RESUMO
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had an enormous impact on the global economy and healthcare. Pharmacists were vital members of the healthcare system, and they participated in various strategies to reduce the effect of the pandemic. Numerous papers were published discussing their roles during the pandemic. Bibliometric analysis was used to measure the impact of publications on this topic and assessed them qualitatively and quantitatively over a specific time. Objective: Evaluate published literature pertaining to the roles of pharmacists and pharmacy services during the pandemic and identify gaps. Methods: An electronic search was conducted on PubMed database using a specific query. Eligible publications were published in English between January 2020 and January 2022 and discussed the role of pharmacists, pharmacies, and pharmacy departments during the pandemic. Clinical trials, studies on pharmacy education/training, and conference abstracts were excluded. Results: Of 954 records retrieved, 338 (35.4%) from 67 countries were included. Most papers (n = 113; 33.4%) were from the community pharmacy sector, followed by the clinical pharmacy sector (n = 89; 26.3%). Sixty-one (18%) papers were multinational, mostly involving two countries. The average number of citations of the included papers was 6 times (range 0-89). The most common MeSH terms were 'humans', 'hospitals', and 'telemedicine', where the former frequently co-appeared with the terms 'COVID-19' and 'pharmacists.' Conclusions: Results from this study illustrate the innovative and proactive strategies developed by pharmacists during the pandemic. Pharmacists from around the world are encouraged to share their experiences for stronger healthcare systems to counter future pandemics and environmental disasters.
RESUMO
Background: Although heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a serious disease, only limited options are available for its treatment. Recent studies have analyzed the effects of phosphodiesterase (PDE) inhibitors, especially PDE5 and PDE3 inhibitors, in patients with HFpEF, with mixed outcomes. Methods: We searched PUBMED and EMBASE databases up to August 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical trials that tested the effects of PDE inhibitors on patients with HFpEF were included as eligible studies. Indicators of left ventricular (LV) function, pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP), right ventricular (RV) function, exercise capacity, and quality of life (QOL) were used to evaluate the efficacy of PDE inhibitors in HFpEF. Results: Six RCTs that reported in 7 studies were included to evaluate the efficiency of PDE inhibitors on HFpEF patients. In the pooled analysis, PDE inhibitors showed insignificant changes in the ratio of early diastolic mitral inflow to annular velocities, left atrial volume index, pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP), pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), peak oxygen uptake, 6-minute walking test distance, as well as Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score. However, substantial improvement was observed in the tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE). Additionally, the regression analysis showed that PDE inhibitor administration time is a critical factor for the decrease in PASP. Conclusions: PDE inhibitors did not effectively improve LV function, PAP, exercise capacity, and QOL in patients with HFpEF. However, they improved RV function with significant difference, suggesting that PDE inhibitors might be a promising option for HFpEF patients with RV dysfunction.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To explore the current evidence concerning the effect of oral antioxidant supplementation on various male fertility outcomes, as antioxidants are widely available compounds that are commonly used for the treatment of male infertility. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Medline and Cochrane electronic databases were searched according to a modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines looking for studies investigating the effect of antioxidant therapy on infertile men. The studies were explored looking for antioxidants: (i) types and doses; (ii) mechanism of action and rationale for use; and (iii) effect on the different outcome measures reported. RESULTS: In all, 26 studies reported a significant positive effect of antioxidant therapy on basic semen parameters, advanced sperm function, outcomes of assisted reproductive therapy, and live-birth rate. Vitamin E, vitamin C, carnitines, N-acetyl cysteine, co-enzyme Q10, zinc, selenium, folic acid and lycopene were most commonly used. The vitamins' mechanism of action and reported doses is presented in Table 1, Table 2. CONCLUSION: Antioxidants generally have a favourable effect on male fertility. Further studies are needed to identify the optimal antioxidant regimen that can be used safely and efficiently in clinical practice.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate various methods of operative sperm retrieval in men with non-obstructive azoospermia (NOA) and to determine the optimal surgical approach in terms of effectiveness, morbidity, and complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched to identify five recent reviews and meta-analyses evaluating outcomes for sperm retrieval in men with NOA. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Micro-TESE is the most efficient method for retrieving sperm but requires special expertise and can be traumatic for the testes. Conventional biopsies are twice more likely to retrieve sperm than fine-needle aspiration. Testicular aspiration performed by multiple passes into the testis is traumatic and is not efficient for sperm retrieval. Needle-aspiration biopsy and open real-time testicular mapping by the single seminiferous tubule technique can offer less traumatic methods for sperm retrieval, which can be tried before proceeding to micro-TESE. The first attempt at sperm retrieval is the best chance the patient has and should combine various techniques sequentially to give the highest chance of success with the least morbidity.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To present the current state of the art in various robot-assisted microsurgical procedures in male infertility and review the latest literature, as the technology in infertility procedures has substantially developed since the incorporation of the Vinci® robotic platform (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The search strategy in this review was conducted in accordance with Cochrane guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). A search strategy was conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed and the Cochrane electronic databases (from 2000 to present) to identify studies that included both robotic and male infertility. RESULTS: In all, 23 studies were found, 12 of which met our inclusion criteria. Articles were excluded if the study did not include both male infertility and robotics. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic assistance for microsurgical procedures in male infertility appears to be safe and feasible. It has several advantages including elimination of tremor, multi-view magnification, additional instrument arms, and enhanced dexterity with articulating instrument arms. It also has a short learning curve with a small skin incision. However, larger, prospective studies are needed to establish the clinical benefits over standard microsurgery.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of comparative studies of laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (LNU), the standard management for upper urothelial tumours, and robot-assisted NU (RANU) that has emerged as a viable alternative. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify all studies reporting on both LNU and RANU for upper urothelial tract tumours. RESULTS: In all, 1630 patients were included, of which 838 underwent LNU and 792 RANU. Three studies reported on mean operative time and found it to be less in LNU, with two reporting this to be significant (RANU 298 vs LNU 251 min, P = 0.03; 306 vs 234 min, respectively, P < 0.001). Both studies reporting on median node count found this to be higher in the robotic groups: RANU 5.5 vs LNU 1.0 and RANU 21 vs LNU 11. Positive surgical margins (RANU 1.69% vs LNU 7.06%, P = 0.18), bladder recurrence (24.6% vs 36.89%, P = 0.09), and distant metastases (27.50% vs 17.50%, P = 0.29) were not significantly different between the two techniques. Disease-specific mortality did not differ between the two techniques (RANU 7.5% vs LNU 12.5%, P = 0.46), but postoperative mortality was reduced in RANU (0.14% vs 1.32%, P = 0.03). Overall complication rates were statistically lower in RANU, at 12.5% vs 18.8% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests these techniques are equivalent in terms of perioperative and oncological performance. Furthermore, there may be a lower overall complication rate, as well as postoperative mortality in the robotic group. Further research in the form of a randomised controlled trial is warranted.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate the safety and efficacy of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and simple prostatectomy for large prostate burdens, as discussion and debate continue about the optimal surgical intervention for this common pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search was conducted for studies comparing HoLEP with simple prostatectomy [open (OP), robot-assisted, laparoscopic] using a sensitive strategy and in accordance with Cochrane collaboration guidelines. Primary parameters of interest were objective measurements including maximum urinary flow rate (Q max) and post-void residual urine volume (PVR), and subjective outcomes including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL). Secondary outcomes of interest included volume of tissue retrieved, catheterisation time, hospital stay, blood loss and serum sodium decrease. Data on baseline characteristics and complications were also collected. Where possible, comparable data were combined and meta-analysis was conducted. RESULTS: In all, 310 articles were identified and after screening abstracts (114) and full manuscripts (14), three randomised studies (263 patients) were included, which met our pre-defined inclusion criteria. All these compared HoLEP with OP. The mean transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) volume was 113.9 mL in the HoLEP group and 119.4 mL in the OP group. There was no statistically significant difference in Q max, PVR, IPSS and QoL at 12 and 24 months between the two interventions. OP was associated with a significantly shorter operative time (P = 0.01) and greater tissue retrieved (P < 0.001). However, with HoLEP there was significantly less blood loss (P < 0.001), patients had a shorter hospital stay (P = 0.03), and were catheterised for significantly fewer hours (P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in the total number of complications recorded amongst HoLEP and OP (P = 0.80). CONCLUSION: The results of the meta-analysis have shown that HoLEP and OP possess similar overall efficacy profiles for both objective and subjective disease status outcome measures. This review shows these improvements persist to at least the 24 month follow-up point. Further randomised studies are warranted to fully determine the optimal surgical intervention for large prostate burdens.