-
Journal of the American Heart... Mar 2016A considerable amount of studies have examined the relationship between off-hours (weekends and nights) admission and mortality risk for various diseases, but the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A considerable amount of studies have examined the relationship between off-hours (weekends and nights) admission and mortality risk for various diseases, but the results remain equivocal.
METHODS AND RESULTS
Through a search of EMBASE, PUBMED, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, we identified cohort studies that evaluated the association between off-hour admission and mortality risk for disease. In a random effects meta-analysis of 140 identified articles (251 cohorts), off-hour admission was strongly associated with increased mortality for aortic aneurysm (odds ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.30-1.77), breast cancer (1.50, 1.21-1.86), leukemia (1.45, 1.17-1.79), respiratory neoplasm (1.32, 1.20-1.26), pancreatic cancer (1.32, 1.12-1.56), malignant neoplasm of genitourinary organs (1.27, 1.08-1.49), colorectal cancer (1.26, 1.07-1.49), pulmonary embolism (1.20, 1.13-1.28), arrhythmia and cardiac arrest (1.19, 1.09-1.29), and lymphoma (1.19, 1.06-1.34). Weaker (odds ratio <1.19) but statistically significant association was noted for renal failure, traumatic brain injury, heart failure, intracerebral hemorrhage, subarachnoid hemorrhage, stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding, myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and bloodstream infections. No association was found for hip fracture, pneumonia, intestinal obstruction, aspiration pneumonia, peptic ulcer, trauma, diverticulitis, and neonatal mortality. Overall, off-hour admission was associated with increased mortality for 28 diseases combined (odds ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.10-1.13).
CONCLUSIONS
Off-hour admission is associated with increased mortality risk, and the associations varied substantially for different diseases. Specialists, nurses, as well as hospital administrators and health policymakers can take these findings into consideration to improve the quality and continuity of medical services.
Topics: After-Hours Care; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cause of Death; Chi-Square Distribution; Communicable Diseases; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Kidney Diseases; Neoplasms; Odds Ratio; Patient Admission; Prognosis; Regression Analysis; Respiratory Tract Diseases; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Time Factors
PubMed: 26994132
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.115.003102 -
BMC Public Health Jul 2011There is a widely held expectation that screening for disease has adverse emotional impacts. The aim of the current review is to estimate the short (< 4 weeks) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There is a widely held expectation that screening for disease has adverse emotional impacts. The aim of the current review is to estimate the short (< 4 weeks) and longer term (> 4 weeks) emotional impact of such screening.
METHODS
Studies selected for inclusion were (a) randomised controlled trials in which (b) participants in one arm underwent screening and received test results, and those in a control arm did not, and (c) emotional outcomes were assessed in both arms. MEDLINE via PubMed (1950 to present), EMBASE (1980 to present), PsycINFO (1985 to present) using OVID SP, and CINAHL (1982 to present) via EBSCO were searched, using strategies developed with keywords and medical subject headings. Data were extracted on emotional outcomes, type of screening test and test results.
RESULTS
Of the 12 studies that met the inclusion criteria, six involved screening for cancer, two for diabetes, and one each for abdominal aortic aneurysms, peptic ulcer, coronary heart disease and osteoporosis. Five studies reported data on anxiety, five [corrected] on depression, two on general distress and eight on quality of life assessed between one week and 13 years after screening (median = 1.3 years).Meta-analyses revealed no significant impact of screening on longer term anxiety (pooled SMD 0.01, 95% CI -0.10, 0.11), depression (pooled SMD -0.04, 95% CI -.12, 0.20), or quality of life subscales (mental and self-assessed health pooled SMDs, respectively: 0.03; -0.01, (95% CI -.02, 0.04; 0.00, 95% CI -.04, 0.03).
CONCLUSION
Screening does not appear to have adverse emotional impacts in the longer term (> 4 weeks). Too few studies assessed outcomes before four weeks to comment on the shorter term emotional impact of screening.
Topics: Emotions; Humans; Mass Screening; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 21798046
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-603 -
Critical Care (London, England) Nov 2015Neurocritical care patients are at high risk for stress-related upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the risks and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Neurocritical care patients are at high risk for stress-related upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) in this patient group.
METHODS
A systematic search of major electronic literature databases was conducted. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which researchers compared the effects of SUP (with proton pump inhibitors or histamine 2 receptor antagonists) with placebo or no prophylaxis in neurocritical care patients. The primary outcome was UGI bleeding, and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and nosocomial pneumonia. Study heterogeneity was sought and quantified. The results were reported as risk ratios/relative risks (RRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
We included 8 RCTs comprising an aggregate of 829 neurocritical care patients. Among these trials, one study conducted in a non-intensive care unit setting that did not meet our inclusion criteria was ultimately included based on further evaluation. All studies were judged as having a high or unclear risk of bias. SUP was more effective than placebo or no prophylaxis at reducing UGI bleeding (random effects: RR 0.31; 95 % CI 0.20-0.47; P < 0.00001; I (2) = 45 %) and all-cause mortality (fixed effects: RR 0.70; 95 % CI 0.50-0.98; P = 0.04; I (2) = 0 %). There was no difference between SUP and placebo or no prophylaxis regarding nosocomial pneumonia (random effects: RR 1.14; 95 % CI 0.67-1.94; P = 0.62; I (2) = 42 %). The slight asymmetry of the funnel plots raised the concern of small trial bias, and apparent heterogeneity existed in participants, interventions, control treatments, and outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS
In neurocritical care patients, SUP seems to be more effective than placebo or no prophylaxis in preventing UGI bleeding and reducing all-cause mortality while not increasing the risk of nosocomial pneumonia. The robustness of this conclusion is limited by a lack of trials with a low risk of bias, sparse data, heterogeneity among trials, and a concern regarding small trial bias.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) identifier: CRD42015015802 . Date of registration: 6 Jan 2015.
Topics: Adult; Brain Injuries; Histamine H2 Antagonists; Humans; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Stomach Ulcer; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 26577436
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-015-1107-2 -
Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic... May 2012A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. We address whether routine pharmacological stress ulcer prophylaxis is of... (Review)
Review
A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. We address whether routine pharmacological stress ulcer prophylaxis is of benefit for patients undergoing cardiac surgery. One hundred and fifty-six papers were found using the reported search, of which 10 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date, country of publication, patient group, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers were tabulated. The results show that the incidence of stress ulcers following cardiac surgery is low (0.45%), but remains associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Five of the 7 studies demonstrated suppression of acid secretion or decreased incidence of gastric complications in patients given pharmacological stress ulcer prophylaxis, with the remaining two suggesting no clinical benefit. One prospective study of 210 patients, randomized equally between a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), histamine antagonist and teprenone, found that PPIs were the most effective at reducing gastric complications after cardiac surgery, including ulcer formation and upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). However, a separate retrospective study suggested no difference in the outcomes between the use of a PPI and a histamine antagonist. Of the studies focused on histamine antagonists, one randomized control trial (RCT) showed that cimetidine can reduce surgical stress, augment the immune system and reduce the intubation time after cardiac surgery, although no direct association with UGIB was made. A second prospectively randomized study of histamine antagonists demonstrated superior pH control with famotidine and ranitidine, when compared with cimetidine. Furthermore, haematological and neurological side-effects were noted only with the use of cimetidine. A recent meta-analysis and systematic review of the literature associated gastric acid suppression with an increased risk of pneumonia. Two prospective cohort studies that examined the use of PPI in conjunction with clopidogrel in patients with coronary artery disease concluded that there was no association with an increase in major adverse cardiovascular events with the use of PPIs. We conclude that the current evidence is marginally in favour of the use of prophylactic PPIs. However, this is associated with an increased risk of hospital-acquired pneumonia.
Topics: Aged; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Benchmarking; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Cross Infection; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Histamine H2 Antagonists; Humans; Pneumonia; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Stomach Ulcer; Stress, Physiological; Stress, Psychological; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 22345061
DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivs019 -
Infection and Drug Resistance 2020is a spiral-shaped gram-negative bacteria associated with peptic ulcer, gastritis and gastric cancer. The global burden and occurrence of infection remains prevalent... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
is a spiral-shaped gram-negative bacteria associated with peptic ulcer, gastritis and gastric cancer. The global burden and occurrence of infection remains prevalent and worldwide. Despite this, the trend of the bacterial resistance is not recently studied which can help in the adoption of global, regional and local prevention strategies.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of the study was to systematically review the existing published literature that presents the estimate of antibiotic resistance.
METHODS
A protocol was primarily registered in PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews and has given a registration number CRD42017068710. It was registered after checking whether there was similar study being conducted. A database search (PubMed/Medline and Google scholar) was used to collect relevant articles. A standardized form was prepared for the extraction of relevant data from studies which fulfilled the eligibility criteria. A National Institute for Health research (NIH)-based quality assessment tool was utilized to assess the quality of studies included in the study.
RESULTS
Our searching process has retrieved a total of 288 publications which later resulted in 38 articles for full-text review. Among the 38 articles reviewed in full text, 14 studies were included which fulfilled the inclusion criteria. -pooled overall prevalence rate of antibiotic resistance was found to be 4.55% (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.96-5.22%) to amoxicillin, 27.22% (95% CI: 25.89-28.58%) to clarithromycin, 39.66% (95% CI: 38.20-41.15%) to metronidazole, and 22.48% (95% CI: 21.24-23.76%) to levofloxacin.
CONCLUSION
The primary antibiotic resistance pattern of is increasing worldwide. Thus, implementation of local drug susceptibility surveillance program, rational prescribing and use of antibiotics are necessary.
PubMed: 32547126
DOI: 10.2147/IDR.S250200 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Peptic ulcer disease is the cause of dyspepsia in about 10% of people. Ninety-five percent of duodenal and 70% of gastric ulcers are associated with Helicobacter pylori.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Peptic ulcer disease is the cause of dyspepsia in about 10% of people. Ninety-five percent of duodenal and 70% of gastric ulcers are associated with Helicobacter pylori. Eradication of H. pylori reduces the relapse rate of ulcers but the magnitude of this effect is uncertain. This is an update of Ford AC, Delaney B, Forman D, Moayyedi P. Eradication therapy for peptic ulcer disease in Helicobacter pylori-positive patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD003840. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003840.pub4.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the proportion of peptic ulcers healed and the proportion of participants who remained free from relapse with eradication therapy against placebo or other pharmacological therapies in H. pylori-positive people.To assess the proportion of participants that achieved complete relief of symptoms and improvement in quality of life scores.To compare the incidence of adverse effects/drop-outs (total number for each drug) associated with the different treatments.To assess the proportion of participants in whom successful eradication was achieved.
SEARCH METHODS
In this update, we identified trials by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to March 2016) and Ovid EMBASE (1980 to March 2016). To identify further relevant trials, we handsearched reference lists from trials selected by electronic searching, and published abstracts from conference proceedings from the United European Gastroenterology Week (published in Gut) and Digestive Disease Week (published in Gastroenterology). The search was last updated in March 2016. We contacted members of Cochrane Upper GI and Pancreatic Diseases, and experts in the field and asked them to provide details of outstanding clinical trials and any relevant unpublished materials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We analysed randomised controlled trials of short- and long-term treatment of peptic ulcer disease in H. pylori-positive adults. Participants received at least one week of H. pylori eradication compared with ulcer healing drug, placebo or no treatment. Trials were included if they reported assessment from two weeks onwards.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We collected data on ulcer healing, recurrence, relief of symptoms and adverse effects. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models with Review Manager software (RevMan 5.3) based on intention-to-treat analysis as far as possible.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 55 trials were included for one or more outcomes for this review.In duodenal ulcer healing, eradication therapy was superior to ulcer healing drug (UHD) (34 trials, 3910 participants, RR of ulcer persisting = 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 0.76; 381/2286 (adjusted proportion: 12.4%) in eradication therapy plus UHD versus 304/1624 (18.7%) in UHD; low quality evidence) and no treatment (two trials, 207 participants, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.53; 30/125 (adjusted proportion: 21.7%) in eradication therapy versus 48/82 (58.5%) in no treatment; low quality evidence).In gastric ulcer healing, the differences were imprecise between eradication therapy and UHD (15 trials, 1974 participants, RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.68; 220/1192 (adjusted proportion: 16.0%) in eradication therapy plus UHD versus 102/782 (13.0%) in UHD; very low quality evidence). In preventing duodenal ulcer recurrence the differences were imprecise between maintenance therapy with H.pylori eradication therapy and maintenance therapy with UHD (four trials, 319 participants, RR of ulcer recurring 0.73; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.25; 19/159 (adjusted proportion: 11.9%) in eradication therapy versus 26/160 (16.3%) in UHD; very low quality evidence), but eradication therapy was superior to no treatment (27 trials 2509 participants, RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.26; 215/1501 (adjusted proportion: 12.9%) in eradication therapy versus 649/1008 (64.4%) in no treatment; very low quality evidence).In preventing gastric ulcer recurrence, eradication therapy was superior to no treatment (12 trials, 1476 participants, RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.45; 116/697 (adjusted proportion: 16.3%) in eradication therapy versus 356/679 (52.4%) in no treatment; very low quality evidence). None of the trials reported proportion of people with gastric ulcer not healed after initial therapy between H.pylori eradication therapy and no active treatment or the proportion of people with recurrent gastric ulcer or peptic ulcers during maintenance therapy between H.pylori eradication therapy and ulcer healing drug therapy.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Adding a one to two-week course of H. pylori eradication therapy is an effective treatment for people with H. pylori-positive duodenal ulcer when compared to ulcer healing drugs alone and no treatment. H. pylori eradication therapy is also effective in preventing recurrence of duodenal and gastric ulcer compared to no treatment. There is currently no evidence that H. pylori eradication therapy is an effective treatment in people with gastric ulcer or that it is effective in preventing recurrence of duodenal ulcer compared to ulcer healing drug. However, confidence intervals were wide and significant benefits or harms of H. pylori eradication therapy in acute ulcer healing of gastric ulcers compared to no treatment, and in preventing recurrence of duodenal ulcers compared to ulcer healing drugs cannot be ruled out.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Duodenal Ulcer; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomach Ulcer
PubMed: 27092708
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003840.pub5 -
Medicine Nov 2022Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and vonoprazan are recommended as first-line therapies for erosive esophagitis (EE). However, it is uncertain how the magnitude of efficacy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and vonoprazan are recommended as first-line therapies for erosive esophagitis (EE). However, it is uncertain how the magnitude of efficacy and safety of first-line therapy, the choice of individual PPIs or vonoprazan in the treatment of EE remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan and PPIs in healing esophageal mucosal injury in patients with EE.
METHODS
Relevant databases were searched to collect randomized controlled trials of proton pump inhibitors and vonoprazan in the treatment of reflux esophagitis up to December 2021. Studies on standard-dose PPIs or vonoprazan that were published in Chinese or English and assessed healing effects in EE were included in the analysis. Stata16.0 was used to conduct a network Meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the treatment.
RESULTS
A total of 41 literatures were included with 11,592 enrolled patients. For the endoscopic cure rate, all the PPIs and vonoprazan significantly improve compared to Placebo; Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, Ilaprazole ranked first, followed by esomeprazole, vonoprazan, pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, rabeprazole and placebo therapy ranked the last. For the rate of adverse events, there was no significant difference among all the PPIs, vonoprazan, and placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
Ilaprazole, esomeprazole and vonoprazan have more advantages in mucosal erosion healing, there was no significant difference in the comparative safety among all interventions.
Topics: Humans; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Esomeprazole; Network Meta-Analysis; Peptic Ulcer; Rabeprazole; Esophagitis, Peptic; Abdominal Injuries
PubMed: 36451489
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000031807 -
Evidence-based Complementary and... 2018Peptic ulcer is a basic term for ulcers on the lower oesophagus, stomach, or jejunum. The specific term for ulcer in the stomach is gastric ulcer. The extensive use of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Peptic ulcer is a basic term for ulcers on the lower oesophagus, stomach, or jejunum. The specific term for ulcer in the stomach is gastric ulcer. The extensive use of honey around the globe helps researchers to study the usefulness of honey. Many studies had already been conducted and proved the effectiveness of honey in treating gastric ulcer.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify relevant studies on honey used as an alternative treatment of gastric ulcer cause by NSAIDs. A comprehensive search was conducted in Medline, SCOPUS, and Ebscohost. The main criteria used were articles published in English and using NSAIDs-induced gastric ulcer in rat's model and those reporting the effectiveness of honey.
RESULTS
Articles published between 2001 and 2014 were identified to be relevant in studies related to the inclusion criteria. The literature search found 30 potential and closely related articles in this review, but only 5 articles were taken which meet the criteria needed to be fulfilled.
CONCLUSIONS
All studies in this review reported the efficacy of honey for gastric ulcer based on its antioxidant and cytoprotective activities. Most of the studies conducted used different types of honey at various doses on rats. Future studies should be conducted to identify the appropriate dose for humans to achieve similar gastroprotective effects.
PubMed: 30105063
DOI: 10.1155/2018/7515692 -
Medicine Nov 2020Kangfuxin (KFX), a well-known Chinese patent medicine which extracted from Periplaneta americana, is widely used as an adjuvant in the treatment of peptic ulcers (PUs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Kangfuxin (KFX), a well-known Chinese patent medicine which extracted from Periplaneta americana, is widely used as an adjuvant in the treatment of peptic ulcers (PUs) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) such as rabeprazole, in China. However, no clear consensus has been reached on the efficacy for PU treatment.
METHODS
We searched in 7 electronic databases to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) completed before May 31, 2020 to explore the clinical efficiency of KFX plus rabeprazole in the treatment of PU. Risk ratio (RR) corresponding to 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated to estimate the outcomes. Publication bias was assessed by both Egger's and Begg's tests. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4 and Stata version 10.0.
RESULTS
Twenty-five RCTs, comprising 2555 PU patients, were included in this study. Meta-analysis showed that, when compared with rabeprazole-based treatment alone, KFX plus rabeprazole significantly improved the healing rate (RR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.25-1.44) and overall response rate of ulcers (RR = 1.16, 95% CI 1.13-1.20), alleviated the clinical symptoms of PU (RR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.08-1.21), and reduced the recurrence of PU (RR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.24-0.61) without an increase in the occurrence of adverse events (RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.66-1.28).
CONCLUSION
Our study suggests that KFX combined with rabeprazole showed positive therapeutic effects and is safe for treating PU, which may provide more reliable evidence for the clinical use of KFX in the treatment of PU.
Topics: Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Materia Medica; Peptic Ulcer; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Rabeprazole; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33235070
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023103 -
Nutrients Sep 2021Gastric ulcer disease induced by the consumption of NSAIDs is a major public health problem. The therapy used for its treatment causes adverse effects in the patient....
Gastric ulcer disease induced by the consumption of NSAIDs is a major public health problem. The therapy used for its treatment causes adverse effects in the patient. Propolis is a natural product that has been used for the treatments of different diseases around the world. Nevertheless, there is little information about the activity of propolis in gastric ulcers caused by treatment with NSAIDs. Therefore, this review evaluates and compares the gastroprotective potential of propolis and its function against NSAID-induced gastric ulcers, for which a systematic search was carried out in the PubMed and ScienceDirect databases. The main criteria were articles that report the gastroprotective activity of propolis against the damage produced by NSAIDs in the gastric mucosa. Gastroprotection was related to the antioxidant, antisecretory, and cytoprotective effects, as well as the phenolic compounds present in the chemical composition of propolis. However, most of the studies used different doses of NSAIDs and propolis and evaluated different parameters. Propolis has proven to be a good alternative for the treatment of gastric ulcer disease. However, future studies should be carried out to identify the compounds responsible for these effects and to determine their potential use in people.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Antioxidants; Apitherapy; Gastric Mucosa; Humans; Propolis; Stomach Ulcer; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34579045
DOI: 10.3390/nu13093169