most efficacious vaccines. Standard dose trivalent IIV3 (IIV3-SD) may prevent ILI compared with placebo, but the result was imprecise (meta-analysis: 2 RCTs, 854 participants, OR 0.39, 95%CI (0.15 to 1.02), low certainty of evidence). Any HD was associated with prevention of ILI compared with placebo (NMA: 9 RCTs, 65 658 participants, OR 0.38, 95%CI (0.15 to 0.93)). Adjuvanted quadrivalent IIV (IIV4-Adj) may be associated with the least vascular adverse events, but the results were very uncertain (NMA: eight 8 RCTs, 57 677 participants, IRR 0.18, 95%CI (0.07 to 0.43), very low certainty of evidence). RIV on all-cause mortality may be comparable to placebo (NMA: 20 RCTs, 140 577 participants, OR 1.01, 95%CI (0.23 to 4.49), low certainty of evidence).
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review demonstrated efficacy associated with IIV3-HD and RIV vaccines in protecting older persons against LCI. RIV vaccine may reduce all-cause mortality when compared with other vaccines, but the evidence is uncertain. Differences in efficacy between influenza vaccines remain uncertain with very low to moderate certainty of evidence.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42020177357.
PubMed: 38604619
DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112767 -
Heart & Lung : the Journal of Critical... 2024Oxygen therapy constitutes a crucial element of post-cardiac operative care. The study assessed the effectiveness of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in comparison to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Oxygen therapy constitutes a crucial element of post-cardiac operative care. The study assessed the effectiveness of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in comparison to conventional oxygen therapy (COT).
OBJECTIVES
The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of HFNC in comparison to COT for adult patients following cardiac surgery.
METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive search of Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception until April 18, 2023, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and crossover studies that compared the efficacy of HFNC with COT in adult patients following cardiac surgery.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included nine studies, consisting of eight RCTs and one crossover study. Compared with COT, HFNC could reduce the need for escalation of respiratory support (RR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.93, P = 0.02), decrease arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO) levels (MD -3.14, 95% CI: -4.90 to -1.39, P<0.001), and increase forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV) levels (MD 0.08, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.15, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the HFNC and COT groups in terms of mortality, intubation rate, respiratory rate, heart rate, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO), forced vital capacity, and complications of atrial fibrillation and delirium.
CONCLUSION
Compared with COT, HFNC could decrease the need for escalation of respiratory support, lower PaCO levels, and elevate FEV levels in patients following cardiac surgery.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Cannula; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Postoperative Care
PubMed: 38582067
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2024.03.008 -
PloS One 2024Mechanical ventilation is commonly used for managing respiratory failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, but weaning patients off ventilator...
High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy versus Non-Invasive Ventilation in patients at very high risk for extubating failure: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Mechanical ventilation is commonly used for managing respiratory failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, but weaning patients off ventilator support can be challenging and associated with complications. While many patients respond well to Non-invasive ventilation (NIV), a significant proportion may not respond as favourably. We aimed to assess whether high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is equally effective as NIV in reducing extubation failure among previously intubated COPD patients.
METHODS
This systematic review was carried out in line with PRISMA guidelines We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane library from inception until February 15, 2023. Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) of adults at high risk for extubating failure were included. We examined the use of HFNC as the intervention and NIV as the comparator. Our outcome of interest included, reintubation rate, length of hospital or intensive care unit (ICU) stay, adverse events, and time to reintubation. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for randomized trials to assess risk of bias.
RESULTS
We identified 348 citations, 11 of which were included, representing 2,666 patients. The trials indicate that HFNC is comparable to NIV in preventing reintubation after extubating in COPD patients. In comparison to NIV, HFNC also produced improved tolerance, comfort, and less complications such as airway care interventions. NIV with active humification may be more effective that HFNC in avoiding reintubation in patients who are at extremely high risk for extubating failure.
CONCLUSION
The inconclusive nature of emerging evidence highlights the need for additional studies to establish the efficacy and suitability of HFNC as an alternative to NIV for previously intubated COPD patients. Clinicians should consider the available options and individualize their approach based on patient characteristics. Future research should focus on addressing these gaps in knowledge to guide clinical decision-making and optimize outcomes for this patient population.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Noninvasive Ventilation; Respiration, Artificial; Cannula; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Respiratory Insufficiency; Oxygen
PubMed: 38568930
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299693 -
Acta Medica Indonesiana Jan 2024Asthma is a disease characterized by chronic airway inflammation, however one-third of asthmatic cases did not respond adequately. Inhaled magnesium has been proposed as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Asthma is a disease characterized by chronic airway inflammation, however one-third of asthmatic cases did not respond adequately. Inhaled magnesium has been proposed as a treatment for unresponsive asthma cases. However, its role remains controversial. This review evaluates the effectiveness and safety of nebulized magnesium compared to standard therapy (Beta Agonist, Anticholinergic, Corticosteroid) in adults with acute asthma attacks.
METHODS
The protocol has been registered in PROSPERO. A literature search was conducted through PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane, ProQuest, and Google Scholar, and using the keywords "inhaled magnesium" and "asthma". Manual searches were carried out through data portals. Journal articles included are randomized controlled trials. The assessment risk of bias was performed using Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials.
RESULTS
There are five articles included in this review. There is no significant difference in readmission rate and oxygen saturation in the magnesium group compared to control (RR 1; 95% CI 0.92 to 1,08; p= 0,96 and MD 1,82; 95% CI -0.89 to 4.53; p= 0.19, respectively). There is a significant reduction of respiratory rate and clinical severity in magnesium (MD -1,72; 95% CI -3,1 to 0.35; p= 0.01, RR 0.29; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.69; p <0.001, respectively). There was a higher risk of side effects in the magnesium group (HR 1.56; 95%CI 1.05 to 2.32; p= 0.03). However, the side effects are relatively mild such as hypotension and nausea.
CONCLUSION
Inhaled magnesium improves the outcome of asthmatic patients, especially in lung function, clinical severity, and respiratory rate. Moreover, inhaled magnesium is safe to be given.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Magnesium; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Hospitalization; Drug Therapy, Combination
PubMed: 38561891
DOI: No ID Found