Anti-Müllerian hormone is a predictor of medium-term cumulative live birth following in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to examine the capacity of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) to predict cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) following IVF/ICSI within 36 months since start of treatment. STUDY DESIGN: This is a cohort study of women seeking IVF/ICSI fertility treatment in a private Australian IVF clinic in a single calendar year. Live births were monitored over three years following start date of IVF/ICSI. The impact of serum AMH level on the CLBR was assessed using Cox's proportional hazard models, and its incremental values in the prediction of CLBR were evaluated. RESULTS: The CLBRs were significantly higher in women with AMH levels in the highest (>44.5 pmol/L; 87.0%, 95% CI 79.2% - 95.1%) and in the middle two quartiles (between 11.5 and 44.5 pmol/L; 81.0%, 95% CI 74.2% - 87.6%), compared with AMH levels below the 25th percentile (≤11.5 pmol/L; 63.2%, 95% CI 53.2% - 74.5%). Approximately half of the women with AMH in the lowest quartile conceived a live birth within 12 months of starting IVF compared with two-thirds of the women in the upper three quartiles. After adjusting for confounders, AMH remained a significant, albeit slight predictor of CLBR with a fall of 3 pmol/L equating to an 1% decrease in CLBR. The AMH's added values into the prediction of live birth were slight, indicated by a net reclassification improvement of 13.8%. The value is lower than that of maternal age (35.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Serum AMH level was a significant slight predictor of CLBR following IVF/ICSI. AMH should not be used to exclude women from IVF/ICSI however, women with low AMH should be counselled on the likelihood of taking longer to achieve a live birth than individuals with normal AMH levels.

Clinical and laboratory factors associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

SARS Coronavirus-2 is one of the most widespread viruses globally during the 21st century, whose severity and ability to cause severe pneumonia and death vary. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of all studies that met our standardised criteria and then extracted data on the age, symptoms, and different treatments of Covid-19 patients and the prognosis of this disease during follow-up. Cases in this study were divided according to severity and death status and meta-analysed separately using raw mean and single proportion methods. We included 171 complete studies including 62,909 confirmed cases of Covid-19, of which 148 studies were meta-analysed. Symptoms clearly emerged in an escalating manner from mild-moderate symptoms, pneumonia, severe-critical to the group of non-survivors. Hypertension (Pooled proportion (PP): 0.48 [95% Confident interval (CI): 0.35-0.61]), diabetes (PP: 0.23 [95% CI: 0.16-0.33]) and smoking (PP: 0.12 [95% CI: 0.03-0.38]) were highest regarding pre-infection comorbidities in the non-survivor group. While acute respiratory distress syndrome (PP: 0.49 [95% CI: 0.29-0.78]), (PP: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.34-0.97]) remained one of the most common complications in the severe and death group respectively. Bilateral ground-glass opacification (PP: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.59-0.75]) was the most visible radiological image. The mortality rates estimated (PP: 0.11 [95% CI: 0.06-0.19]), (PP: 0.03 [95% CI: 0.01-0.05]), and (PP: 0.01 [95% CI: 0-0.3]) in severe-critical, pneumonia and mild-moderate groups respectively. This study can serve as a high evidence guideline for different clinical presentations of Covid-19, graded from mild to severe, and for special forms like pneumonia and death groups.

Torasemide versus furosemide in treatment of heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

AIM: Diuretics are a cornerstone in treatment of heart failure (HF). Torasemide is a loop diuretic with a potential advantage over other diuretics. We aim to meta-analyse and compare the effect of torasemide with furosemide in HF patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search using 12 databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing furosemide and torasemide in HF patients were included and meta-analysed. We assessed the risk of bias using Cochrane Collaboration's tool. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016046112). RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs with 1598 patients were included. There was a significant difference between torasemide 20 mg and furosemide 40 mg in increasing the urine volume (standard difference of the mean (SDM) [95% confidence interval] = -0.78 [-1.52 to -0.053], P = .036). Torasemide 10 mg and 10 to 20 mg have a significant effect on potassium excretion in comparison with furosemide 25 to 40 mg (P = .018 and .023, respectively). In general, torasemide and furosemide have no significant difference in mortality, edema improvement, weight loss, heart rate, and reducing systolic/diastolic blood pressure. However, oral torasemide has a significant lower hospital stay P < .001 and superior effect in improving ejection fraction P = .029. CONCLUSION: Although not all results are statistically significant, torasemide has potential advantages on multiple aspects of HF management when compared with furosemide. More studies are needed to clarify these effects.

Association of Allergic Symptoms with Dengue Infection and Severity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

The relationship between the severity of dengue infection and allergy is still obscure. We conducted an electronic search across 12 databases for relevant articles reporting allergic symptoms, dengue infection, and dengue classification. These studies were categorized according to dengue severity and allergy symptoms, and a meta-analysis was performed by pooling the studies in each category. Among the included 57 articles, pruritus was the most common allergic sign followed by non-specified allergy and asthma (28.6%, 13%, and 6.5%, respectively). Despite the reported significant association of dengue with pruritus and total IgE level (P < 0.05), in comparison with non-dengue cases and healthy controls, there was no association between the different severe dengue group with pruritus, skin allergy, food allergy or asthma. However, removing the largest study revealed a significant association between asthma with dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF) rather than dengue fever (DF). In comparison with DF, DHF was associated with IgE positivity. Furthermore, specific-IgE level was higher in secondary DF rather than primary DF. There was a possible association between allergy symptoms and dengue severity progression. Further studies are needed to clarify this association.

Correction to: Association of Allergic Symptoms with Dengue Infection and Severity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

The spelling of the fifth author's name was misspelled. The byline should appear as shown above.

A step by step guide for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis with simulation data.

BACKGROUND: The massive abundance of studies relating to tropical medicine and health has increased strikingly over the last few decades. In the field of tropical medicine and health, a well-conducted systematic review and meta-analysis (SR/MA) is considered a feasible solution for keeping clinicians abreast of current evidence-based medicine. Understanding of SR/MA steps is of paramount importance for its conduction. It is not easy to be done as there are obstacles that could face the researcher. To solve those hindrances, this methodology study aimed to provide a step-by-step approach mainly for beginners and junior researchers, in the field of tropical medicine and other health care fields, on how to properly conduct a SR/MA, in which all the steps here depicts our experience and expertise combined with the already well-known and accepted international guidance.We suggest that all steps of SR/MA should be done independently by 2-3 reviewers' discussion, to ensure data quality and accuracy. CONCLUSION: SR/MA steps include the development of research question, forming criteria, search strategy, searching databases, protocol registration, title, abstract, full-text screening, manual searching, extracting data, quality assessment, data checking, statistical analysis, double data checking, and manuscript writing.

Quality of flow diagram in systematic review and/or meta-analysis.

Systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses generally provide the best evidence for medical research. Authors are recommended to use flow diagrams to present the review process, allowing for better understanding among readers. However, no studies as of yet have assessed the quality of flow diagrams in systematic review/meta-analyses. Our study aims to evaluate the quality of systematic review/meta-analyses over a period of ten years, by assessing the quality of the flow diagrams, and the correlation to the methodological quality. Two hundred articles of "systematic review" and/or "meta-analysis" from January 2004 to August 2015 were randomly retrieved in Pubmed to be assessed for the flow diagram and methodological qualities. The flow diagrams were evaluated using a 16-grade scale corresponding to the four stages of PRISMA flow diagram. It composes four parts: Identification, Screening, Eligibility and Inclusion. Of the 200 articles screened, 154 articles were included and were assessed with AMSTAR checklist. Among them, 78 articles (50.6%) had the flow diagram. Over ten years, the proportion of papers with flow diagram available had been increasing significantly with regression coefficient beta = 5.649 (p = 0.002). However, the improvement in quality of the flow diagram increased slightly but not significantly (regression coefficient beta = 0.177, p = 0.133). Our analysis showed high variation in the proportion of articles that reported flow diagram components. The lowest proportions were 1% for reporting methods of duplicates removal in screening phase, followed by 6% for manual search in identification phase, 22% for number of studies for each specific/subgroup analysis, 27% for number of articles retrieved from each database, and 31% for number of studies included in qualitative analysis. The flow diagram quality was correlated with the methodological quality with the Pearson's coefficient r = 0.32 (p = 0.0039). Therefore, this review suggests that the reporting quality of flow diagram is less satisfactory, hence not maximizing the potential benefit of the flow diagrams. A guideline with standardized flow diagram is recommended to improve the quality of systematic reviews, and to enable better reader comprehension of the review process.

Early vaccination protects against childhood leukemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Leukemia is the most commonly diagnosed childhood cancer, although its etiology is still largely unknown. Growing evidence supports a role for infection in the etiology of acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL), and the involvement of the immune system suggests that vaccination may also play a role. However, the findings presented in the published literature are inconsistent. Therefore, we conducted a PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis. 14 studies were identified and meta-analyzed. Vaccinations studied comprised Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine, Triple vaccine, Hepatitis B vaccine (HBV), Polio, Measles, Rubella, Mumps, trivalent MMR vaccine and Haemophilus influenza type B (HiB) vaccine. We observed a protective association between any vaccination in the first year of life and risk of childhood leukemia (summary odds ratio (OR) 0.58 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36-0.91]). When individual vaccines were analysed, some evidence of an association was seen only for BCG (summary OR 0.73 [95% CI 0.50-1.08]). In conclusion, early vaccination appears to be associated with a reduced risk of childhood leukemia. This finding may be underpinned by the association observed for BCG. Given the relatively imprecise nature of the results of this meta-analysis, our findings should be interpreted cautiously and replicated in future studies.