Abstract

SIGNIFICANCE Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) may be a potential drug for treatment of chronic refractory ulcers, which increase the risk of systemic infection and local canceration. However, the efficacy and safety of clinical application of PRP are still controversial. Thus, this study was aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of PRP in patients with chronic ulcers. Recent Advances: For this meta-analysis, Cochrane's Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Knowledge databases were searched. Results were pooled using a random-effects model. The primary outcome was the proportion of completely healed chronic ulcers. CRITICAL ISSUES Seventeen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Compared with the control group, PRP significantly increased the fraction of healed ulcers (pooled RR =1.50; 95% CI 1.20 to 1.87; I2=47.8%). In autologous PRP (APRP) and homologous PRP (HPRP) subgroups, there were statistical differences between the control group vs. treatment subgroup (pooled RR=1.30, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.54, I2=25.7%; pooled RR=3.53, 95% CI 1.94 to 6.43, I2=0.0%, respectively). In terms of percent of chronic ulcers area healed, there was a statistically significant difference between the PRP-treated group vs. the control group (SMD=1.37, 95%CI=0.91 to 1.82, I2=22.1 %). As for PRP safety, there existed a statistically significant difference between the APRP subgroup and the HPRP subgroup, respectively (pooled RR=0.58; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.98; I2=0.0%) and (pooled RR=4.12; 95% CI 1.55 to 10.96; I2=6.8%). FUTURE DIRECTIONS Our findings shows that PRP may be a beneficial treatment of chronic skin ulcers and that APRP may be much safer than HPRP.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Epistaxis is a very common presentation in the emergency department (ED), accounting for approximately 1 in 200 ED visits in the United States. Currently, standard practice includes the initial use of topical anesthetics and vasoconstrictors, followed by more invasive treatments such as nasal packing, cauterization or surgical ligation for refractory cases. Over the years several studies have investigated the potential use of topical Tranexamic Acid (TXA) in the management of epistaxis. We have conducted a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of topical TXA versus other standard practices or placebo in the management of epistaxis. METHODS PubMed and Scopus databases were searched from inception to April 2021. We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies investigating the efficacy of TXA in bleeding cessation in epistaxis in adults. The primary outcome measured was the prevalence of bleeding cessation after treatment at first assessment. Other outcomes were bleeding reoccurrence between 24 and 72 h and at 7-8 days. A random-effects model was used to estimate odds ratio (OR) for outcomes. RESULTS A total of eight studies were included in the analysis, including seven randomized trials and one retrospective study. We included a total of 1299 patients, 596 (46%) received TXA while 703 (54%) received control treatment (placebo, lidocaine plus vasoconstrictors or local anesthetics). Patients who were treated with TXA were 3.5 times (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.3-9.7) more likely to achieve bleeding cessation at the first assessment. Patients treated with TXA had 63% (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.20-0.66) less likelihood of returning due to rebleeding at 24-72 h. CONCLUSION Topical TXA is associated with better bleeding cessation rates after treatment compared to the standard practices.

Abstract

BACKGROUND In patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE), bleeding risk should be carefully assessed but none of the available risk scores is currently recommended. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the performance of bleeding scores in patients with VTE focusing on high-risk patients. METHODS Longitudinal studies were searched in Medline and Cochrane Library, as well as reviews and references of retrieved articles. Studies were identified, data were extracted, and reporting quality was evaluated. We determined the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the 'high risk' category of each bleeding score. Random effects meta-analysis was performed in order to derive the central estimates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS Twenty-one studies and ten bleeding scores fulfilled the inclusion criteria. VTE-BLEED showed the highest sensitivity but the second-lowest specificity (Se 76%; Sp 61%), followed by ACCP (Se 59%; Sp 57%). The remaining scores had high specificity (> 80%) but a low sensitivity (< 20%). HEMORR(2)HAGES and Niewenhuis score showed the best performance regarding LR+ that was 2.67 and 5.91, respectively. Regarding DOR, the Niewenhuis score and VTE-BLEED were the best performers with 9.04; 95% CI 3.87-21.09 and 4.94 95% CI 2.66-9.09, respectively. In a cohort with patients predominantly treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), VTE-BLEED had the highest sensitivity (Se 77%; Sp 60%). CONCLUSIONS Overall, the majority of the risk scores showed a moderate ability to forecast major bleeding events, with the VTE-BLEED as the most sensitive in patients treated with DOACs.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Therefore, prevention is important. Band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. However, primary prophylaxis is not the current standard of care in paediatric patients because it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES To determine the benefits and harms of beta-blockers compared with placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded (April 2020). We screened the reference lists of the retrieved publications and manually searched the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conference (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2008 to December 2019. We searched clinicaltrials.gov, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for ongoing clinical trials. We imposed no language or document type restrictions on our search. SELECTION CRITERIA We planned to include randomised clinical trials, irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status to assess benefits and harms. We included observational studies, retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials, for a narrative report of harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials by standard Cochrane methodologies. We planned to asses risk of bias and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We planned to use intention-to-treat principle. We planned to analyse data with RevMan Analysis. MAIN RESULTS We found no randomised clinical trials that assessed beta-blockers compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. We found four observational studies that reported on harms. As a systematic search for observational studies was not planned, we only listed the reported harms in a table. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of beta-blockers versus placebo on patient-relevant clinical outcomes, such as mortality, quality of life, failure to control variceal bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of the two interventions.

Abstract

Objective: Anemia is frequent in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and the optimal red blood cell transfusion strategy for AMI patients with anemia is still controversial. We aimed to compare the efficacy of restrictive and liberal red cell transfusion strategies in AMI patients with anemia. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov, from their inception until March 2021. Studies designed to compare the efficacy between restrictive and liberal red blood cell transfusion strategies in patients with AMI were included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, including overall mortality, in-hospital or follow-up mortality. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were presented and pooled by random-effects models. Results: The search yielded a total of 6,630 participants in six studies. A total of 2,008 patients received restrictive red blood cell transfusion while 4,622 patients were given liberal red blood cell transfusion. No difference was found in overall mortality and follow-up mortality between restrictive and liberal transfusion groups (RR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.82-1.40, P = 0.62; RR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.56-1.42, P = 0.62). However, restrictive transfusion tended to have a higher risk of in-hospital mortality compared with liberal transfusion (RR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.00-1.50, P = 0.05). No secondary outcomes, including follow-up reinfarction, stroke, and acute heart failure, differed significantly between the two groups. In addition, subgroup analysis showed no differences in overall mortality between the two groups based on sample size and design. Conclusion: Restrictive and liberal red blood cell transfusion have a similar effect on overall mortality and follow-up mortality in AMI patients with anemia. However, restrictive transfusion tended to have a higher risk of in-hospital mortality compared with liberal transfusion. The findings suggest that transfusion strategy should be further evaluated in future studies.

Abstract

Recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a common complication following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Our study aimed to estimate the comparative efficacy of different pharmacologic interventions for the prevention of GIB, through a network meta-analysis (NMA). A total of 13 observational studies comparing six strategies. Among those, 4 were for primary, and 9 were for secondary prevention of GIB. On NMA, thalidomide (Hazard ratio [HR]: 0.016, Credible interval [CrI]I: 0.00053-0.12), omega-3-fatty acid (HR:0.088, CrI: 0.026-0.77), octreotide (HR: 0.17, CrI: 0.0589-0.41) and danazol (HR:0.17, CrI: 0.059-0.41) reduced the risk of GIB. The use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ACEi/ARB) and digoxin were not associated with any significant reduction. Based on NMA, combining indirect treatment comparisons, thalidomide, danazol, and octreotide treatments were associated with decreased risk of recurrent GIB. Additionally, Omega 3 fatty acids were associated with a lower risk of the primary episode of GIB in the LVAD patient population.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION The optimal therapy for bleeding-related gastric varices is still a controversial topic. There is a paucity of literature that comprehensively summarizes the available literature regarding safety and efficacy of thrombin in bleeding gastric varices. METHODS Four independent reviewers performed a comprehensive review of all original articles published from inception to October 2020, describing the use of thrombin for management of bleeding gastric varices. Primary outcomes were (1) pooled early and late rebleeding rate, (2) pooled gastric variceal related mortality rate, (3) pooled rescue therapy rate, and (4) pooled adverse event rate with the use of thrombin in bleeding gastric varices. The meta-analysis was performed and the statistics were two-tailed. Finally, probability of publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and with Egger's test. RESULTS Eleven studies were included in the analysis after comprehensive search. This yielded a pooled early rebleeding rate of 9.3% (95% CI 4.9-17) and late rebleeding rate 13.8% (95% CI 9-20.4). Pooled rescue therapy rate after injecting thrombin in bleeding gastric varices was 10.1% (95% CI 6.1-16.3). The pooled 6-week gastric variceal-related mortality rate after injecting thrombin in bleeding gastric varices was 7.6% (95% CI 4.5-12.5). There were a total of four adverse events out of a total of 222 patients with pooled adverse event rate after injecting thrombin in bleeding gastric varices was 5.6% (95% CI 2.9-10.6). CONCLUSION In summary, the systematic review and meta-analysis on the use of thrombin for bleeding gastric varices suggest low rates of rebleeding and minimal rates of adverse events. While, early and late rebleeding rate and rescue therapy rate are similar to cyanoacrylate-based therapy, the minimal rates of adverse events are perhaps the most important benefit of thrombin. Thus, the current data suggest that thrombin is a very promising therapeutic alternative with low risk of adverse events for bleeding gastric varices.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The aim of this systemic review is to compare different treatments for patients with granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) and microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) to inform evidence-based recommendations for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/Vasculitis Foundation (VF) Vasculitis Management Guidelines. METHODS A systemic review was conducted by searching articles in English using OVID Medline, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Articles were screened for suitability in addressing PICO questions, with studies presenting the highest level of evidence given preference. RESULTS A total of 729 full-text articles addressing GPA and MPA PICO questions were reviewed. For remission induction, rituximab was shown to be noninferior to cyclophosphamide (CYC) (odds ratio [OR]: 1.55, moderate certainty of evidence). The addition of plasma exchange to induction therapy in severe disease did not improve the composite end point of death or end stage renal disease (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.86 [95% confidence interval CI: 0.65, 1.13], moderate certainty of evidence). In nonsevere disease, methotrexate was noninferior to CYC for induction of remission (remission at 6 months of 90% vs. 94%). For maintenance of remission, methotrexate and azathioprine showed no difference in the risk of relapse over a mean follow-up of 29 months (HR: 0.92, [95% CI: 0.52, 1.65]low certainty of evidence). As maintenance therapy, rituximab was superior to a tapering azathioprine strategy in major relapse-free survival at 28 months (HR: 6.61, [95% CI: 1.56, 27.96], moderate certainty of evidence). In two randomized trials, longer-term azathioprine maintenance therapy (>24 months) is associated with fewer relapses without an increase in adverse events. CONCLUSION This comprehensive systematic review synthesizes and evaluates the benefits and toxicities of different treatment options for GPA and MPA.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Nasal packing is the mainstay of epistaxis management; however, packs cause patient discomfort and can lead to hospital admission. Absorbable haemostats provide clotting factors or act as a substrate to stimulate clotting and represent a potential treatment alternative. A systematic review was performed to evaluate the efficacy of topical haemostats in the management of epistaxis. METHODS A systematic literature search of 7 databases was performed. Only eligible randomised controlled-trials (RCTs) and observational studies were included. The primary outcome was short-term haemostatic success (<7 days). Secondary outcomes included long-term haemostatic control (no re-bleeding 7-30 days), patient discomfort and adverse effects. Meta-analysis was performed where possible. RESULTS Of 2,249 records identified, 12 were included in the qualitative synthesis and 4 RCTs were included in meta-analysis. The following haemostats were reported: gelatin-thrombin matrix (n=8), aerosolised/gel tranexamic acid (n=1), cellulose agents (n=2), and fibrin sealants (n=1). Studies involving tranexamic acid on removable delivery devices (e.g. pledgets) were excluded. There was heterogeneity in outcome measures and inclusion criteria (coagulopathies/anticoagulants were excluded in 3 RCTs and 2 observational studies). The short-term haemostatic success varied between studies (13.9% to 100%). No significant post-procedural complications were reported. The meta-analysis favoured absorbable haemostatic agent versus packing (risk ratio 1.20; 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.37; p=0.007). The risk of bias across all studies was moderate to high. CONCLUSIONS The evidence suggests haemostatic agents are effective at managing acute epistaxis when compared with nasal packing. More data are required before recommendations can be made regarding management in patients on anticoagulants.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effectiveness and adverse events of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in individuals with lower-extremity diabetic ulcers, lower-extremity venous ulcers, and pressure ulcers. PATIENTS AND METHODS We searched multiple databases from database inception to June 11, 2020, for randomized controlled trials and observational studies that compared PRP to any other wound care without PRP in adults with lower-extremity diabetic ulcers, lower-extremity venous ulcers, and pressure ulcers. RESULTS We included 20 randomized controlled trials and five observational studies. Compared with management without PRP, PRP therapy significantly increased complete wound closure in lower-extremity diabetic ulcers (relative risk, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.32, moderate strength of evidence [SOE]), shortened time to complete wound closure, and reduced wound area and depth (low SOE). No significant changes were found in terms of wound infection, amputation, wound recurrence, or hospitalization. In patients with lower-extremity venous ulcers or pressure ulcers, the SOE was insufficient to estimate an effect on critical outcomes, such as complete wound closure or time to complete wound closure. There was no statistically significant difference in adverse events. CONCLUSION Autologous PRP may increase complete wound closure, shorten healing time, and reduce wound size in individuals with lower-extremity diabetic ulcers. The evidence is insufficient to estimate an effect on wound healing in individuals with lower-extremity venous ulcers or pressure ulcers. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020172817.