-
1.
Reporting Bias is Highly Prevalent in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Platelet Rich Plasma Injections for Hip Osteoarthritis
Kim, D., Bashrum, B. S., Kotlier, J. L., Mayfield, C. K., Thompson, A. A., Abu-Zahra, M., Hwang, M., Bolia, I. K., Petrigliano, F. A., Liu, J. N.
Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation. 2024;6(1):100851
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
PURPOSE To describe the incidence and types of spin in systematic reviews of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for hip osteoarthritis (OA) and to determine whether patterns in study characteristics could be identified among studies with identifiable spin. METHODS The PubMed, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus databases were queried. Inclusion criteria were systematic reviews or meta-analyses that included an assessment of intra-articular PRP injections as a stand-alone treatment for hip OA. Two authors independently assessed the presence of spin in the included studies and recorded general study characteristics. The prevalence of the 15 different categories of spin was quantified using descriptive statistics. RESULTS Fifteen studies met inclusion criteria for this study. All studies contained at least two types of spin (range 2-9), with a median of 2. The most common type of spin was type 14 ("Failure to report a wide confidence interval of estimates"), which was observed in 10 studies. The second most common type of spin was type 13 ("Failure to specify the direction of the effect when it favors the control intervention"), found in 6 studies. CONCLUSIONS Spin is highly prevalent in abstracts of systematic reviews of PRP in the treatment of hip OA. Several associations were found between spin types and the study characteristics of AMSTAR 2 rating, Scopus CiteScore, journal impact factor, and PROSPERO preregistration. When present, spin in the abstracts of reviewed studies tended to favor the use of PRP in hip osteoarthritis. CLINICAL RELEVANCE It is important to understand the prevalence of spin in published abstracts, especially in areas of great impact or interest, so authors and readers can have a greater awareness of this potential form of bias.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients with hip osteoarthritis (15 systematic reviews).
Intervention
Systematic review to describe the incidence and types of spin bias in systematic reviews of platelet-rich plasma injections for hip osteoarthritis and to determine whether patterns in study characteristics could be identified among studies with identifiable spin.
Comparison
Outcome
All studies contained at least two types of spin (range 2-9), with a median of 2. The most common type of spin was type 14 ("Failure to report a wide confidence interval of estimates"), which was observed in 10 studies. The second most common type of spin was type 13 ("Failure to specify the direction of the effect when it favors the control intervention"), found in 6 studies. Several associations were found between spin types and the study characteristics of AMSTAR 2 rating, Scopus CiteScore, journal impact factor, and PROSPERO preregistration.
-
2.
Effectiveness of care bundles for prevention and treatment of postpartum hemorrhage: a systematic review
Vogel, J. P., Nguyen, P. Y., Ramson, J., De Silva, M. S., Pham, M. D., Sultana, S., McDonald, S., Adu-Bonsaffoh, K., McDougall, A. R. A.
American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2024
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Care bundles are a promising approach to reducing postpartum hemorrhage (PPH)-related morbidity and mortality. We assessed the effectiveness and safety of care bundles for PPH prevention and/or treatment. DATA SOURCES We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Maternity and Infant Care Database, and Global Index Medicus (inception to 9 June 2023) and ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP (last 5 years) using a phased search strategy, combining terms for PPH and care bundles. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Peer-review studies evaluating PPH-related care bundles. Care bundles were defined as interventions comprising three or more components implemented collectively, concurrently or in rapid succession. Randomized and non-randomized controlled trials, interrupted time series and before-after studies (controlled or uncontrolled) were eligible. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS Risk of bias assessed using ROB2 (randomized trials) and ROBINS-I (non-randomized studies). For controlled studies, we reported risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, with certainty of evidence determined using GRADE. For uncontrolled studies we used effect direction tables and summarized results narratively. RESULTS Twenty-two studies were included for analysis. For prevention-only bundles (two studies), low-certainty evidence suggests possible benefits in reducing blood loss, duration of hospitalization and ICU stay, and maternal wellbeing. For treatment-only bundles (nine studies), high-certainty evidence shows that the E-MOTIVE intervention reduced risks of composite severe morbidity (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.32-0.50) as well as blood transfusion for bleeding, PPH, severe PPH, and mean blood loss. One non-randomized trial and seven uncontrolled studies suggest other PPH treatment bundles might reduce blood loss and severe PPH, but this is uncertain. For combined prevention/treatment bundles (11 studies), low-certainty evidence shows that the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative (CMQCC) care bundle may reduce severe maternal morbidity (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.57-0.72). Ten uncontrolled studies variably showed possible benefits, no effects, or harms for other bundle types. Nearly all uncontrolled studies did not use suitable statistical methods for single-group pretest-posttest comparisons and should thus be interpreted with caution. CONCLUSIONS The E-MOTIVE intervention improves PPH-related outcomes among women delivering vaginally, and the CMQCC bundle may reduce severe maternal morbidity. Other bundle designs warrant further effectiveness research before implementation is contemplated.
PICO Summary
Population
Women experiencing vaginal birth or caesarean delivery (22 studies).
Intervention
Care bundles for postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) prevention and/or treatment.
Comparison
Outcome
For prevention-only bundles (2 studies), low-certainty evidence suggests possible benefits in reducing blood loss, duration of hospitalization and intensive care unit stay, and maternal wellbeing. For treatment-only bundles (9 studies), high-certainty evidence shows that the E-MOTIVE intervention reduced risks of composite severe morbidity (RR 0.40; 95% CI [0.32, 0.50] as well as blood transfusion for bleeding, PPH, severe PPH, and mean blood loss. One non-randomized trial and seven uncontrolled studies suggest other PPH treatment bundles might reduce blood loss and severe PPH, but this is uncertain. For combined prevention/treatment bundles (11 studies), low-certainty evidence shows that the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative (CMQCC) care bundle may reduce severe maternal morbidity (RR 0.64; 95% CI [0.57, 0.72]. Ten uncontrolled studies variably showed possible benefits, no effects, or harms for other bundle types.
-
3.
Pharmacological interventions for the prevention of bleeding in people undergoing elective hip or knee surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Gibbs, V. N., Champaneria, R., Sandercock, J., Welton, N. J., Geneen, L. J., Brunskill, S. J., Dorée, C., Kimber, C., Palmer, A. J., Estcourt, L. J.
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2024;1(1):Cd013295
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hip and knee replacement surgery is a well-established means of improving quality of life, but is associated with a significant risk of bleeding. One-third of people are estimated to be anaemic before hip or knee replacement surgery; coupled with the blood lost during surgery, up to 90% of individuals are anaemic postoperatively. As a result, people undergoing orthopaedic surgery receive 3.9% of all packed red blood cell transfusions in the UK. Bleeding and the need for allogeneic blood transfusions has been shown to increase the risk of surgical site infection and mortality, and is associated with an increased duration of hospital stay and costs associated with surgery. Reducing blood loss during surgery may reduce the risk of allogeneic blood transfusion, reduce costs and improve outcomes following surgery. Several pharmacological interventions are available and currently employed as part of routine clinical care. OBJECTIVES To determine the relative efficacy of pharmacological interventions for preventing blood loss in elective primary or revision hip or knee replacement, and to identify optimal administration of interventions regarding timing, dose and route, using network meta-analysis (NMA) methodology. SEARCH METHODS We searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews, from inception to 18 October 2022: CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Transfusion Evidence Library (Evidentia), ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). SELECTION CRITERIA We included RCTs of people undergoing elective hip or knee surgery only. We excluded non-elective or emergency procedures, and studies published since 2010 that had not been prospectively registered (Cochrane Injuries policy). There were no restrictions on gender, ethnicity or age (adults only). We excluded studies that used standard of care as the comparator. Eligible interventions included: antifibrinolytics (tranexamic acid (TXA), aprotinin, epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA)), desmopressin, factor VIIa and XIII, fibrinogen, fibrin sealants and non-fibrin sealants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We performed the review according to standard Cochrane methodology. Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using CINeMA. We presented direct (pairwise) results using RevMan Web and performed the NMA using BUGSnet. We were interested in the following primary outcomes: need for allogenic blood transfusion (up to 30 days) and all-cause mortality (deaths occurring up to 30 days after the operation), and the following secondary outcomes: mean number of transfusion episodes per person (up to 30 days), re-operation due to bleeding (within seven days), length of hospital stay and adverse events related to the intervention received. MAIN RESULTS We included a total of 102 studies. Twelve studies did not report the number of included participants; the other 90 studies included 8418 participants. Trials included more women (64%) than men (36%). In the NMA for allogeneic blood transfusion, we included 47 studies (4398 participants). Most studies examined TXA (58 arms, 56%). We found that TXA, given intra-articularly and orally at a total dose of greater than 3 g pre-incision, intraoperatively and postoperatively, ranked the highest, with an anticipated absolute effect of 147 fewer blood transfusions per 1000 people (150 fewer to 104 fewer) (53% chance of ranking 1st) within the NMA (risk ratio (RR) 0.02, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0 to 0.31; moderate-certainty evidence). This was followed by TXA given orally at a total dose of 3 g pre-incision and postoperatively (RR 0.06, 95% CrI 0.00 to 1.34; low-certainty evidence) and TXA given intravenously and orally at a total dose of greater than 3 g intraoperatively and postoperatively (RR 0.10, 95% CrI 0.02 to 0.55; low-certainty evidence). Aprotinin (RR 0.59, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.96; low-certainty evidence), topical fibrin (RR 0.86, CrI 0.25 to 2.93; very low-certainty evidence) and EACA (RR 0.60, 95% CrI 0.29 to 1.27; very low-certainty evidence) were not shown to be as effective compared with TXA at reducing the risk of blood transfusion. We were unable to perform an NMA for our primary outcome all-cause mortality within 30 days of surgery due to the large number of studies with zero events, or because the outcome was not reported. In the NMA for deep vein thrombosis (DVT), we included 19 studies (2395 participants). Most studies examined TXA (27 arms, 64%). No studies assessed desmopressin, EACA or topical fibrin. We found that TXA given intravenously and orally at a total dose of greater than 3 g intraoperatively and postoperatively ranked the highest, with an anticipated absolute effect of 67 fewer DVTs per 1000 people (67 fewer to 34 more) (26% chance of ranking first) within the NMA (RR 0.16, 95% CrI 0.02 to 1.43; low-certainty evidence). This was followed by TXA given intravenously and intra-articularly at a total dose of 2 g pre-incision and intraoperatively (RR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.00 to 9.12; low-certainty evidence) and TXA given intravenously and intra-articularly, total dose greater than 3 g pre-incision, intraoperatively and postoperatively (RR 0.13, 95% CrI 0.01 to 3.11; low-certainty evidence). Aprotinin was not shown to be as effective compared with TXA (RR 0.67, 95% CrI 0.28 to 1.62; very low-certainty evidence). We were unable to perform an NMA for our secondary outcomes pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction and CVA (stroke) within 30 days, mean number of transfusion episodes per person (up to 30 days), re-operation due to bleeding (within seven days), or length of hospital stay, due to the large number of studies with zero events, or because the outcome was not reported by enough studies to build a network. There are 30 ongoing trials planning to recruit 3776 participants, the majority examining TXA (26 trials). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found that of all the interventions studied, TXA is probably the most effective intervention for preventing bleeding in people undergoing hip or knee replacement surgery. Aprotinin and EACA may not be as effective as TXA at preventing the need for allogeneic blood transfusion. We were not able to draw strong conclusions on the optimal dose, route and timing of administration of TXA. We found that TXA given at higher doses tended to rank higher in the treatment hierarchy, and we also found that it may be more beneficial to use a mixed route of administration (oral and intra-articular, oral and intravenous, or intravenous and intra-articular). Oral administration may be as effective as intravenous administration of TXA. We found little to no evidence of harm associated with higher doses of tranexamic acid in the risk of DVT. However, we are not able to definitively draw these conclusions based on the trials included within this review.
PICO Summary
Population
People undergoing elective hip or knee surgery (102 randomised controlled trials).
Intervention
Antifibrinolytics (tranexamic acid, aprotinin, epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA)), desmopressin, factor VIIa and XIII, fibrinogen, fibrin sealants and non-fibrin sealants.
Comparison
Placebo or one of the active interventions.
Outcome
The primary outcomes were the proportion of participants requiring an allogeneic blood transfusion and all‐cause mortality. Tranexamic acid was the most common drug studied. Mortality was not reported by many trials. Tranexamic acid interventions consistently ranked higher than other treatments such as aprotinin, EACA and topical fibrin sealants compared with placebo. The authors noted that mixed routes of administration (oral and intra‐articular, intravenous and intra‐articular) appear to be more effective than single routes of administration and higher doses of tranexamic acid feature higher up the treatment ranking hierarchy. The authors identified 30 ongoing studies.
-
4.
Effects of albumin and crystalloid priming strategies on red blood cell transfusions in on-pump cardiac surgery: a network meta-analysis
Wang, T., Wang, J., Zhang, M., Zhang, H., Zhang, Q., Liu, G., Dong, W., Wang, Y., Ji, B.
BMC anesthesiology. 2024;24(1):26
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND In on-pump cardiac surgery, the albumin priming strategy could maintain colloid osmotic pressure better than crystalloid solutions and reduce excessive perioperative fluid balance. However, a high-quality meta-analysis is required to compare the safety of these approaches in perioperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. Owing to limited direct evidence, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to increase the pool of studies and provide indirect evidence. METHODS The pre-defined primary outcomes were intraoperative and the first 24 h postoperative RBC transfusion volume in units. The pre-defined secondary outcome was postoperative blood loss (the first 24 h). We reviewed all randomized controlled trials comparing albumin, crystalloid, and artificial colloid priming strategies. Studies that only displayed pre-defined outcomes could be included. A pairwise meta-analysis was performed on studies that directly compared the pre-defined outcomes between albumin and crystalloids. Additionally, a random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) model was employed to generate indirect evidence for the pre-defined outcomes between albumin and crystalloids. RESULTS The literature search identified 830 studies,10 of which were included in the final analysis. Direct meta-analysis indicated that crystalloid priming significantly decreased total perioperative RBC transfusions (MD: -0.68U; 95%CI: -1.26, -0.09U; P = 0.02) and intraoperative RBC transfusions (MD: -0.20U; 95%CI: -0.39, -0.01U; P = 0.03) compared to albumin. Postoperative RBC transfusions showed a decreasing trend in the crystalloid group; however, the difference was not statistically significant. (MD: -0.16U; 95%CI: -0.45, 0.14U; P = 0.30). After including indirect evidence, the NMA results continued to demonstrate a higher RBC receiving with the albumin priming strategy compared to crystalloids, although the differences did not reach statistical significance. For postoperative blood loss, direct evidence showed no significant differences between albumin and crystalloid priming strategies. However, NMA evidence displayed that albumin exist higher probability of reducing postoperative blood loss than crystalloid. CONCLUSION Both direct and NMA evidence indicated that the albumin priming strategy resulted in more perioperative RBC transfusions than crystalloids. Considering the additional blood management burden, the application of an albumin-priming strategy in on-pump cardiac surgery still needs more consideration.
PICO Summary
Population
Adult patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (10 randomised controlled trials).
Intervention
Network meta-analysis (NMA) to perform direct comparisons, including albumin vs. artificial colloid and artificial colloid vs. crystalloid, and to obtain indirect evidence for the comparisons between albumin and crystalloid priming strategies.
Comparison
Outcome
Direct meta-analysis indicated that crystalloid priming significantly decreased total perioperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusions (MD -0.68U; 95% CI [-1.26, -0.09U]) and intraoperative RBC transfusions (MD -0.20U; 95% CI [-0.39, -0.01U]) compared to albumin. Postoperative RBC transfusions showed a decreasing trend in the crystalloid group; however, the difference was not statistically significant (MD -0.16U; 95% CI: [-0.45, 0.14U]). After including indirect evidence, the NMA results continued to demonstrate a higher RBC receiving with the albumin priming strategy compared to crystalloids, although the differences did not reach statistical significance.
-
5.
Desmopressin to reduce periprocedural bleeding and transfusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Wang, C., Lebedeva, V., Yang, J., Anih, J., Park, L. J., Paczkowski, F., Roshanov, P. S.
Perioperative medicine (London, England). 2024;13(1):5
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
We systematically reviewed the literature to investigate the effects of peri-procedural desmopressin in patients without known inherited bleeding disorders undergoing surgery or other invasive procedures. We included 63 randomized trials (4163 participants) published up to February 1, 2023. Seven trials were published after a 2017 Cochrane systematic review on this topic. There were 38 trials in cardiac surgery, 22 in noncardiac surgery, and 3 in non-surgical procedures. Meta-analyses demonstrated that desmopressin likely does not reduce the risk of receiving a red blood cell transfusion (25 trials, risk ratio [RR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86 to 1.05) and may not reduce the risk of reoperation due to bleeding (22 trials, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.19) when compared to placebo or usual care. However, we demonstrated significant reductions in number of units of red blood cells transfused (25 trials, mean difference -0.55 units, 95% CI - 0.94 to - 0.15), total volume of blood loss (33 trials, standardized mean difference - 0.40 standard deviations; 95% CI - 0.56 to - 0.23), and the risk of bleeding events (2 trials, RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.84). The certainty of evidence of these findings was generally low. Desmopressin increased the risk of clinically significant hypotension that required intervention (19 trials, RR 2.15, 95% CI 1.36 to 3.41). Limited evidence suggests that tranexamic acid is more effective than desmopressin in reducing transfusion risk (3 trials, RR 2.38 favoring tranexamic acid, 95% CI 1.06 to 5.39) and total volume of blood loss (3 trials, mean difference 391.7 mL favoring tranexamic acid, 95% CI - 93.3 to 876.7 mL). No trials directly informed the safety and hemostatic efficacy of desmopressin in advanced kidney disease. In conclusion, desmopressin likely reduces periprocedural blood loss and the number of units of blood transfused in small trials with methodologic limitations. However, the risk of hypotension needs to be mitigated. Large trials should evaluate desmopressin alongside tranexamic acid and enroll patients with advanced kidney disease.
PICO Summary
Population
Children or adults without known inherited bleeding disorders undergoing surgery or other invasive procedures (63 randomised controlled trials, n= 4,163).
Intervention
Desmopressin administered intravenously or subcutaneously before, during, or immediately after a surgical or interventional procedure.
Comparison
Placebo, usual care, or antifibrinolytic agents.
Outcome
Meta-analyses demonstrated that desmopressin likely does not reduce the risk of receiving a red blood cell transfusion (25 trials, risk ratio [RR] 0.95; 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.86, 1.05]) and may not reduce the risk of reoperation due to bleeding (22 trials, RR 0.75; 95% CI [0.47, 1.19]) when compared to placebo or usual care. However, the authors demonstrated significant reductions in number of units of red blood cells transfused (25 trials, mean difference -0.55 units; 95% CI [-0.94, -0.15]), total volume of blood loss (33 trials, standardized mean difference - 0.40 standard deviations; 95% CI [-0.56, -0.23]), and the risk of bleeding events (2 trials, RR 0.45; 95% CI [0.24, 0.84]). The certainty of evidence of these findings was generally low.
-
6.
Intravenous immunoglobulin for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy
Bus, S. R., de Haan, R. J., Vermeulen, M., van Schaik, I. N., Eftimov, F.
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2024;2(2):Cd001797
-
-
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) causes progressive or relapsing weakness and numbness of the limbs, which lasts for at least two months. Uncontrolled studies have suggested that intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) could help to reduce symptoms. This is an update of a review first published in 2002 and last updated in 2013. OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin in people with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers on 8 March 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that tested any dose of IVIg versus placebo, plasma exchange, or corticosteroids in people with definite or probable CIDP. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was significant improvement in disability within six weeks after the start of treatment, as determined and defined by the study authors. Our secondary outcomes were change in mean disability score within six weeks, change in muscle strength (Medical Research Council (MRC) sum score) within six weeks, change in mean disability score at 24 weeks or later, frequency of serious adverse events, and frequency of any adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for our main outcomes. MAIN RESULTS We included nine RCTs with 372 participants (235 male) from Europe, North America, South America, and Israel. There was low statistical heterogeneity between the trial results, and the overall risk of bias was low for all trials that contributed data to the analysis. Five trials (235 participants) compared IVIg with placebo, one trial (20 participants) compared IVIg with plasma exchange, two trials (72 participants) compared IVIg with prednisolone, and one trial (45 participants) compared IVIg with intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP). We included one new trial in this update, though it contributed no data to any meta-analyses. IVIg compared with placebo increases the probability of significant improvement in disability within six weeks of the start of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72 to 3.36; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 4, 95% CI 3 to 5; 5 trials, 269 participants; high-certainty evidence). Since each trial used a different disability scale and definition of significant improvement, we were unable to evaluate the clinical relevance of the pooled effect. IVIg compared with placebo improves disability measured on the Rankin scale (0 to 6, lower is better) two to six weeks after the start of treatment (mean difference (MD) -0.26 points, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.05; 3 trials, 90 participants; high-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with placebo probably improves disability measured on the Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) scale (1 to 10, lower is better) after 24 weeks (MD 0.80 points, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.37; 1 trial, 117 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference between IVIg and placebo in the frequency of serious adverse events (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.87; 3 trials, 315 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The trial comparing IVIg with plasma exchange reported none of our main outcomes. IVIg compared with prednisolone probably has little or no effect on the probability of significant improvement in disability four weeks after the start of treatment (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.68; 1 trial, 29 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and little or no effect on change in mean disability measured on the Rankin scale (MD 0.21 points, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.61; 1 trial, 24 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference between IVIg and prednisolone in the frequency of serious adverse events (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.69; 1 cross-over trial, 32 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with IVMP probably increases the likelihood of significant improvement in disability two weeks after starting treatment (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.40 to 5.38; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with IVMP probably has little or no effect on change in disability measured on the Rankin scale two weeks after the start of treatment (MD 0.24 points, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.63; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or on change in mean disability measured with the Overall Neuropathy Limitation Scale (ONLS, 1 to 12, lower is better) 24 weeks after the start of treatment (MD 0.03 points, 95% CI -0.91 to 0.97; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The frequency of serious adverse events may be higher with IVIg compared with IVMP (RR 4.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 86.78; 1 trial, 45 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Evidence from RCTs shows that IVIg improves disability for at least two to six weeks compared with placebo, with an NNTB of 4. During this period, IVIg probably has similar efficacy to oral prednisolone and IVMP. Further placebo-controlled trials are unlikely to change these conclusions. In one large trial, the benefit of IVIg compared with placebo in terms of improved disability score persisted for 24 weeks. Further research is needed to assess the long-term benefits and harms of IVIg relative to other treatments.
PICO Summary
Population
People with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (9 randomised controlled trials, n= 372).
Intervention
Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg).
Comparison
Placebo; plasma exchange; corticosteroids (prednisolone and intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP)).
Outcome
The primary outcome was significant improvement in disability within six weeks after the start of treatment. There was low statistical heterogeneity between the trial results, and the overall risk of bias was low for all trials that contributed data to the analysis. IVIg compared with placebo increases the probability of significant improvement in disability within six weeks of the start of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.40; 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.72, 3.36]; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 4; 95% CI [3, 5]; 5 trials, 269 participants, high-certainty evidence). The trial comparing IVIg with plasma exchange reported none of our main outcomes. IVIg compared with prednisolone probably has little or no effect on the probability of significant improvement in disability four weeks after the start of treatment (RR 0.91; 95% CI [0.50, 1.68]; 1 trial, 29 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with IVMP probably increases the likelihood of significant improvement in disability two weeks after starting treatment (RR 1.46; 95% CI [0.40, 5.38]; 1 trial, 45 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).
-
7.
Reported outcomes in patients with iron deficiency or iron deficiency anemia undergoing major surgery: a systematic review of outcomes
Stangl, S., Popp, M., Reis, S., Sitter, M., Saal-Bauernschubert, L., Schießer, S., Kranke, P., Choorapoikayil, S., Weibel, S., Meybohm, P.
Systematic reviews. 2024;13(1):5
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND Iron deficiency (ID) is the leading cause of anemia worldwide. The prevalence of preoperative ID ranges from 23 to 33%. Preoperative anemia is associated with worse outcomes, making it important to diagnose and treat ID before elective surgery. Several studies indicated the effectiveness of intravenous iron supplementation in iron deficiency with or without anemia (ID(A)). However, it remains challenging to establish reliable evidence due to heterogeneity in utilized study outcomes. The development of a core outcome set (COS) can help to reduce this heterogeneity by proposing a minimal set of meaningful and standardized outcomes. The aim of our systematic review was to identify and assess outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies investigating iron supplementation in iron-deficient patients with or without anemia. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov systematically from 2000 to April 1, 2022. RCTs and observational studies investigating iron supplementation in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of ID(A), were included. Study characteristics and reported outcomes were extracted. Outcomes were categorized according to an established outcome taxonomy. Quality of outcome reporting was assessed with a pre-specified tool. Reported clinically relevant differences for sample size calculation were extracted. RESULTS Out of 2898 records, 346 underwent full-text screening and 13 studies (five RCTs, eight observational studies) with sufficient diagnostic inclusion criteria for iron deficiency with or without anemia (ID(A)) were eligible. It is noteworthy to mention that 49 studies were excluded due to no confirmed diagnosis of ID(A). Overall, 111 outcomes were structured into five core areas including nine domains. Most studies (92%) reported outcomes within the 'blood and lymphatic system' domain, followed by "adverse event" (77%) and "need for further resources" (77%). All of the latter reported on the need for blood transfusion. Reported outcomes were heterogeneous in measures and timing. Merely, two (33%) of six prospective studies were registered prospectively of which one (17%) showed no signs of selective outcome reporting. CONCLUSION This systematic review comprehensively depicts the heterogeneity of reported outcomes in studies investigating iron supplementation in ID(A) patients regarding exact definitions and timing. Our analysis provides a systematic base for consenting to a minimal COS. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42020214247.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients with iron deficiency or iron deficiency anaemia undergoing major surgery (13 studies: 5 randomised controlled trials and 8 observational studies).
Intervention
Systematic review to identify and appraise outcomes reported for preoperative or perioperative treatment of iron deficiency, with or without anemia.
Comparison
Outcome
Overall, 111 outcomes were structured into five core areas including nine domains. Most studies (92%) reported outcomes within the 'blood and lymphatic system' domain, followed by ‘adverse event’ (77%) and ‘need for further resources’ (77%). All of the latter reported on the need for blood transfusion. Reported outcomes were heterogeneous in measures and timing. Merely, two (33%) of six prospective studies were registered prospectively of which one (17%) showed no signs of selective outcome reporting.
-
8.
Evaluation of Spin Bias in Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Rotator Cuff Repair With Platelet-Rich Plasma
Moulton, S. G., Hartwell, M. J., Feeley, B. T.
The American journal of sports medicine. 2024;:3635465231213039
-
-
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in orthopaedics continues to increase. One common use of PRP is as an adjunct in rotator cuff repair surgery. Multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses have summarized the data on PRP use in rotator cuff repair surgery. However, systematic reviews and meta-analyses are subject to spin bias, where authors' interpretations of results influence readers' interpretations. PURPOSE To evaluate spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of PRP with rotator cuff repair surgery. STUDY DESIGN Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS A PubMed and Embase search was conducted using the terms rotator cuff repair and PRP and systematic review or meta-analysis. After review of 74 initial studies, 25 studies met the inclusion criteria. Study characteristics were documented, and each study was evaluated for the 15 most common forms of spin and using the AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews, Version 2) rating system. Correlations between spin types and study characteristics were evaluated using binary logistic regression for continuous independent variables and a chi-square test or Fisher exact test for categorical variables. RESULTS At least 1 form of spin was found in 56% (14/25) of the included studies. In regard to the 3 different categories of spin, a form of misleading interpretation was found in 56% (14/25) of the studies. A form of misleading reporting was found in 48% (12/25) of the studies. A form of inappropriate extrapolation was found in 16% (4/25) of the studies. A significant association was found between misleading interpretation and publication year (odds ratio [OR], 1.41 per year increase in publication; 95% CI, 1.04-1.92; P = .029) and misleading reporting and publication year (OR, 1.41 per year increase in publication; 95% CI, 1.02-1.95; P = .037). An association was found between inappropriate extrapolation and journal impact factor (OR, 0.21 per unit increase in impact factor; 95% CI, 0.044-0.99; P = .048). CONCLUSION A significant amount of spin was found in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of PRP use in rotator cuff repair surgery. Given the increasing use of PRP by clinicians and interest among patients, spin found in these studies may have a significant effect on clinical practice.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) (25 studies).
Intervention
Systematic review to evaluate the presence of spin bias in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of PRP with rotator cuff repair surgery.
Comparison
Outcome
Each included study was evaluated for the 15 most common forms of spin. Correlations between spin types and study characteristics were evaluated. At least 1 form of spin bias was found in 56% (14/25) of the included studies. In regard to the 3 different categories of spin, a form of misleading interpretation was found in 56% (14/25) of the studies. A form of misleading reporting was found in 48% (12/25) of the studies. A form of inappropriate extrapolation was found in 16% (4/25) of the studies. A significant association was found between misleading interpretation and publication year (odds ratio (OR) 1.41 per year increase in publication; 95% CI [1.04, 1.92]) and misleading reporting and publication year (OR 1.41 per year increase in publication; 95% CI [1.02, 1.95]). An association was found between inappropriate extrapolation and journal impact factor (OR 0.21 per unit increase in impact factor; 95% CI [0.044, 0.99]).
-
9.
Kidney disease in trials of perioperative tranexamic acid
Liu, C. W., Anih, J., Lebedeva, V., Gungor, A., Wang, C., Park, L., Roshanov, P. S.
Journal of clinical anesthesia. 2024;94:111417
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE To assess how kidney disease is handled in randomized trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of perioperative tranexamic acid, and to evaluate its effects across levels of kidney function. DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. SETTING We screened studies from a previous comprehensive systematic review, and updated its search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL to July 31, 2023. PATIENTS Patients undergoing non-obstetric surgery. INTERVENTIONS Intravenous tranexamic acid compared to placebo or usual care without tranexamic acid. MEASUREMENT We summarized the handling of kidney disease in eligibility criteria, dose adjustments for kidney function, and effects of tranexamic acid on thrombotic events, seizures, and bleeding by subgroups of kidney function. MAIN RESULTS We evaluated 300 trials with 53,085 participants; 45,958 participants (86.6%) were enrolled in 228 trials (76.0%) that explicitly excluded patients with kidney disease. Definitions of kidney diseased used for exclusion varied widely. Most were non-specific and some corresponded to mild disease. Only 5 trials adjusted dosing for kidney function. Meta-analysis of two large trials found tranexamic acid unlikely to substantially increase or decrease the occurrence of thrombotic events in patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m(2) (RR, 0.95; 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.07) or ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73m(2) (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.11; P for subgroup difference = 0.47), but both trials excluded patients with severe kidney disease. No analysis could be performed regarding seizure risk. One large trial in noncardiac surgery reported similar reduction in bleeding across subgroups of kidney function but excluded patients with creatinine clearance <30 mL/min. CONCLUSIONS The large evidence base supporting perioperative tranexamic acid suffers from broad and unjustified exclusion of patients with kidney disease. Typical perioperative dosing of tranexamic acid is likely safe and effective in patients with creatinine clearance >30 mL/min, but effects in more severe kidney disease are unknown.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients undergoing non-obstetric surgery (300 trials, n= 53,085).
Intervention
Intravenous tranexamic acid.
Comparison
Placebo or usual care without tranexamic acid.
Outcome
From all the included studies, 45,958 participants (86.6%) were enrolled in 228 trials (76.0%) that explicitly excluded patients with kidney disease. Definitions of kidney diseased used for exclusion varied widely. Most were non-specific and some corresponded to mild disease. Only 5 trials adjusted dosing for kidney function. Meta-analysis of two large trials found tranexamic acid unlikely to substantially increase or decrease the occurrence of thrombotic events in patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73m(2) (RR 0.95; 95% CI [0.83, 1.07]) or ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73m(2) (RR 1.00; 95% CI [0.91, 1.11], but both trials excluded patients with severe kidney disease. No analysis could be performed regarding seizure risk. One large trial in non-cardiac surgery reported similar reduction in bleeding across subgroups of kidney function but excluded patients with creatinine clearance <30 mL/min.
-
10.
Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and cardiovascular mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 studies and 372,156 hemodialysis patients
Karimi, Z., Raeisi Shahraki, H., Mohammadian-Hafshejani, A.
International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention. 2023;19:200220
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Prior studies on the association between erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) and cardiovascular mortality in hemodialysis patients have yielded conflicting findings. We aimed to clarify this relationship through a systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence. METHODS We comprehensively searched major databases for observational and interventional studies on ESA use and cardiovascular mortality in hemodialysis patients published from 1980 to September 2023. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects models. Sources of heterogeneity were explored through subgroup analyses and meta-regression. The study data were analyzed using Stata 15 software. FINDINGS Upon conducting the initial search, we extracted 792 articles and, after screening and considering the research criteria, 17 studies with 372,156 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, ESA use was associated with a 27 % increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.27, 95 % CI: 1.15-1.40, p < 0.001). This risk varied by geographical location, with RRs of 1.27 (95 % CI: 1.14-1.41; p-value≤0.001) for America, 1.33 (95 % CI: 1.12-1.58; p-value = 0.001) for Asia, and 1.23 (95 % CI: 1.02-1.49; p-value = 0.028) for Europe. Importantly, a gender disparity was revealed, with studies involving a higher proportion of males showing greater risks (RR 1.51, 95 % CI: 1.25-1.83, p < 0.001) than female-predominant studies (RR 1.08, 95 % CI: 0.86-1.36, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION Our meta-analysis indicates ESA use is associated with heightened cardiovascular mortality in hemodialysis patients, especially in males. These findings have implications for optimizing dosing strategies while balancing efficacy and safety. Further research is warranted, particularly randomized controlled trials, to establish definitive ESA dosing guidelines.
PICO Summary
Population
Haemodialysis patients (17 studies, n= 372,156).
Intervention
Systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the relationship between erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) use and cardiovascular mortality.
Comparison
Outcome
Overall, ESA use was associated with a 27% increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (RR, 1.27; 95% CI [1.15, 1.40]). This risk varied by geographical location, with RRs of 1.27; 95% CI [1.14, 1.41] for America, 1.33; 95% CI [1.12, 1.58] for Asia, and 1.23; 95% CI [1.02, 1.49] for Europe. A gender disparity was revealed, with studies involving a higher proportion of males showing greater risks RR, 1.51; 95% CI [1.25, 1.83] than female-predominant studies RR, 1.08; 95% CI [0.86, 1.36].