Prenatal caffeine consumption and neurobehavioral disorders - A systematic review.

Studies have suggested associations between gestational exposure to caffeine and adverse outcomes, however the evidence is still limited. Therefore, a systematic review was conducted to investigate the association between prenatal caffeine exposure and neurobehavioral disorders. The MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and LILACS databases were searched. Observational studies involving women with documented caffeine consumption during pregnancy were eligible for inclusion. The outcomes evaluated were behavioral and intellectual development, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, and related behaviors. The data were analyzed by qualitative synthesis. The ROBINS-I tool was employed to assess the risk of bias, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE (PROSPERO: CRD42023421164). The search yielded fourteen studies that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. The sample size among pregnant women ranged from 173 to 64,189, and among children ranged from 88 to 49,190. Maternal caffeine consumption during pregnancy ranged from 0 to 1000 mg/day, with the highest levels observed during mid-pregnancy. Seven studies indicated a potential association between prenatal caffeine exposure and neurobehavioral/neurodevelopment deficits, one study showed that prenatal caffeine exposure improved peer problems, and six studies did not show a significant effect of prenatal caffeine consumption on neurobehavioral disorders. The included studies were classified as moderate for the risk of bias and with very low certainty of evidence. Thus, the evidence is insufficient to confirm with certainty that the prenatal caffeine exposure leads to neurobehavioral disorders. Studies heterogenicity, as well as their variable quality and the presence of several confounding factors, generate uncertainty.

Effectiveness of epidural morphine for the treatment of cancer pain in patients with gastrointestinal neoplasm-a systematic review.

One-third of cancer pain patients do not experience adequate pain relief using analgesic ladder by the World Health Organization. Interventional procedures, such as epidural morphine, have been considered. This study aimed to review the literature comparing the effects of epidural administration of morphine with the oral route. This systematic review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted with patients with gastrointestinal neoplasm. A search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases to identify studies published up to May 2023. The retrieved study was evaluated using the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool and qualitatively synthesized. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach (Prospero: CRD42021264728). Only one RCT, a crossover trial, was included in this systematic review. The study was conducted with ten participants (one withdrawal) and reported a statistically significant difference between both subcutaneous and epidural morphine solutions and oral morphine. The adverse events were not described. The included study presents some concerns of bias and low certainty of evidence on the effectiveness and security of epidural morphine administration. The available literature does not suffice to elucidate whether morphine administration via the epidural route is more effective than other routes. Further RCTs are necessary to improve the level of evidence on the effectiveness and risk-benefit of epidural morphine in the management of cancer pain in gastrointestinal neoplasm patients.

Antimicrobial stewardship for surgical antibiotic prophylaxis and surgical site infections: a systematic review.

Background Surgical site infections account for 14-17% of all healthcare-associated infections. Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) are complementary strategies developed to optimize the use of antimicrobials. Aim to evaluate the effectiveness of AMS in promoting adherence to surgical antibiotic prophylaxis protocols in hospitalized patients, reducing surgical site infection rate and cost-benefit ratio. Method This systematic review of randomized clinical trials, non-randomized clinical trials and before and after studies was performed using Pubmed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov, in addition to reference lists of included studies. The risk of bias of studies was measured by the ROBINS-I checklist and the quality of the evidence synthesis by GRADE. Results Fourteen before and after design studies were included. In 85.7% of the studies, AMS was effective in increasing adherence to surgical antibiotic prophylaxis protocols and in 28.5%, there was reduction in surgical site infection rate. Three studies evaluated cost-benefit ratio and found a favorable impact. Eight (57%) studies were at risk of moderate bias and six had severe bias. The evaluation of the synthesis of evidence showed quality ranging from low to very low. Conclusion AMS, such as audit, feedback, education, implementation of a protocol, and a computer-assisted decision support methodology, appear to be effective in promoting adherence to surgical antibiotic prophylaxis protocols, reducing surgical site infection rate with a positive economic impact. However, more studies, particularly randomized clinical trials, are needed to improve the level of evidence of available information on AMS in order to favor decision-making.