-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2017It has been proposed that body positioning in preterm infants, as compared with other, more invasive measures, may be an effective method of reducing clinically... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
It has been proposed that body positioning in preterm infants, as compared with other, more invasive measures, may be an effective method of reducing clinically significant apnoea.
OBJECTIVES
To determine effects of body positioning on cardiorespiratory parameters in spontaneously breathing preterm infants with clinically significant apnoea.Subgroup analyses examined effects of body positioning of spontaneously breathing preterm infants with apnoea from the following subgroups.• Gestational age < 28 weeks or birth weight less than 1000 grams.• Apnoea managed with methylxanthines.• Frequent apnoea (> 10 events/d).• Type of apnoea measured (central vs mixed vs obstructive)
SEARCH METHODS
We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group (CNRG) to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 10), MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to 14 November 2016), Embase (1980 to 14 November 2016) and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to 2016 November 14). We also searched clinical trials databases and conference proceedings for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled clinical trials with parallel, factorial or cross-over design comparing the impact of different body positions on apnoea in spontaneously breathing preterm infants were eligible for our review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We assessed trial quality, data extraction and synthesis of data using standard methods of the CNRG. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the quality of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
The search conducted in November 2016 identified no new studies. Five studies (N = 114) were eligible for inclusion. None of the individual studies nor meta-analyses showed a reduction in apnoea, bradycardia, oxygen desaturation or oxygen saturation with body positioning (supine vs prone; prone vs right lateral; prone vs left lateral; right lateral vs left lateral; prone horizontal vs prone head elevated; right lateral horizontal vs right lateral head elevated, left lateral horizontal vs left lateral head elevated).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found insufficient evidence to determine effects of body positioning on apnoea, bradycardia and oxygen saturation in preterm infants. No new studies have been conducted since the original review was published. Large, multi-centre studies are warranted to provide conclusive evidence, but it may be plausible to conclude that positioning of spontaneously breathing preterm infants has no effect on their cardiorespiratory parameters.
Topics: Apnea; Bradycardia; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Infant, Premature, Diseases; Oxygen Consumption; Patient Positioning; Posture; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration
PubMed: 28067942
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004951.pub3 -
Indian Heart Journal 2022Intravenous calcium channel blockers or beta-blockers are the preferred rate control medications for hemodynamically stable patients with atrial fibrillation with rapid... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Intravenous calcium channel blockers or beta-blockers are the preferred rate control medications for hemodynamically stable patients with atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular rate (AF-RVR) in the emergency department.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy of intravenous diltiazem and metoprolol for rate control and safety with respect to development of hypotension and bradycardia in patients with AF-RVR.
METHODS
For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases, and the clinicaltrials.gov registry between database inception and 30th May 2021. Articles were included if they compared efficacy and safety of diltiazem versus metoprolol in critically ill adult patients hospitalized with AF-RVR. Outcome measures were achievement of rate control, development of new hypotension, and bradycardia after drug administration.
RESULTS
Of 86 records identified, 14 were eligible, all of which had a low to moderate risk of overall bias. The meta-analysis (Mantel-Haenszel, random-effects model) showed that diltiazem use was associated with increased achievement of rate control target compared to metoprolol [14 studies, n = 1732, Odds Ratio (OR): 1.92; 95% Confidence Intervals (CI):1.26 to 2.90; I = 61%]. In the pooled analysis, no differences were seen in hypotension using diltiazem vs metoprolol [12 studies, n = 1477, OR: 0.96; 95% CI:0.61 to 1.52; I = 35%] or bradycardia [9 studies, n = 1203, OR: 2.44; 95% CI: 0.82 to 7.31; I = 48%].
CONCLUSIONS
Intravenous diltiazem is associated with increased achievement of rate control target in patients with AF-RVR compared to metoprolol, while both medications are associated with similar incidence of hypotension and bradycardia.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Diltiazem; Atrial Fibrillation; Metoprolol; Bradycardia; Hypotension; Heart Rate
PubMed: 36334652
DOI: 10.1016/j.ihj.2022.10.195 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2017Resistant hypertension is highly prevalent among the general hypertensive population and the clinical management of this condition remains problematic. Different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Resistant hypertension is highly prevalent among the general hypertensive population and the clinical management of this condition remains problematic. Different approaches, including a more intensified antihypertensive therapy, lifestyle modifications, or both, have largely failed to improve patients' outcomes and to reduce cardiovascular and renal risk. As renal sympathetic hyperactivity is a major driver of resistant hypertension, renal sympathetic ablation (renal denervation) has been recently proposed as a possible therapeutic alternative to treat this condition.
OBJECTIVES
We sought to evaluate the short- and long-term effects of renal denervation in individuals with resistant hypertension on clinical end points, including fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, hospital admissions, quality of life, blood pressure control, left ventricular hypertrophy, cardiovascular and metabolic profile, and kidney function, as well as the potential adverse events related to the procedure.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases to 17 February 2016 using relevant search terms: the Cochrane Hypertension Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and ClinicalTrials.gov SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared renal denervation to standard therapy or sham procedure to treat resistant hypertension, without language restriction.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently extracted data and assessed study risks of bias. We summarised treatment effects on available clinical outcomes and adverse events using random-effects meta-analyses. We assessed heterogeneity in estimated treatment effects using Chi² and I² statistics. We calculated summary treatment estimates as a mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes, and a risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, together with their 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
We found 12 eligible studies (1149 participants). In four studies, renal denervation was compared to sham procedure; one study compared a proximal ablation to a complete renal artery denervation; in the remaining, renal denervation was tested against standard or intensified antihypertensive therapy.None of the included trials was designed to look at hard clinical end points as primary outcomes.When compared to control, there was low quality evidence that renal denervation did not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction (4 studies, 742 participants; RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.84), ischaemic stroke (4 studies, 823 participants; RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.72), or unstable angina (2 studies, 201 participants; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.08 to 5.06), and moderate quality evidence that it had no effect on 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) systolic BP (5 studies, 797 participants; MD 0.28 mmHg, 95% CI -3.74 to 4.29), diastolic BP (4 studies, 756 participants; MD 0.93 mmHg, 95% CI -4.50 to 6.36), office measured systolic BP (6 studies, 886 participants; MD -4.08 mmHg, 95% CI -15.26 to 7.11), or diastolic BP (5 studies, 845 participants; MD -1.30 mmHg, 95% CI -7.30 to 4.69). Furthermore, low quality evidence suggested that this procedure produced no effect on either serum creatinine (3 studies, 736 participants, MD 0.01 mg/dL; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.14), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), or creatinine clearance (4 studies, 837 participants; MD -2.09 mL/min, 95% CI -8.12 to 3.95). Based on low-quality evidence, renal denervation significantly increased bradycardia episodes compared to control (3 studies, 220 participants; RR 6.63, 95% CI 1.19 to 36.84), while the risk of other adverse events was comparable or not assessable.Data were sparse or absent for all cause mortality, hospitalisation, fatal cardiovascular events, quality of life, atrial fibrillation episodes, left ventricular hypertrophy, sleep apnoea severity, need for renal replacement therapy, and metabolic profile.The quality of the evidence was low for cardiovascular outcomes and adverse events and moderate for lack of effect on blood pressure and renal function.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In patients with resistant hypertension, there is low quality evidence that renal denervation does not change major cardiovascular events, and renal function. There was moderate quality evidence that it does not change blood pressure and and low quality evidence that it caused an increaseof bradycardia episodes. Future trials measuring patient-centred instead of surrogate outcomes, with longer follow-up periods, larger sample size and more standardized procedural methods are necessary to clarify the utility of this procedure in this population.
Topics: Angina, Unstable; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure Determination; Drug Resistance; Humans; Hypertension; Kidney; Myocardial Infarction; Stroke; Sympathectomy
PubMed: 28220472
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011499.pub2 -
Drug Design, Development and Therapy 2017To compare the effects of dexmedetomidine (Dex) and fentanyl as adjuvants to local anesthetics in spinal anesthesia. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To compare the effects of dexmedetomidine (Dex) and fentanyl as adjuvants to local anesthetics in spinal anesthesia.
METHODS
Two researchers independently searched the PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and CBM for randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of Dex and fentanyl as adjuvants to local anesthetics for intrathecal injection.
RESULTS
A total of 639 patients from nine studies were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that Dex resulted in statistically significant longer duration of stable sensory block (mean difference [MD] =27.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] [9.89, 44.34], <0.01, =97%), sensory block (standardized mean difference [SMD] =3.81; 95% CI [2.35, 5.27], <0.01, =97%), motor block (SMD =3.64; 95% CI [2.19, 5.08], <0.01, =97%), and pain free period (SMD =2.98; 95% CI [1.69, 4.27], <0.01, =96%); reducing the incidence of pruritus (relative risk [RR] =0.15; 95% CI [0.06, 0.39], <0.01, =0%) compared with fentanyl. However, the onset of sensory and motor block, the time to peak sensory level, and the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia, and the side effects (nausea, vomiting, shivering and respiratory depression) were not significantly different between Dex and fentanyl.
CONCLUSION
Compared to fentanyl, Dex as local anesthetics adjuvant in spinal anesthesia prolonged the duration of spinal anesthesia, improved postoperative analgesia, reduced the incidence of pruritus, and did not increase the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia.
Topics: Adjuvants, Anesthesia; Adolescent; Adult; Anesthesia, Spinal; Anesthetics, Local; Dexmedetomidine; Fentanyl; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Young Adult
PubMed: 29238167
DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S146092 -
PloS One 2014Neuraxial application of dexmedetomidine (DEX) as adjuvant analgesic has been invetigated in some randomized controlled trials (RCTs) but not been approved because of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Neuraxial application of dexmedetomidine (DEX) as adjuvant analgesic has been invetigated in some randomized controlled trials (RCTs) but not been approved because of the inconsistency of efficacy and safety in these RCTs. We performed this meta-analysis to access the efficacy and safety of neuraxial DEX as local anaesthetic (LA) adjuvant.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases from inception to June 2013 for RCTs that investigated the analgesia efficacy and safety for neuraxial application DEX as LA adjuvant. Effects were summarized using standardized mean differences (SMDs), weighed mean differences (WMDs) or odds ratio (OR) with suitable effect model. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain intensity and analgesic duration, bradycardia and hypotension.
RESULTS
Sixteen RCTs involving 1092 participants were included. Neuraxial DEX significantly decreased postoperative pain intensity (SMD, -1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI), -1.70 to -0.89; P<0.00001), prolonged analgesic duration (WMD, 6.93 hours; 95% CI, 5.23 to 8.62; P<0.00001) and increased the risk of bradycardia (OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.18 to 6.10; P = 0.02). No evidence showed that neuraxial DEX increased the risk of other adverse events, such as hypotension (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.83 to 2.85; P = 0.17). Additionally, neuraxial DEX was associated with beneficial alterations in postoperative sedation scores and number of analgesic requirements, sensory and motor block characteristics, and intro-operative hemodynamics.
CONCLUSION
Neuraxial DEX is a favorable LA adjuvant with better and longer analgesia. The greatest concern is bradycardia. Further large sample trials with strict design and focusing on long-term outcomes are needed.
Topics: Analgesia; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anesthesia; Anesthetics, Local; Bradycardia; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Hypotension; Pain Management; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24671181
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093114 -
Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and... Jul 2011Recommendations for physical activity during pregnancy have progressed significantly in the last 30 years and continue to evolve as an increasing body of scientific... (Review)
Review
Recommendations for physical activity during pregnancy have progressed significantly in the last 30 years and continue to evolve as an increasing body of scientific evidence becomes available. In addition, there is an increasing number of women who wish to either maintain physical fitness levels during the prenatal period or initiate exercise for a healthier lifestyle during pregnancy. As such, consistent evaluation of the risks associated with exercise during pregnancy is warranted for maternal and fetal well-being. The primary purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the scientific information available regarding maternal and fetal responses as it relates to the occurrence of adverse exercise-related events in pregnant women without contraindications to exercise. A systematic and evidence-based approach was used to analyze critically the level of evidence for risks associated with acute and chronic exercise during pregnancy in healthy pregnant women. All articles were screened according to standardized evaluation criteria developed by a panel of experts. A total of 74 investigations that involved 3766 pregnant women were included in the analysis. Of the 74 studies, only 35 studies documented the presence or absence of adverse events. The serious adverse event rate for these studies was 1.4 per 10 000 h of exercise. The adverse event rate increased to 6.8 per 10 000 h of exercise when including the occurrence of more mild events and exercise-related fetal bradycardia and tachycardia. Previously inactive or active women (without contraindications) are at a low risk for adverse fetal or maternal events if they participate in routine physical activity during pregnancy.
Topics: Adult; Consensus; Decision Support Techniques; Decision Trees; Evidence-Based Medicine; Exercise Therapy; Female; Health Status; Health Status Indicators; Humans; Mass Screening; Motor Activity; Perinatal Care; Physical Fitness; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular; Pregnancy Outcome; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Surveys and Questionnaires; Young Adult
PubMed: 21800947
DOI: 10.1139/h11-061 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022Phenylephrine is the first-line drug used to maintain blood pressure in cesarean delivery. However, it poses a high risk of bradycardia and depression of cardiac...
Comparative efficacy and safety of prophylactic norepinephrine and phenylephrine in spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.
Phenylephrine is the first-line drug used to maintain blood pressure in cesarean delivery. However, it poses a high risk of bradycardia and depression of cardiac activity in pregnant women. Consequently, norepinephrine has gained popularity over the recent years, as an alternative to Phenylephrine because it is thought that prophylactic use of vasopressors may reduce the incidence of hypotension after spinal anesthesia. This systematic review compared the efficacy of both treatments. We searched the following databases; CNKI, PubMed, Embase, Web of science, clinicaltrials.gov, Medline and Cochrane Library, for randomized controlled trials comparing the prophylactic efficacy of norepinephrine and phenylephrine on elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia. The search period was from inception to July 2022, and the primary outcome indicator was incidence of bradycardia. Statistical analysis was conducted on Rev manager 5.4, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to evaluate the quality of evidence from each main finding. A total of 12 papers were included in the analysis. The incidence of bradycardia (RR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.49, < 0.00001) and reactive hypertension (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.83, = 0.003) was significantly lower in the norepinephrine (NE) group compared with the phenylephrine (PE) category. In contrast, there were no statistical differences in the umbilical cord blood gas analysis pH values between the groups (arterial: MD = 0.00, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.01, = 0.22, vein: MD = 0.01, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.02, = 0.06). The incidence of hypotension, nausea, and vomiting did not differ significantly between the NE and PE groups (hypotension: 23% vs. 18%; nausea: 14% vs. 18%; vomiting: 5% vs. 7%, respectively). Prophylactic use of norepinephrine is safe and effective in maintaining maternal hemodynamics without causing adverse events to either the pregnant woman or fetus. website https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022347095.
PubMed: 36518675
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.1015325 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Oct 2022COVID-19 is a viral infectious disease leading to a spectrum of clinical complications, especially cardiovascular. Evidence shows that this infection can potentially... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 is a viral infectious disease leading to a spectrum of clinical complications, especially cardiovascular. Evidence shows that this infection can potentially accompany a worse outcome in pregnant women. Cardiovascular complications in mothers and their fetuses are reported by previous studies.
OBJECTIVE
In this systematic review, we aim to investigate the cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 during pregnancy in the mothers and fetus, according to the published literature.
METHOD
We systematically searched the online databases of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, using relevant keywords up to April 2022. We included all observational studies reporting cardiovascular complications among COVID-19-affected pregnant women and their fetuses.
RESULTS
We included 74 studies containing 47582 pregnant COVID-19 cases. Pre-eclampsia, hypertensive disorders, cardiomyopathy, heart failure, myocardial infarction, thrombosis formation, alterations in maternal-fetal Doppler patterns, and maternal and fetal arrhythmia were reported as cardiovascular complications. The highest incidences of pre-eclampsia/eclampsia among COVID-19 pregnant cases, reported by studies, were 69% and 62%, and the lowest were 0.5% and 3%. The highest and lowest incidences of fetal bradycardia were 20% and 3%, and regarding fetal tachycardia, 5.4% and 1%, respectively.
CONCLUSION
SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy can potentially be associated with cardiovascular complications in the mother, particularly pre-eclampsia and heart failure. Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy can potentially cause cardiovascular complications in the fetus, particularly arrhythmia.
PubMed: 36294520
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11206194 -
Academic Emergency Medicine : Official... Mar 2023Dexmedetomidine (DEX), a centrally acting alpha-2 agonist, is increasingly used for sedation in multiple clinical settings. Evidence from the intensive care unit and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dexmedetomidine (DEX), a centrally acting alpha-2 agonist, is increasingly used for sedation in multiple clinical settings. Evidence from the intensive care unit and operative settings suggests DEX may have significant advantages over traditional GABAergic sedatives such as benzodiazepines. There has been limited research on the use of DEX in the emergency department (ED).
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the medical literature to identify all published evidence regarding the use of DEX in the ED. We included randomized and nonrandomized studies and studies reporting any use of DEX in the ED, even when it was not the primary focus of the study. Two authors reviewed studies for inclusion, and a single author assessed studies for quality and risk of bias and abstracted data.
RESULTS
We identified 35 studies meeting inclusion criteria, including 11 randomized controlled trials, 13 cohort and other nonrandomized studies, and 11 case reports and case series. Significant heterogeneity in interventions, comparators, indications, and outcomes precluded data pooling and meta-analysis. We found modest evidence that DEX was efficacious in facilitating medical imaging and mixed and limited evidence regarding its efficacy for procedural sedation and sedation of nonintubated medical and psychiatric patients. Our results suggested that DEX is associated with bradycardia and hypotension, which are generally transient and infrequently require medical intervention.
CONCLUSIONS
A limited body of generally poor- to moderate-quality evidence suggests that the use of DEX may be efficacious in certain clinical scenarios in the ED and that DEX use in the ED is likely safe. Further high-quality research into DEX use in the ED setting is needed, with a particular focus on clear and consistent selection of indications, identification of clear and clinically relevant primary outcomes, and careful assessment of the clinical implications of the hemodynamic effects of DEX therapy.
Topics: Humans; Dexmedetomidine; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Benzodiazepines; Hypotension; Emergency Service, Hospital
PubMed: 36448276
DOI: 10.1111/acem.14636 -
PloS One 2023The use of dexmedetomidine rather than midazolam may improve ICU outcomes. We summarized the available recent evidence to further verify this conclusion. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The use of dexmedetomidine rather than midazolam may improve ICU outcomes. We summarized the available recent evidence to further verify this conclusion.
METHODS
An electronic search of PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted. Risk ratios (RR) were used for binary categorical variables, and for continuous variables, weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated, the effect sizes are expressed as 95% confidence intervals (CI), and trial sequential analysis was performed.
RESULTS
16 randomized controlled trials were enrolled 2035 patients in the study. Dexmedetomidine as opposed to midazolam achieved a shorter length of stay in ICU (MD = -2.25, 95%CI = -2.94, -1.57, p<0.0001), lower risk of delirium (RR = 0.63, 95%CI = 0.50, 0.81, p = 0.0002), and shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (MD = -0.83, 95%CI = -1.24, -0.43, p<0.0001). The association between dexmedetomidine and bradycardia was also found to be significant (RR 2.21, 95%CI 1.31, 3.73, p = 0.003). We found no difference in hypotension (RR = 1.44, 95%CI = 0.87, 2.38, P = 0.16), mortality (RR = 1.02, 95%CI = 0.83, 1.25, P = 0.87), neither in terms of adverse effects requiring intervention, hospital length of stay, or sedation effects.
CONCLUSIONS
Combined with recent evidence, compared with midazolam, dexmedetomidine decreased the risk of delirium, mechanical ventilation, length of stay in the ICU, as well as reduced patient costs. But dexmedetomidine could not reduce mortality and increased the risk of bradycardia.
Topics: Humans; Midazolam; Dexmedetomidine; Respiration, Artificial; Bradycardia; Intensive Care Units; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Delirium
PubMed: 37963140
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0294292