Abstract

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of androgenetic alopecia, as well as establish an effective treatment protocol and optimal PRP preparation procedure. METHODS We searched the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, CNKI, and Wanfang databases from inception to October 29, 2021, using PROSPERO's International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registration ID: CRD42022295921). RESULTS The original literature search revealed 215 reviews; after duplication removal, 89 papers were eliminated, 95 were eliminated after reading the titles and abstracts, and eventually, 28 articles were included after reading the complete text. CONCLUSIONS PRP treatment for androgenetic alopecia is effective, and we recommend the following: (1) a PRP volume of at least 0.05 ml/cm(2) , preferably 0.1 ml/cm(2) ; (2) at least three consecutive treatments at an interval of 1 month; (3) intensive therapy is beneficial and can be provided from 3 to 6 months after continuous treatment; (4) objective indicators such as hair diameter, hair count; (5) long-term follow-up.

Abstract

BACKGROUND This meta-analysis aimed to explore the impact of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion on mortality during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Previous studies investigated the prognostic impact of RBC transfusion during ECMO on the risk of mortality, but no meta-analysis has been published before. METHODS The PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library were systematically searched for papers published up to 13 December 2021, using the MeSH terms "ECMO", "'Erythrocytes", and "Mortality" to identify meta-analyses. Total or daily RBC transfusion during ECMO and mortality were examined. RESULTS The random-effect model was used. Eight studies (794 patients, including 354 dead) were included. The total volume of RBC was associated with higher mortality standardized weighted difference (SWD = -0.62, 95% CI: -1.06,-0.18, p = .006; I2 = 79.7%, P(heterogeneity) = 0.001). The daily volume of RBC was associated with higher mortality (SWD = -0.77, 95% CI: -1.11,-0.42, p < .001; I2 = 65.7%, P(heterogeneity) = 0.020). The total volume of RBC was associated with mortality for venovenous (VV) (SWD = -0.72, 95% CI: -1.23, -0.20, p = .006) but not venoarterial ECMO (p = .126) or when reported together (p = .089). The daily volume of RBC was associated with mortality for VV (SWD = -0.72, 95% CI: -1.18, -0.26, p = 0.002; I2 = 0.0%, P(heterogeneity) = 0.642) and venoarterial (SWD = -0.95, 95% CI: -1.32, -0.57, p < .001) ECMO, but not when reported together (p = .067). The sensitivity analysis suggested the robustness of the results. CONCLUSION When considering the total and daily volumes of RBC transfusion during ECMO, the patients who survived received smaller total and daily volumes of RBC transfusion. This meta-analysis suggests that RBC transfusion might be associated with a higher risk of mortality during ECMO.

Abstract

Thrombocytopenia is a common and unsolved problem in myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients; we aimed to summarize the evidence of TPO-RA treatment for heath-related quality of life (HRQoL) and platelet transfusion burden of MDS patients. We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing TPO-RA to placebo in MDS published until July 31, 2021. A random-effect model was used. Eight RCTs with 908 patients were identified. Only three RCTs involving eltrombopag reported HRQoL, and all three studies treated HRQoL as a secondary outcome. In these three RCTs, the HRQoL instruments used in each study were different. However, this outcome cannot be meta-analyzed because some studies did not provide complete data. Subsequent clinical trials should pay more attention to this. Compared to placebo, TPO-RA did not affect platelet transfusion incidence 0.83 (95% CI 0.60-1.15). There was no evidence for subgroup differences in the analyses of different types of TPO-RA, different additional agent, and different types of MDS risk groups. However, platelet transfusion units (RR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.84) were significantly decreased. The RR of patients who did not require platelet transfusion for 56 or more consecutive days was not different between groups (RR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.34). TPO-RA may decrease platelet transfusion units in MDS patients with thrombocytopenia. But the significance of this finding should be interpreted with caution, because too few studies were meta-analyzed.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The outbreak of COVID-19 has resulted in more than 200 million infections and 4 million deaths. The blood derivative therapy represented by intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and convalescent plasma (CP) therapy may be the promising therapeutics for COVID-19. METHODS A systematic article search was performed for eligible studies published up to August 3, 2021, through the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library. The included articles were screened by using rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria. All analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.4. Quality of studies and risk of bias were evaluated. RESULTS A total of 5 IVIG therapy and 13 CP therapy randomized controlled trials were included with a sample size of 13,696 subjects diagnosed with COVID-19. IVIG could reduce the mortality compared with the control group (RR 0.65, 95% CI: 0.46-0.93, p = 0.02). The use of CP did not effectively reduce the mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.91-1.03, p = 0.38), the length of hospital stay (MD -0.47, 95% CI: -4.13 to 3.20, p = 0.80), and the mechanical ventilation use (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.89-1.07, p = 0.62) of the patients with COVID-19. Treatment with IVIG or CP was not significantly associated with an increase in reported adverse events (RR 1.07, 95% CI: 0.94-1.22, p = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS Treatment with IVIG could be effective and safe to improve survival for patients with COVID-19. But the benefit of CP in the treatment of COVID-19 is limited. The certainty of the evidence was moderate for all outcomes.

Abstract

PURPOSE Peptic ulcer is a multifactorial and complex disease and affects a wide range of people worldwide. We provided a novel therapeutic approach for peptic ulcer and observed its effect. METHODS Peptic ulcer patients were enrolled from 2016 to 2017 in Chongqing and randomly assigned to two groups: a control group that used only rabeprazole and a platelet-rich plasma (PRP) group that received a combination therapy of autologous PRP (aPRP) and rabeprazole. The therapeutic effect was assessed via the ulcer size and symptom score. RESULTS A total of 27 patients were included (12 patients in the control group and 15 patients in the PRP group) in this study. Our results showed that all participants have healed in 30 days, and there was no significant difference in healing time between the PRP group and the control group in different independent variables. However, regression analysis revealed that the healing time was 6.99 days shorter in the PRP group than that in the control group, and patients with higher symptom scores in the initial examination need more time to heal during treatment. Endoscopic results showed that the repaired ulcer in the PRP group was more similar to the normal gastric mucosa tissue than that the control group. CONCLUSION This study showed an encouraging preliminary result that aPRP has a positive result in patients with peptic ulcer and seems to be a better choice for refractory peptic ulcer treatment. Although further follow-up studies are needed to determine the duration of efficacy of aPRP, the approach will be helpful in improving the clinical treatment of peptic ulcer.

Abstract

Objective: To study the efficacy and patient comfort of absorbable hemostatic powder after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Methods: A total of 21 (17 males, 4 females) patients with an average age of 42(ranging from 18 to 65) underwent bilateral ESS for chronic rhinosinusitis(CRS) in Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University between October 2015 and July 2019 were enrolled to compare the effect of absorbable hemostasis powder with Nasopore using an intrapatient control design. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in the left and right nasal cavities of the same patient. If hemostatic powder was applied in the experiment nasal cavity, the Nasopore was applied in the control nasal cavity. The mean preoperative sinus computed tomography (CT) score was 6.25. All patients competed for symptom diaries using a visual analog scale (VAS, score out of 10) at baseline, through 1, 7, 14 and 30 days. Outcomes including bleeding, facial pain, nasal obstruction, nasal discharges using VAS were recorded separately for both sides. Postoperative endoscopic scores were also investigated. SPSS 22 and Graphpad prism 8.0 statistical softwares were used for the analysis. Paired t-test or nonparametric test was used between the test side and the control side. The difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Results: The bleeding score and total nasal symptom VAS scores at postoperative days (POD) 1, 7, 14 and 30 were not significantly different(t=1.341, 0.552, 0.631, 0.158, all P>0.05;t=0.944, 1.471, 1.612, 2.251, all P>0.05). There was no significant difference between absorbable hemostasis powder and Nasopore side on POD 1, 7, 14 and 30 in terms of each nasal symptom VAS scores(all P>0.05). On POD 1, 7 and 14, the packing material degeneration scores of the absorbable hemostasis powder side were significantly lower than those of the Nasopore side [(1.33±0.21)vs(2.00±0.00),(0.38±0.18) vs (1.95±0.22), 0 vs (1.80±0.13), all P<0.01]. There were significant differences between absorbable hemostasis powder and Nasopore side on POD 1, 7, 14 and 30 in terms of endoscopic scores (edema, crusting, discharges, scar, polyps and material degeneration, t=3.07, 7.00, 6.41, 2.69, all P<0.05). Conclusions: The absorbable hemostasis powder and Nasopore has similar postoperative hemostasis effect. The absorbable hemostasis powder is rapidly cleared and without negative effects on mucosal wound healing 14 days postoperatively.

Abstract

PURPOSE Leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) and advanced-platelet-rich fibrin (A-PRF) that are derivatives of PRF (platelet-rich fibrin) accelerate wound healing and reduce postoperative sequelae after tooth extraction. This network meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness of L-PRF and A-PRF in mandibular third molar extraction and provide suggestions for alleviating postoperative symptoms and signs. METHODS A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and SinoMed databases up to Oct 9, 2020. Three types of randomized controlled trials were included to investigate the effects of PRF derivatives after extracting mandibular third molars: A-PRF and L-PRF groups; A-PRF and control groups; L-PRF and control groups. Their relative effectiveness and ranking were assessed using network meta-analysis and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) with STATA 16.0 and Revman 5.3, respectively. RESULTS Ten randomized controlled trials were included, with 307 mandibular third molar extraction patients involved. The results showed that A-PRF had the best effect among the 3 groups in improving postoperative pain on the third (SUCRA = 98.2%) and seventh (SUCRA = 88.4%) days; L-PRF promoted soft tissue healing (MD=-0.90, 95% CI [-1.40, -0.40], P = .0004) on the seventh day compared with the control. However, other comparisons showed no significant differences (P > .05). CONCLUSION The limited results confirmed that PRF derivatives only reduced some postoperative symptoms and did not prevent them all. Application of A-PRF after third molar extraction reduced postoperative pain, and L-PRF improved the degree of soft tissue healing.

Abstract

ImportanceConvalescent plasma is a potential therapeutic option for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but further data from randomized clinical trials are needed ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of convalescent plasma therapy for patients with COVID-19 Design, Setting, and ParticipantsOpen-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial performed in 7 medical centers in Wuhan, China, from February 14, 2020, to April 1, 2020, with final follow-up April 28, 2020 The trial included 103 participants with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 that was severe (respiratory distress and/or hypoxemia) or life-threatening (shock, organ failure, or requiring mechanical ventilation) The trial was terminated early after 103 of a planned 200 patients were enrolled InterventionConvalescent plasma in addition to standard treatment (n = 52) vs standard treatment alone (control) (n = 51), stratified by disease severity Main Outcomes and MeasuresPrimary outcome was time to clinical improvement within 28 days, defined as patient discharged alive or reduction of 2 points on a 6-point disease severity scale (ranging from 1 [discharge] to 6 [death]) Secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality, time to discharge, and the rate of viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results turned from positive at baseline to negative at up to 72 hours ResultsOf 103 patients who were randomized (median age, 70 years;60 [58 3%] male), 101 (98 1%) completed the trial Clinical improvement occurred within 28 days in 51 9% (27/52) of the convalescent plasma group vs 43 1% (22/51) in the control group (difference, 8 8% [95% CI, −10 4% to 28 0%];hazard ratio [HR], 1 40 [95% CI, 0 79-2 49];P =  26) Among those with severe disease, the primary outcome occurred in 91 3% (21/23) of the convalescent plasma group vs 68 2% (15/22) of the control group (HR, 2 15 [95% CI, 1 07-4 32];P =  03);among those with life-threatening disease the primary outcome occurred in 20 7% (6/29) of the convalescent plasma group vs 24 1% (7/29) of the control group (HR, 0 88 [95% CI, 0 30-2 63];P =  83) (Pfor interaction =  17) There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (15 7% vs 24 0%;OR, 0 65 [95% CI, 0 29-1 46];P =  30) or time from randomization to discharge (51 0% vs 36 0% discharged by day 28;HR, 1 61 [95% CI, 0 88-2 93];P =  12) Convalescent plasma treatment was associated with a negative conversion rate of viral PCR at 72 hours in 87 2% of the convalescent plasma group vs 37 5% of the control group (OR, 11 39 [95% CI, 3 91-33 18];P <  001) Two patients in the convalescent plasma group experienced adverse events within hours after transfusion that improved with supportive care Conclusion and RelevanceAmong patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy added to standard treatment, compared with standard treatment alone, did not result in a statistically significant improvement in time to clinical improvement within 28 days Interpretation is limited by early termination of the trial, which may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference Trial RegistrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry:ChiCTR2000029757

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To evaluate efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), we conducted this meta-analysis, as well as proposed a protocol for its application in curative processes. METHODS All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PRP for the management of mild or moderate CTS were included in this study. Database search was conducted from study inception to July 2020, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. We used visual analogue scores (VAS) and the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) as evaluation tools for primary outcomes. Second outcomes comprised cross-sectional area (ΔCSA) and electrophysiological indexes including distal motor latency (DML), sensory peak latency (SPL), motor nerve conduction velocity (MNCV), sensory nerve conduction velocity (SNCV), compound muscle action potential (CMAP), and sensory nerve action potential (SNAP). The pooled data were analyzed using RevMan 5.3. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted with the evidence of heterogeneity. Egger' test was used to investigate publication bias. RESULTS 9 RCTs were finally screened out with 434 patients included. Control groups comprised corticosteroid injection in 5 trials, saline injection in 1 trial, and splint in 3 trials. At the 1st month after follow-up, only ΔCSA between the PRP group and the control group showed significant difference (P < 0.05). In the 3rd month, there were statistically significant differences in VAS, BCTQ, SPL, SNCV, and ΔCSA between two groups (P < 0.05), while no statistically significant differences were found in the remaining outcomes. In the 6th month, there were statistically significant differences at BCTQ (P < 0.05) in primary outcomes and ΔCSA (P < 0.05) in secondary outcomes between two groups. As to adverse events in PRP injection, only one study reported increased pain sensation within 48 h after injections. CONCLUSION This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that the PRP could be effective for mild to moderate CTS and superior to traditional conservative treatments in improving pain and function and reducing the swelling of the median nerve for a mid-long-term effect. To some extent, the electrophysiological indexes also improved after PRP injection compared with others conservative treatments.

Abstract

BACKGROUND A tourniquet is a device commonly used to control massive hemorrhage during knee replacement surgery. However, the question remains whether the use of tourniquets affects the permeability of the bone cement around the knee prosthesis. Moreover, the long-term effects and stability of the knee prosthesis are still debatable. The aim of this study was to examine whether the use of a tourniquet increases the thickness of the cement mantle and affects the postoperative blood loss and pain during primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using meta-analysis. METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Library, MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, CNKI, and Wang Fang databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on primary TKA, from inception to November 2019. All RCTs in primary TKA with and without a tourniquet were included. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.2 software. RESULTS A total of eight RCTs (677 knees) were analyzed. We found no significant difference in the age and sex of the patients. The results showed that the application of tourniquet affects the thickness of the bone cement around the tibial prosthesis (WMD = 0.16, 95%CI = 0.11 to 0.21, p < 0.00001). However, in our study, there was no significant difference in postoperative blood loss between the two groups was observed (WMD = 12.07, 95%CI = - 78.63 to 102.77, p = 0.79). The use of an intraoperative tourniquet can increase the intensity of postoperative pain (WMD = 1.34, 95%, CI = 0.32 to 2.36, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Tourniquet application increases the thickness of the bone cement around the prosthesis and may thus increase the stability and durability of the prosthesis after TKA. The application of an intraoperative tourniquet can increase the intensity of postoperative pain.