-
British Journal of Anaesthesia Mar 2020In surgical patients undergoing general anaesthesia, coughing at the time of extubation is common and can result in potentially dangerous complications. We performed a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In surgical patients undergoing general anaesthesia, coughing at the time of extubation is common and can result in potentially dangerous complications. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of i.v. lidocaine administration during the perioperative period to prevent cough and other airway complications.
METHODS
We searched Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System, Excerpta Medica database, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for RCTs comparing the perioperative use of i.v. lidocaine with a control group in adult patients undergoing surgery under general anaesthesia. The RCTs were assessed using risk-of-bias assessment, and the quality of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE).
RESULTS
In 16 trials (n=1516), the administration of i.v. lidocaine compared with placebo or no treatment led to large reductions in post-extubation cough (risk ratio [RR]: 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48-0.86) and in postoperative sore throat at 1 h (RR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.32-0.67). There was no difference in incidence of laryngospasm (risk difference [RD]: 0.02; 95% CI: -0.07 to 0.03) or incidence of adverse events related to the use of lidocaine.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of i.v. lidocaine perioperatively decreased airway complications, including coughing and sore throat. There was no associated increased risk of harm.
Topics: Anesthesia, General; Anesthetics, Local; Cough; Device Removal; Humans; Injections, Intravenous; Intubation, Intratracheal; Lidocaine; Perioperative Care; Pharyngitis; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 32000978
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2019.11.033 -
Journal of Cardiovascular Development... May 2022(1) Background: Myocarditis following group A streptococcal pharyngitis and tonsillitis is a relatively rare medical condition. The aim of this systematic review was to... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Myocarditis following group A streptococcal pharyngitis and tonsillitis is a relatively rare medical condition. The aim of this systematic review was to identify specific ECG changes, laboratory parameters and signs, and symptoms associated with this disease. (2) Methods: A systematic literature review was performed in concordance with the current PRISMA guidelines, including the databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, CDSR, CENTRAL, CCAs, EBM Reviews, and LILACS. Articles were included if they covered myocarditis after streptococcal pharyngitis/tonsillitis in humans. Exclusion criteria were rheumatic, autoimmune, or toxic myocarditis. (3) Results: Patients that developed myocarditis after group A streptococcal throat infection frequently presented with chest pain, elevated cardiac markers, and ST-segment elevations, making it a condition that shows more similarities to acute coronary syndrome than viral myocarditis. (4) Conclusions: Myocarditis after streptococcal pharyngitis and/or tonsillitis is a rather infrequently described disease; however, it is necessary to consider this condition when investigating streptococcal sore throat because it can be associated with severe adverse events for the individual patient.
PubMed: 35735799
DOI: 10.3390/jcdd9060170 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Nov 2007About 10-30% of people present to primary healthcare services with sore throat each year. The causative organisms of sore throat may be bacteria (most commonly... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
About 10-30% of people present to primary healthcare services with sore throat each year. The causative organisms of sore throat may be bacteria (most commonly Streptococcus) or viruses (typically rhinovirus), although it is difficult to distinguish bacterial from viral infections clinically.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to reduce symptoms of acute infective sore throat? What are the effects of interventions to prevent complications of acute infective sore throat? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to May 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found eight systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antibiotics, corticosteroids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol, and probiotics.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Acute Disease; Administration, Oral; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Humans; Incidence; Pharyngitis; Streptococcal Infections; Streptococcus
PubMed: 19450346
DOI: No ID Found -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Apr 2024Centor and McIsaac scores are clinical prediction rules for diagnosing group A streptococcus (GAS) infection in patients with pharyngitis. Their recommended thresholds... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Centor and McIsaac scores are clinical prediction rules for diagnosing group A streptococcus (GAS) infection in patients with pharyngitis. Their recommended thresholds vary between guidelines.
OBJECTIVES
To estimate the sensitivity and specificity of the McIsaac and Centor scores to diagnose GAS pharyngitis and evaluate their impact on antibiotic prescribing at each threshold in patients presenting to secondary care.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to September 2022.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Studies of patients presenting with acute pharyngitis to emergency or outpatient clinics that estimated the accuracy of McIsaac or Centor scores against throat cultures and/or rapid antigen detection tests (RADT) as reference standards.
TESTS
Centor or McIsaac score.
REFERENCE STANDARD
Throat cultures and/or RADT.
ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS
Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies.
METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS
The sensitivities and specificities of the McIsaac and Centor scores were pooled at each threshold using bivariate random effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies were included (eight McIsaac and six Centor scores). Eight studies had unclear and six had a high risk of bias. The McIsaac score had higher estimated sensitivity and lower specificity relative to Centor scores at equivalent thresholds but with wide and overlapping confidence regions. Using either score as a triage to RADT to decide antibiotic treatment would reduce antibiotic prescription to patients with non-GAS pharyngitis relative to RADT test for everyone, but also reduce antibiotic prescription to patients with GAS.
DISCUSSION
Centor and McIsaac scores are equally ineffective at triaging patients who need antibiotics presenting with pharyngitis at hospitals. At high thresholds, too many true positive cases are missed, whereas at low thresholds, too many false positives are treated, leading to the over prescription of antibiotics. The former may be compensated by adequate safety netting by clinicians, ensuring that patients can seek help if symptoms worsen.
Topics: Humans; Secondary Care; Streptococcal Infections; Pharyngitis; Streptococcus pyogenes; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 38182052
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2023.12.025 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Oct 2009The definition of severe recurrent throat infections is arbitrary, but recent criteria have defined severe tonsillitis as: five or more episodes of true tonsillitis a... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The definition of severe recurrent throat infections is arbitrary, but recent criteria have defined severe tonsillitis as: five or more episodes of true tonsillitis a year; symptoms for at least 1 year; and episodes that are disabling and prevent normal functioning. Diagnosis of acute tonsillitis is clinical, and it can be difficult to distinguish viral from bacterial infections. Rapid antigen testing has a very low sensitivity in the diagnosis of bacterial tonsillitis, but more accurate tests take longer to deliver results. Bacteria are cultured from few people with tonsillitis. Other causes include infectious mononucleosis from Epstein-Barr virus infection, cytomegalovirus, toxoplasmosis, HIV, hepatitis A, and rubella.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of tonsillectomy in children and adults with acute recurrent or chronic throat infections? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to March 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 10 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: cold-steel tonsillectomy and diathermy tonsillectomy.
Topics: Acute Disease; Humans; Recurrence; Tonsillitis; United States Food and Drug Administration
PubMed: 21718574
DOI: No ID Found -
PloS One 2014Pharyngitis management guidelines include estimates of the test characteristics of rapid antigen streptococcus tests (RAST) using a non-systematic approach. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pharyngitis management guidelines include estimates of the test characteristics of rapid antigen streptococcus tests (RAST) using a non-systematic approach.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the sensitivity and specificity, and sources of variability, of RAST for diagnosing group A streptococcal (GAS) pharyngitis.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Cochrane Reviews, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Scopus, SciELO, CINAHL, guidelines, 2000-2012.
STUDY SELECTION
Culture as reference standard, all languages.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Study characteristics, quality.
MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S)
Sensitivity, specificity.
RESULTS
We included 59 studies encompassing 55,766 patients. Forty three studies (18,464 patients) fulfilled the higher quality definition (at least 50 patients, prospective data collection, and no significant biases) and 16 (35,634 patients) did not. For the higher quality immunochromatographic methods in children (10,325 patients), heterogeneity was high for sensitivity (inconsistency [I(2)] 88%) and specificity (I(2) 86%). For enzyme immunoassay in children (342 patients), the pooled sensitivity was 86% (95% CI, 79-92%) and the pooled specificity was 92% (95% CI, 88-95%). For the higher quality immunochromatographic methods in the adult population (1,216 patients), the pooled sensitivity was 91% (95% CI, 87 to 94%) and the pooled specificity was 93% (95% CI, 92 to 95%); however, heterogeneity was modest for sensitivity (I(2) 61%) and specificity (I(2) 72%). For enzyme immunoassay in the adult population (333 patients), the pooled sensitivity was 86% (95% CI, 81-91%) and the pooled specificity was 97% (95% CI, 96 to 99%); however, heterogeneity was high for sensitivity and specificity (both, I(2) 88%).
CONCLUSIONS
RAST immunochromatographic methods appear to be very sensitive and highly specific to diagnose group A streptococcal pharyngitis among adults but not in children. We could not identify sources of variability among higher quality studies. The present systematic review provides the best evidence for the wide range of sensitivity included in current guidelines.
Topics: Chromatography, Affinity; Humans; Immunoenzyme Techniques; Pharyngitis; Sensitivity and Specificity; Streptococcal Infections; Streptococcus pyogenes
PubMed: 25369170
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111727 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Dec 2021Acute pharyngitis is one of the most common conditions in outpatient settings and an important source of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Rapid antigen detection... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute pharyngitis is one of the most common conditions in outpatient settings and an important source of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Rapid antigen detection tests (RADTs) offer diagnosis of group A streptococcus at the point of care but have limited sensitivity. Rapid nucleic acid tests (RNATs) are now available; a systematic review of their accuracy is lacking.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the accuracy of RNATs in patients with pharyngitis; to explore test-level and study-level factors that could explain variability in accuracy; and to compare the accuracy of RNATs with that of RADTs.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science (1990-2020).
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Cross-sectional studies and randomized trials.
PARTICIPANTS
Patients with pharyngitis.
INDEX TEST/S AND REFERENCE STANDARDS
RNAT commercial kits compared with throat culture.
METHODS
We assessed risk of bias and applicability using QUADAS-2. We performed meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity using the bivariate random-effects model. Variability was explored by subgroup analyses and meta-regression.
RESULTS
We included 38 studies (46 test evaluations; 17 411 test results). RNATs were most often performed in a laboratory. The overall methodological quality of primary studies was uncertain because of incomplete reporting. RNATs had a summary sensitivity of 97.5% (95% CI 96.2%-98.3%) and a summary specificity of 95.1% (95% CI 93.6%-96.3%). There was low variability in estimates across studies. Variability in sensitivity and specificity was partially explained by test type (p < 0.05 for both). Sensitivity analyses limited to studies with low risk of bias showed robust accuracy estimates. RNATs were more sensitive than RADTs (13 studies; 96.8% versus 82.3%, p 0.004); there was no difference in specificity (p 0.92).
CONCLUSIONS
The high diagnostic accuracy of RNATs may allow their use as stand-alone tests to diagnose group A streptococcus pharyngitis. Based on direct comparisons, RNATs have greater sensitivity than RADTs and equal specificity. Further studies should evaluate RNATs in point-of-care settings.
Topics: Humans; Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques; Nucleic Acids; Pharyngitis; Point-of-Care Testing; Sensitivity and Specificity; Streptococcus pyogenes
PubMed: 33964409
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.04.021 -
PloS One 2023Streptoccocal A (Strep A, GAS) infections in Australia are responsible for significant morbidity and mortality through both invasive (iGAS) and post-streptococcal...
BACKGROUND
Streptoccocal A (Strep A, GAS) infections in Australia are responsible for significant morbidity and mortality through both invasive (iGAS) and post-streptococcal (postGAS) diseases as well as preceding superficial (sGAS) skin and throat infection. The burden of iGAS and postGAS are addressed in some jurisdictions by mandatory notification systems; in contrast, the burden of preceding sGAS has no reporting structure, and is less well defined. This review provides valuable, contemporaneous evidence on the epidemiology of sGAS presentations in Australia, informing preventative health projects such as a Streptococcal A vaccine and standardisation of primary care notification.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, Global Health, Cochrane, CINAHL databases and the grey literature were searched for studies from an Australian setting relating to the epidemiology of sGAS infections between 1970 and 2020 inclusive. Extracted data were pooled for relevant population and subgroup analysis. From 5157 titles in the databases combined with 186 grey literature reports and following removal of duplicates, 4889 articles underwent preliminary title screening. The abstract of 519 articles were reviewed with 162 articles identified for full text review, and 38 articles identified for inclusion. The majority of data was collected for impetigo in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations, remote communities, and in the Northern Territory, Australia. A paucity of data was noted for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in urban centres or with pharyngitis. Prevalence estimates have not significantly changed over time. Community estimates of impetigo point prevalence ranged from 5.5-66.1%, with a pooled prevalence of 27.9% [95% CI: 20.0-36.5%]. All studies excepting one included >80% Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and all excepting two were in remote or very remote settings. Observed prevalence of impetigo as diagnosed in healthcare encounters was lower, with a pooled estimate of 10.6% [95% CI: 3.1-21.8%], and a range of 0.1-50.0%. Community prevalence estimates for pharyngitis ranged from 0.2-39.4%, with a pooled estimate of 12.5% [95% CI: 3.5-25.9%], higher than the prevalence of pharyngitis in healthcare encounters; ranging from 1.0-5.0%, and a pooled estimate of 2.0% [95% CI: 1.3-2.8%]. The review was limited by heterogeneity in study design and lack of comparator studies for some populations.
CONCLUSIONS
Superficial Streptococcal A infections contribute to an inequitable burden of disease in Australia and persists despite public health interventions. The burden in community studies is generally higher than in health-services settings, suggesting under-recognition, possible normalisation and missed opportunities for treatment to prevent postGAS. The available, reported epidemiology is heterogeneous. Standardised nation-wide notification for sGAS disease surveillance must be considered in combination with the development of a Communicable Diseases Network of Australia (CDNA) Series of National Guideline (SoNG), to accurately define and address disease burden across populations in Australia.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This review is registered with PROSPERO. Registration number: CRD42019140440.
Topics: Humans; Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples; Health Services, Indigenous; Impetigo; Northern Territory; Pharyngitis; Streptococcus
PubMed: 38033025
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288016 -
BMC Medicine Jun 2011Stratifying patients with a sore throat into the probability of having an underlying bacterial or viral cause may be helpful in targeting antibiotic treatment. We sought... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Stratifying patients with a sore throat into the probability of having an underlying bacterial or viral cause may be helpful in targeting antibiotic treatment. We sought to assess the diagnostic accuracy of signs and symptoms and validate a clinical prediction rule (CPR), the Centor score, for predicting group A β-haemolytic streptococcal (GABHS) pharyngitis in adults (> 14 years of age) presenting with sore throat symptoms.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed up to July 2010. Studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of signs and symptoms and/or validated the Centor score were included. For the analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of signs and symptoms and the Centor score, studies were combined using a bivariate random effects model, while for the calibration analysis of the Centor score, a random effects model was used.
RESULTS
A total of 21 studies incorporating 4,839 patients were included in the meta-analysis on diagnostic accuracy of signs and symptoms. The results were heterogeneous and suggest that individual signs and symptoms generate only small shifts in post-test probability (range positive likelihood ratio (+LR) 1.45-2.33, -LR 0.54-0.72). As a decision rule for considering antibiotic prescribing (score ≥ 3), the Centor score has reasonable specificity (0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.88) and a post-test probability of 12% to 40% based on a prior prevalence of 5% to 20%. Pooled calibration shows no significant difference between the numbers of patients predicted and observed to have GABHS pharyngitis across strata of Centor score (0-1 risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.06; 2-3 RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.17; 4 RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.37).
CONCLUSIONS
Individual signs and symptoms are not powerful enough to discriminate GABHS pharyngitis from other types of sore throat. The Centor score is a well calibrated CPR for estimating the probability of GABHS pharyngitis. The Centor score can enhance appropriate prescribing of antibiotics, but should be used with caution in low prevalence settings of GABHS pharyngitis such as primary care.
Topics: Adult; Diagnosis, Differential; Humans; Pharyngitis; Predictive Value of Tests; Primary Health Care; Streptococcal Infections; Streptococcus pyogenes
PubMed: 21631919
DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-9-67 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2024Clinicians and healthcare policymakers have been drenched with a deluge of overlapping meta-analyses (MAs), and the necessity for comprehensive and clearly defined...
BACKGROUND
Clinicians and healthcare policymakers have been drenched with a deluge of overlapping meta-analyses (MAs), and the necessity for comprehensive and clearly defined evidence of Janus kinase inhibitors (JKIs) in atopic dermatitis (AD) is urgent.
METHODS
Six databases were searched for MAs published until October 2023. Qualitative description of MAs was mainly used, and Investigator's Global Assessment response (IGA response), the 75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (the EASI75), peak pruritus Numerical rating score (PP-NRS), and adverse effects were cited to describe the efficacy and safety of JKIs. The methodological quality of the included MAs was assessed by A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews II (AMSTAR II), and the quality of evidence was evaluated by the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE).
RESULTS
Sixteen MAs were pooled in this review, of which five studies appraised JKIs, five appraised systemic JKIs, five papers assessed abrocitinib only, and one assessed baricitinib. Two studies were of "high" methodological quality and 14 MAs were of "moderate" quality. Eleven MAs integrated the results of JKIs and reported that JKIs provide faster onset of IGA response (RR=2.83, 95% CI [2.25, 3.56], high-quality evidence). Similarly, 10 MAs showed that JAK inhibitors were more effective in improving the EASI75 (RR=2.84, 95% CI [2.2, 3.67], high-quality evidence). Results from 12 MAs showed JKIs were active in reducing the PP-NRS (SMD=-0.49, 95% CI [-0.67, -0.32]). All MAs affirmed JKIs added no adverse effects leading to discontinuation and serious adverse events (P<0.05). However, 200mg of abrocitinib had a higher risk of acne (RR=4.34, 95% CI [1.61, 11.71), herpes zoster (RR=1.64, 95% CI [0.42, 6.39]), headache (RR=1.76, 95% CI [1.03, 3]), and nausea (RR=7.81, 95% CI [3.84, 15.87]). Upadacitinib was known to increase acne (RR=6.23, 95% CI [4.08, 9.49]), nasopharyngitis (RR=1.36, 95% CI [1.03, 1.8]) and blood creatine phosphokinase (blood CPK) (RR=2.41, 95% CI [1.47, 3.95]). Baricitinib at 2mg was associated with increased blood CPK (RR=2.25, 95% CI [1.1, 2.97]).
CONCLUSION
Compared to placebo or dupilumab, the administration of JKIs can ameliorate IGA response more effectively, improve the EASI75, and relieve pruritus without severe adverse effect, while accompanied by more acne, nasopharyngitis, headache, and digestive disturbances. The curative effect of 200 mg of abrocitinib is significant and more caution should be given in patients with gastrointestinal dysfunction, herpes zoster, and those who are acne-prone. Baricitinib and upadacitinib should be avoided in populations at high risk for cardiovascular events.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=369369, PROSPERO (CRD42022369369).
Topics: Humans; Dermatitis, Atopic; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Nasopharyngitis; Pruritus; Acne Vulgaris; Headache; Herpes Zoster; Immunoglobulin A; Purines; Sulfonamides; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines; Azetidines
PubMed: 38464512
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1342810