Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The use of immunotherapies for recurrent miscarriage: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis.
Cavalcante, Marcelo Borges; Alcântara da Silva, Pedro Henrique; Sampaio, Olga Goiana Martins; Câmara, Fernanda Eunice Araújo; de Melo Bezerra Cavalcante, Candice Torres; Barini, Ricardo.
Afiliação
  • Cavalcante MB; Post Graduate Program in Medical Sciences, Universidade de Fortaleza (UNIFOR), Fortaleza, CE 60.811-905, Brazil; CONCEPTUS - Reproductive Medicine, Fortaleza, CE 60.170-240, Brazil. Electronic address: marcelocavalcante.med@gmail.com.
  • Alcântara da Silva PH; Ana Bezerra University Hospital - Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Santa Cruz, RN, Brazil.
  • Sampaio OGM; Post Graduate Program in Medical Sciences, Universidade de Fortaleza (UNIFOR), Fortaleza, CE 60.811-905, Brazil.
  • Câmara FEA; Post Graduate Program in Medical Sciences, Universidade de Fortaleza (UNIFOR), Fortaleza, CE 60.811-905, Brazil.
  • de Melo Bezerra Cavalcante CT; Medical Course, Universidade de Fortaleza (UNIFOR), Fortaleza, CE 60.811-905, Brazil.
  • Barini R; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Campinas University (UNICAMP), Campinas, SP 13.083-887, Brazil.
J Reprod Immunol ; 158: 103986, 2023 08.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37413775
Immunotherapies have been a treatment proposed for recurrent miscarriages (RMs). The use of immunotherapies remains not recommended in the management of couples with RM. This overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis (SRs-MAs) aims to identify and evaluate the quality of SRs-MAs that studied the effectiveness of immunotherapies in the treatment of RM patients. SRs-MAs were searched in PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science. SRs-MAs were analyzed using AMSTAR-2, PRISMA 2020, Risk of Bias in Systematic (ROBIS), and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tools to evaluate the methodological quality, reporting quality, risk of bias, and evidence quality of included SRs-MAs, respectively. This review included 20 SRs-MAs that evaluated the following immunotherapies: intravenous immunoglobulin (13 publications), lymphocyte immunotherapy (6 publications), corticosteroids (3 publications), and lipid emulsion (1 publication). SRs-MAs were rated as high methodological, moderate, and critically low quality in 14 (70 %), 1 (5 %), and 5 (25 %) SRs-MAs and high reporting, moderate, and low quality in 13 (65 %), 4 (20 %), and 3 (5 %) SRs-MAs, respectively. The overall risk of bias revealed a low risk of bias for three-quarters of the SRs-MAs. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis resulted in 23 outcomes, of which 4, 3, 5, and 11 results were of high, moderate, low, and very low quality, respectively. An improvement has been observed over the past few years in the quality of systematic reviews (SR)-MAs that have investigated the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin, lymphocyte immunotherapy, lipid emulsion therapy, and corticosteroids as a therapy for RM.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Aborto Habitual / Imunoglobulinas Intravenosas Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Overview / Systematic_reviews Limite: Female / Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Reprod Immunol Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Aborto Habitual / Imunoglobulinas Intravenosas Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Overview / Systematic_reviews Limite: Female / Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Reprod Immunol Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article
...