Prognostic serum biomarkers in cancer patients with COVID-19: A systematic review
Translational oncology. 2022;21:101443
PURPOSE Cancer patients with COVID-19 likely express biomarker changes in circulation. However, the biomarkers used in SARS-CoV-2 infected cancer patients for COVID-19 severity and prognosis are largely unclear. Therefore, this systematic review aims to determine what biomarkers were measured in cancer patients with COVID-19 and their prognostic utility. METHODS A systematic literature review in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus was performed on June 16th, 2021. The search keywords coronavirus, neoplasm, biomarkers, and disease progression were used to filter out 17 eligible studies, which were then carefully evaluated. RESULTS A total of 4,168 patients, 16 types of cancer, and 60 biomarkers were included. Seven up-regulated markers, including CRP, d-dimer, ferritin, IL-2R, IL-6, LDH, and PCT, were identified in eligible studies. Albumin and hemoglobin were significantly down-regulated in cancer patients with COVID-19. Moreover, we observed that the SARS-CoV-2 infected cancer patients with lower CRP, ferritin, and LDH levels successfully survived from COVID-19 treatments. CONCLUSION Several important clinical biomarkers, such as CRP, ferritin, and LDH, may serve as the prognostic markers to predict the outcomes following COVID-19 treatment and monitor the deterioration of COVID-19 in cancer patients.
Intra-articular versus intravenous administration of tranexamic acid in lower limb total arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials
European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie. 2022
AIM: The ideal route of tranexamic acid (TXA) administration in total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. This study aims to identify the optima route of TXA administration in THA or TKA. METHODS PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL database were systematically searched until 4 August 2021 for randomised studies that compared intravenous (IV) or intra-articular (IA) administration of TXA in THA or TKA. RESULTS Sixty-seven studies enrolling 8335 patients (IA: 4162; IV: 4173) were eligible for quantitative and qualitative analysis. Comparable results were demonstrated in the incidence of venous thromboembolisation (OR:0.96, p = 0.84), total blood loss (MD: - 9.05, p = 0.36), drain output (MD: - 7.36, p = 0.54), hidden blood loss (MD: - 6.85, p = 0.47), postoperative haemoglobin level (MD: 0.01, p = 0.91), haemoglobin drop (MD: - 0.10, p = 0.22), blood transfusion rate (OR: 0.99, p = 0.87), total adverse events (OR: 1.12, p = 0.28), postoperative range of motion (MD: 1.08, p = 0.36), postoperative VAS pain score (MD: 0.13, p = 0.24) and postoperative D-dimer level (MD: 0.61, p = 0.64). IV route of TXA administration was associated with significantly longer length of hospital stay compared to IA route of administration (MD: - 0.22, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION In this meta-analysis, both IV and IA route of TXA administration were equally effective in managing blood loss and postoperative outcomes in lower limb joints arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level 1. PROSPERO Registration CRD42021271355.
Effects of Platelet-Rich Plasma on Clinical Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine. 2022;10(1):23259671211061535
BACKGROUND Many studies have documented the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) alongside anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) in the management of ACL injury, but evidence on the benefits of PRP in improving the clinical outcomes of ACLR is inconsistent. PURPOSE To help in our understanding, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of PRP on patient-reported functional scores, the clinical assessments of knee function and structure, and complications. STUDY DESIGN Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS We searched 9 online databases for RCTs published in English or Chinese that examined the effects of PRP on ACLR. The primary outcome measures were visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores. The secondary outcomes included KT-1000 arthrometer, pivot-shift test, Lysholm and Tegner scores, tunnel widening, graft characterization, and complications. Subgroup analyses were performed according to time of assessments. Fixed- and random-effects models were selected for data analysis. RESULTS A total of 14 studies were included. When PRP was injected to graft tunnels, the pooled VAS scores of the 2 groups were similar (P = .31), and the subgroup analysis found that VAS and IKDC only improved at 3 months postoperatively (P = .0003 and P < .00001, respectively). When PRP was used at the bone-patellar tendon-bone harvest sites, VAS was decreased in the first 6 months postoperatively (P < .00001), whereas IKDC score was not remarkably different (P = .07). After PRP injection, Lysholm scores at 3 months postoperatively was different between the 2 groups (P < .00001), but the Tegner scores (P = .86), KT-1000 measurements (P = .12), the positive rate of pivot-shift test (P = .64), the enlargement of tunnels (femoral, P = .91; tibial, P = .80), and the characterization of grafts (P = .05) were not different. No difference in complications was found in either group. CONCLUSION PRP applied alongside ACLR could reduce postoperative pain and improve knee function in the short and medium terms but is ineffective in the long term. PRP does not improve knee stability and the enlargement of tunnels and does not accelerate the healing of grafts. Further studies would be required.
Association of Convalescent Plasma Treatment With Clinical Status in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Meta-analysis
JAMA network open. 2022;5(1):e2147331
IMPORTANCE COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is a potentially beneficial treatment for COVID-19 that requires rigorous testing. OBJECTIVE To compile individual patient data from randomized clinical trials of CCP and to monitor the data until completion or until accumulated evidence enables reliable conclusions regarding the clinical outcomes associated with CCP. DATA SOURCES From May to August 2020, a systematic search was performed for trials of CCP in the literature, clinical trial registry sites, and medRxiv. Domain experts at local, national, and international organizations were consulted regularly. STUDY SELECTION Eligible trials enrolled hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19, not receiving mechanical ventilation, and randomized them to CCP or control. The administered CCP was required to have measurable antibodies assessed locally. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS A minimal data set was submitted regularly via a secure portal, analyzed using a prespecified bayesian statistical plan, and reviewed frequently by a collective data and safety monitoring board. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Prespecified coprimary end points-the World Health Organization (WHO) 11-point ordinal scale analyzed using a proportional odds model and a binary indicator of WHO score of 7 or higher capturing the most severe outcomes including mechanical ventilation through death and analyzed using a logistic model-were assessed clinically at 14 days after randomization. RESULTS Eight international trials collectively enrolled 2369 participants (1138 randomized to control and 1231 randomized to CCP). A total of 2341 participants (median [IQR] age, 60 [50-72] years; 845 women [35.7%]) had primary outcome data as of April 2021. The median (IQR) of the ordinal WHO scale was 3 (3-6); the cumulative OR was 0.94 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.74-1.19; posterior probability of OR <1 of 71%). A total of 352 patients (15%) had WHO score greater than or equal to 7; the OR was 0.94 (95% CrI, 0.69-1.30; posterior probability of OR <1 of 65%). Adjusted for baseline covariates, the ORs for mortality were 0.88 at day 14 (95% CrI, 0.61-1.26; posterior probability of OR <1 of 77%) and 0.85 at day 28 (95% CrI, 0.62-1.18; posterior probability of OR <1 of 84%). Heterogeneity of treatment effect sizes was observed across an array of baseline characteristics. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This meta-analysis found no association of CCP with better clinical outcomes for the typical patient. These findings suggest that real-time individual patient data pooling and meta-analysis during a pandemic are feasible, offering a model for future research and providing a rich data resource.
Sinus Lift Associated with Leucocyte-Platelet-Rich Fibrin (Second Generation) for Bone Gain: A Systematic Review
Journal of clinical medicine. 2022;11(7)
The purpose of this systematic review was to analyze sinus lifting procedures and to compare the efficiency of this treatment associated with the second generation of platelet-rich fibrin related to its effects on bone gain and to clarify the regenerative efficacy in sinus lift procedure, whether alone or as a coadjutant to other bone graft materials. The PICOT question was, "In clinical studies with patients needing a maxillary sinus lift (P), does the use of PRF either alone (I) or in conjunction with other biomaterials (C) improve the clinical outcome associated with bone gain and density (O), with at least three months of follow-up (T)?" An electronic search was conducted in the MEDLINE (PubMed), Science Direct, and Scopus databases through a search strategy. A total of 443 articles were obtained from the electronic database search. Sixteen articles met all criteria and were included in this review. Within the limitation of this study and interpreting the results carefully, it was suggested that a higher risk for implant failure after a sinus elevation might be seen in patients with residual bone ≤4 mm, and PRF application was effective, suggesting reducing the time needed for new bone formation.
How Does Platelet-Rich Plasma Compare Clinically to Other Therapies in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
The American journal of sports medicine. 2022;:3635465211062243
BACKGROUND There has been an increase in interest in the use of biological therapies in orthopaedic conditions such as knee osteoarthritis. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is one of these therapies, but it still lacks consistent results. PURPOSE To evaluate the effects (benefits and harms) of PRP intra-articular injection compared with other nonsurgical methods for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. STUDY DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS Three electronic databases were searched to identify relevant studies published before January 2021. The primary outcomes were pain, function, and failure of treatment. Risks of bias of all trials were assessed using a Cochrane risk of bias tool. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation System was used to assess the quality of evidence of included studies. RESULTS A total of 40 studies with 3035 participants were included. Analysis of this review focused on comparing PRP with hyaluronic acid, corticosteroid, and saline, as we believe they are the most relevant comparisons with the most studies available. At 6-month follow-up, PRP was as effective as and in some studies more effective than other therapies regarding pain, function, and stiffness. However, current evidence is of low or very low quality and is based on trials with high risk of bias and great heterogeneity among them. No significant difference among treatments was found concerning major adverse events and treatment failure. CONCLUSION Although studies suggest that PRP may be more effective than or at least as effective as other modalities of nonsurgical treatment for knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain, function, and adverse events, serious limitations and methodological flaws are considerable in the current literature. Therefore, the authors are not able to make recommendations for clinical practice regarding PRP for knee osteoarthritis.
Hypertensive primary intraventricular hemorrhage: a systematic review
Neurosurgical review. 2022
Primary intraventricular hemorrhage (PIVH) is a special subtype of intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) without a hemorrhagic parenchymal component. Different conditions may cause this uncommon hemorrhage including trauma, vascular anomalies, coagulation disorders, and others. Frequently, PIVH is associated with structural vascular anomalies such as aneurysms, arteriovenous malformations, and dural fistulas. Traditionally, hypertension has been considered a predisposing factor for PIVH. A wide variety of studies have been published describing patients with PIVH; however, studies describing exclusively patients with hypertensive PIVH are lacking in the literature. For this reason, the features of PIVH secondary to hypertension are not well described. The purpose of this study is to analyze and describe the characteristics of hypertensive PIVH. A PubMed and Scopus search adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was performed to include studies reporting patients with hypertensive PIVH. The search yielded 19 articles reporting retrospective case series. The diagnosis of hypertensive PIVH should be established in patients meeting the following criteria: (a) elevation of blood pressure is observed at admission, (b) a cerebral angiography is negative for vascular anomalies, and (c) other causes of intracranial hemorrhage are ruled out. The prognosis is poorer in patients who present with low Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), old age, hydrocephalus, or more extensive intraventricular bleeding. The results of this study show that hypertension is the most common cause of PIVH, followed by hemorrhage caused by vascular anomalies. Hypertension may be a direct cause of PIVH, but also it may be a predisposing factor for bleeding in cases of an associated vascular anomaly.
Effectiveness and safety of carboxytocin versus oxytocin in preventing postpartum hemorrhage: A systematic review and meta-analysis
The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research. 2022
OBJECTIVE This study compared the effectiveness and safety of carbetocin and oxytocin in preventing postpartum hemorrhage (PPH). METHODS A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies published up to February 2019. Next, two independent reviewers screened the studies according to the selection criteria as well as the strategies recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. Data were then extracted and evaluated. All statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.1. RESULTS A total of 24 studies involving 37 383 patients were included for analysis. For cesarean section patients, carbetocin was superior to oxytocin in reduction of the need for additional uterine contraction (odds ratio [OR] = 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.35, 0.65], p < 0.00001), PPH (OR = 0.70, 95% CI [0.51, 0.95], p = 0.02), blood loss (mean [MD] = -64.36, 95% CI [-107.78, -20.93], p = 0.004), and transfusion (OR = 0.59, 95% CI [0.42, 0.82], p = 0.002), and there was no significant difference in severe PPH (OR = 0.84, 95% CI [0.66, 1.090], p = 0.19). For vaginal delivery patients, carbetocin was superior to oxytocin in reduction of the need for additional uterine contractions (OR = 0.48, 95% CI [0.25, 0.93], p = 0.03), PPH (OR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.09, 0.91], p = 0.03), and blood loss (MD = -63.52, 95% CI [-113.43, -13.60], p = 0.01), and there were no significant differences in severe PPH (OR = 0.82, 95% CI [0.40, 1.69], p = 0.59) and transfusion (OR = 0.60, 95% CI [0.22, 1.61], p = 0.31). With regard to safety, for cesarean section patients, carbetocin was superior to oxytocin in reduction of the incidence of headache (OR = 0.72, [0.55, 0.95], p = 0.02), and there were no significant differences in nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, flushing, tremors, itching, dizziness, and fever. For vaginal delivery patients, there were no significant differences in nausea, vomiting, headache, abdominal pain, flushing, tremors, itching, dizziness, and fever between the two drugs. CONCLUSION For patients undergoing cesarean section and vaginal delivery, carbetocin was superior to oxytocin in effectiveness and similar in safety. Therefore, carbetocin is expected to be an alternative uterine contraction agent for preventing PPH.
Comparative efficacy of 19 drug therapies for patients with idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura: a multiple-treatments network meta-analysis
Annals of hematology. 2022
Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is the most common clinical bleeding disorder with a high mortality rate and poor long-term survival quality in severe patients. There is controversy on how to choose the appropriate treatment. We systematically reviewed 19 randomized controlled trials (including 2615 participants) from January 1, 2015, to April 20, 2021. These investigations compared multiple drugs or their combinations in the therapeutic dose range for the treatment of ITP. The primary endpoint was based on the proportion of patients who responded to these therapies. The efficacy of eltrombopag plus rituximab, avatrombopag, dexamethasone plus anti-HP, and dexamethasone plus rhTPO was significantly higher than placebo (OR: 46.66, 29.44, 2.66, 1.86) or dexamethasone alone (OR: 46.22, 29.01, 2.22, 1.40). Placebo, oral immunosuppressants, and dexamethasone plus oseltamivir were less effective than the other ITP therapies tested. Eltrombopag plus rituximab may be the best choice when starting treatment for ITP.
Efficacy of different anticoagulant doses for patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
PURPOSE As no reported randomized control trials (RCTs) directly compare the three administration doses of anticoagulants (prophylactic dose, treatment dose, and no treatment), the most recommended dose to be administered to patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of anticoagulant doses administered to patients with COVID-19, using a network meta-analysis (NMA) including high-quality studies. METHODS All eligible trials from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Clinicaltrials.gov were included. We included RCTs and observational studies adjusted for covariates for patients aged ≥ 18 years and hospitalized due to objectively confirmed COVID-19. The main study outcome was mortality. RESULTS In patients with moderate COVID-19, the prophylactic (relative risk (RR) 0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-0.80]) and treatment dose (RR 0.57 [95% CI 0.45-0.72] were associated with a lower risk of short-term mortality than that with no anticoagulant treatment. However, the prophylactic and treatment dose groups were not significantly different. The hierarchy for efficacy in reducing short-term mortality was treatment dose (P score 92.4) > prophylactic dose (57.6) > no treatment (0.0). In patients with severe COVID-19, due to the absence of trials with the no-treatment group, NMA could not be conducted. However, pairwise comparison did not show a significant difference between the prophylactic and treatment dose groups. CONCLUSIONS Treatment and prophylactic doses of anticoagulants showed similar effects on mortality; however, the treatment dose is preferred over the prophylactic dose for patients with both moderate and severe COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND REGISTRATION DATES PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021245308, 05/21/2021).