Recovery in Stroke Patients Treated With Fluoxetine Versus Placebo: A Pooled Analysis of 7,165 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is a major cause of disability and death. Stroke recovery outcomes range from functional impairment to disability. This study was designed to compare the recovery results of stroke patients treated with fluoxetine to those treated with placebo. REVIEW SUMMARY: Seventeen randomized clinical trials were identified by searching PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science until June 2021. Fluoxetine enhances the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score [mean difference (MD)=-0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-1.19 to -0.15)] and the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale (FMMS) score [MD=17.36, 95% CI (12.12-22.61)] at the 3-month follow up. However, the NIHSS score showed no significant difference between the 2 groups at 2 weeks [MD=-0.32, 95% CI (-0.72 to 0.07)] or at 6 months [MD=-0.17, 95% CI (-0.47 to 0.14)]. Fluoxetine-treated and placebo-treated patients had the same overall impact on FMMS scores at 1 month ( P =0.41). Barthel index showed no significant difference between the 2 arms at 3 months ( P =0.21) or 6 months ( P =0.68). Fluoxetine-treated patients were at a higher risk of broken bone [risk ratios (RR)=2.30, 95% CI (1.59-3.32)] and hyponatremia [RR=2.12, 95% CI (1.19-3.76)], and at lower risk of new depression [RR=0.72, 95% CI (0.61-0.84)] in comparison with placebo. CONCLUSION: The efficacy of fluoxetine on the NIHSS and FMMS is likely to take time to emerge and is expected to be transient. The Barthel index score did not differ between the fluoxetine and placebo groups. The use of fluoxetine increased the incidence of hyponatremia and bone fractures while decreasing the risk of new-onset depression.

Automated versus manual oxygen control in preterm infants receiving respiratory support: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ventilated preterm infants are exposed to deviations from the intended arterial oxygen saturation range. Therefore, an automated control system was developed to rapidly modulate the fraction of inspired oxygen. The aim of this review is to compare the efficacy and safety of automated versus manual oxygen delivery control. METHODS: In December 2020, we systematically searched four electronic databases; PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science for eligible randomized controlled trials. We extracted and pooled data as mean difference and 95% confidence interval in an inverse variance method using RevMan software. RESULTS: Thirteen trials were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis, enrolling 343 preterm infants on respiratory support. Automated oxygen control increased the time spent within the target arterial oxygen saturation range of 85-96% (MD = 8.96; 95% CI [6.26, 11.67], p<.00001), and 90-95% (MD = 18.25; 95% CI [4.58, 31.65], p = .008). In addition, it reduced the time of hypoxia (<80%); (MD = -1.24; 95% CI [-2.05, -0.43], p = .003), (MD = -0.82; 95% CI [-1.23, -0.41], p<.0001) with predetermined ranges of 85-96% and 90-95%, respectively. Automated control system reduced as well the time of hyperoxia (>98%) (MD = -0.99; 95% CI [-1.74, -0.25], p = .009) at intended range of 90-95%, and number of manual inspired oxygen fraction adjustments (MD = -2.82; 95% CI [-4.56, -1.08], p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Automated oxygen delivery is rapid and effective in controlling infants' oxygen saturation. It can be used to reduce the load over the nurses, but not to substitute the clinical supervision. Further long-term trials of large-scale are required to evaluate the prolonged clinical outcomes.