Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Regimen for Mild/Moderately Severe COVID-19: A Rapid Review With Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of the approved nirmatrelvir/ritonavir regimen for treatment of laboratory-confirmed mild/moderately severe COVID-19 remains unclear. METHODS: We systematically identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world studies (RWS; observational studies) of the efficacy/effectiveness and/or safety of the approved nirmatrelvir/ritonavir regimen for COVID-19. We pooled appropriate data (adjusted estimates for RWS) using an inverse variance, random-effects model. We calculated statistical heterogeneity using the I 2 statistic. Results are presented as relative risk (RR) with associated 95% CI. We further assessed risk of bias/study quality and conducted trial sequential analysis of the evidence from RCTs. RESULTS: We included 4 RCTs (4,070 persons) and 16 RWS (1,925,047 persons) of adults (aged ≥18 years). One and 3 RCTs were of low and unclear risk of bias, respectively. The RWS were of good quality. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir significantly decreased COVID-19 hospitalization compared with placebo/no treatment (RR = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.10-0.31; I 2 = 77.2%; 2 RCTs, 3,542 persons), but there was no significant difference for decrease of worsening severity (RR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.66-1.01; I 2 = 47.5%; 3 RCTs, 1,824 persons), viral clearance (RR = 1.19; 95% CI, 0.93-1.51; I 2 = 82%; 2 RCTs, 528 persons), adverse events (RR = 1.41; 95% CI, 0.92-2.14; I 2 = 70.6%; 4 RCTs, 4,070 persons), serious adverse events (RR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.41-1.62; I 2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, 3,806 persons), and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.04-1.70; I 2 = 49.9%; 3 RCTs, 3,806 persons), although trial sequential analysis suggested that the current total sample sizes for these outcomes were not large enough for conclusions to be drawn. Real-world studies also showed significantly decreased COVID-19 hospitalization (RR = 0.48; 95% CI, 0.37-0.60; I 2 = 95.0%; 11 RWS, 1,421,398 persons) and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.14-0.34; I 2 = 65%; 7 RWS, 286,131 persons) for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir compared with no treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir appears to be promising for preventing hospitalization and potentially decreasing all-cause mortality for persons with mild/moderately severe COVID-19, but the evidence is weak. More studies are needed.

Antiseizure medication use during pregnancy and neonatal growth outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: We aimed to systematically synthesize the current published literature on neonatal growth outcomes associated with antiseizure medication (ASM) use during pregnancy. METHODS: We searched seven databases, from inception to 23 March 2022. We investigated small for gestational age (SGA) and low birth weight (LBW) as primary outcomes and birth weight, birth height, cephalization index and head circumference as secondary outcomes. The primary analysis included pregnant people exposed to any ASM compared with unexposed pregnant people. Subgroup analysis included ASM class analysis, within epilepsy group analysis and polytherapy compared to monotherapy. RESULTS: We screened 15 720 citations and included 65 studies in the review. Exposed pregnant people had a significantly increased risk of SGA relative risk (RR) 1.33 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.50, I2 74%), LBW RR 1.54 (95% CI 1.33 to 1.77, I2 67%), and decreased birth weight with a mean difference (MD) of -118.87 (95% CI -161.03 to -76.71, I2 42%) g. A non-significant risk change in birth height and head circumference was observed. In subgroup analysis, ASM polytherapy, within epilepsy and ASM class analysis were also associated with an increased risk of SGA and LBW. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrates that pregnant people exposed to ASMs have a significantly increased risk of adverse fetal growth outcomes including SGA and LBW and decreased birth weight compared to unexposed pregnant people. Polytherapy was associated with higher risks compared to monotherapy. Additional studies are warranted on specific ASM risks.

The impact of early palliative care on the quality of life of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: The IMPERATIVE case-crossover study.

PURPOSE: Pancreatic cancer is a lethal disease. Many patients experience a heavy burden of cancer-associated symptoms and poor quality of life (QOL). Early palliative care alongside standard oncologic care results in improved QOL and survival in some cancer types. The benefit in advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) is not fully quantified. METHODS: In this prospective case-crossover study, patients ≥ 18 years old with APC were recruited from ambulatory clinics at a tertiary cancer center. Patients underwent a palliative care consultation within 2 weeks of registration, with follow up visits every 2 weeks for the first month, then every 4 weeks until week 16, then as needed. The primary outcome was change in QOL between baseline (BL) and week 16, measured by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - hepatobiliary (FACT-Hep). Secondary outcomes included symptom control (ESAS-r), depression, and anxiety (HADS, PHQ-9) at week 16. RESULTS: Of 40 patients, 25 (63%) were male, 28 (70%) had metastatic disease, 31 (78%) had ECOG performance status 0-1, 31 (78%) received chemotherapy. Median age was 70. Mean FACT-hep score at BL was 118.8, compared to 125.7 at week 16 (mean change 6.89, [95%CI (-1.69-15.6); p = 0.11]). On multivariable analysis, metastatic disease (mean change 15.3 [95%CI (5.3-25.2); p = 0.004]) and age < 70 (mean change 12.9 [95%CI (0.5-25.4); p = 0.04]) were associated with improved QOL. Patients with metastatic disease had significant improvement in symptom burden (mean change -7.4 [95%CI (-13.4 to -1.4); p = 0.02]). There was no difference in depression or anxiety from BL to week 16. CONCLUSION: Palliative care should be integrated early in the journey for patients with APC, as it can improve QOL and symptom burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03837132.

Preoperative oral fluoroquinolone antibiotics in elective colorectal surgery to prevent surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative treatment with oral neomycin combined with erythromycin or metronidazole is recommended to decrease the risk of surgical site infections (SSIs) in elective colorectal surgery. However, oral neomycin is not commercially available in Canada, and therefore it is not routinely used. Fluoroquinolones are widely available and have excellent activity against aerobic Gram-negative bacteria. The aim of this systematic review was to identify, critically appraise and summarize the evidence on the efficacy and safety of preoperative use of oral fluoroquinolone antibiotics for the prevention of SSIs in adult patients undergoing elective colorectal resection. METHODS: Following Cochrane guidelines, we included English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral fluoroquinolones plus routine preoperative intravenous antibiotics against intravenous antibiotics alone from MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials( Ovid) and ClinicalTrials.gov. RESULTS: We included 3 RCTs (1136 patients). Risk of bias was uncertain in 2 trials and high in 1 trial. Preoperative oral fluoroquinolones led to significantly decreased total SSIs (risk ratio [RR] 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32-0.57, I 2 = 0%), superficial incisional (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.22-0.68, I 2 = 32%), deep incisional (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.06-0.65, I 2 = 0%) and organ/space SSIs (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12-0.90, I 2 = 33%). There was also a significant reduction in anastomotic leaks (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.87, I 2 = 0%). No antibiotic-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: This review suggests that preoperative oral fluoroquinolones with intravenous antibiotics are superior to intravenous antibiotics alone for preventing SSIs after colorectal surgery. If neomycin is unavailable, oral fluoroquinolones should be considered as a reasonable alternative. Future trials are required to further compare the relative efficacy of oral antibiotic regimens.

Stress, depression, and anxiety among undergraduate nursing students in the time of a pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Emerging literature reports on the challenges faced by nursing students internationally during the pandemic as they continue their education. The aim of this mixed methods study was to examine stress, depression, and anxiety among undergraduate nursing students at a Canadian university during the pandemic. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS: Stress and coping and trauma theories informed this study. METHODS: Mixed methods included an online questionnaire composed of the Depression Anxiety Stress scales (DASS), sociodemographic data, and quality of life items with open-ended questions. RESULTS: Sample included 280 participants. Mean scores for depression and stress were in the mild level, for anxiety in the moderate level; 24 , 37 and 23 % of the sample had scores of severe or extremely severe for depression, anxiety, and stress respectively. Written comments reflected the impact on participants' relationships, motivation, struggles with remote learning, perceived heavy workloads, and impact on health and self-care, while some described positive experiences, including improved study habits. DISCUSSION: Uncertainty, isolation, sudden and ongoing changes with program delivery and a variety of psychosocial losses, helped to explain the distress many shared. The disconnect between reported levels of use of mental health services and the higher levels of mental distress raises the question of access to and use of these services. IMPLICATIONS FOR AN INTERNATIONAL AUDIENCE: The importance of developing and maintaining effective coping, including a support system, and committing to healthy self-care during challenging times was reinforced. CONCLUSIONS: This difficult time for nursing students emphasized the need to ensure attention to student well-being and mental health during their foundational educational experiences.

Effectiveness of T cell-mediated rejection therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The effectiveness of T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) therapy for achieving histological remission remains undefined in patients on modern immunosuppression. We systematically identified, critically appraised, and summarized the incidence and histological outcomes after TCMR treatment in patients on tacrolimus (Tac) and mycophenolic acid (MPA). English-language publications were searched in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Central (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), and Clinicaltrials.gov (NLM) up to January 2021. Study quality was assessed with the National Institutes of Health Study Quality Tool. We pooled results using an inverse variance, random-effects model and report the binomial proportions with associated 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Statistical heterogeneity was explored using the I2  statistic. From 2875 screened citations, we included 12 studies (1255 participants). Fifty-eight percent were good/high quality while the rest were moderate quality. Thirty-nine percent of patients (95% CI 0.26-0.53, I2 77%) had persistent ≥Banff Borderline TCMR 2-9 months after anti-rejection therapy. Pulse steroids and augmented maintenance immunosuppression were mainstays of therapy, but considerable practice heterogeneity was present. A high proportion of biopsy-proven rejection exists after treatment emphasizing the importance of histology to characterize remission. Anti-rejection therapy is foundational to transplant management but well-designed clinical trials in patients on Tac/MPA immunosuppression are lacking to define the optimal therapeutic approach.

Does a Delay in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Increase the Incidence of Secondary Pathology in the Knee? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Previous systematic reviews looking at timing of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) examined the functional outcomes and range of motion; however, few have quantified the effect of timing of surgery on secondary pathology. The goal of this study was to analyze the effects of early ACLRs versus delayed ACLR on the incidence of meniscal and chondral lesions. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL on March 20, 2018, for randomized control trials (RCTs) that compared early and delayed ACLR in a skeletally mature population. Two reviewers independently identified trials, extracted trial-level data, performed risk-of-bias assessments using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and evaluated the study methodology using the Detsky scale. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model with the primary outcome being the total number of meniscal and chondral lesions per group. RESULTS: Of 1887 citations identified from electronic and hand searches, we included 4 unique RCTs (303 patients). We considered early reconstruction as <3 weeks and delayed reconstruction as >4 weeks after injury. There was no evidence of a difference between early and late ACLR regarding the incidence of meniscal [relative risk (RR), 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.74-1.29] or chondral lesions (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.59-1.29), postoperative infection, graft rupture, functional outcomes, or range of motion. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of benefit of early ACLR. Further studies may consider delaying surgery even further (eg, >3 months) to determine whether there are any real benefits to earlier reconstruction.

Training interventions to improve adenoma detection rates during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopies are effective means of detecting and removing precancerous adenomatous polyps. The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a marker of colonoscopy quality and an independent predictor of colorectal cancer incidence. Focused training interventions may improve an endoscopist's ADR, but the supporting research is limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis identified, critically appraised, and meta-analyzed data from randomized trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of training interventions on ADRs. METHODS: Ovid Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Eric, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for RCTs investigating the effect of an educational intervention on ADRs. Two reviewers independently screened, identified, and extracted trial-level data. Internal validity was assessed in duplicate using the Risk of Bias tool. Our primary outcome was the ADR. Secondary outcomes were advanced ADR, adenocarcinoma detection rate, polyp detection rate, and withdrawal times. Safety outcomes were post-polypectomy bleeding rate and colonoscopy-related perforation rate. RESULTS: From 2837 screened citations, we identified 3 trials (119 endoscopists) meeting our inclusion criteria. Training interventions were associated with a trend toward increased ADRs (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00-1.34; I2 83%; 3 trials; 119 endoscopists). When limited to screening colonoscopies, the odds ratio for ADRs associated with training interventions was 1.17 (95% CI 1.00-1.36; I2 80%; 3 trials; 119 endoscopists). There was a high level of heterogeneity between the trials' training interventions. Training intervention improved the advanced ADR, adenocarcinoma detection rate, polyp detection rate, and withdrawal times. Safety outcomes were not reported. CONCLUSIONS: A focused training intervention was associated with a strong trend toward increased ADRs among certified endoscopists. While the described training interventions definitely show promise, further efforts around continuing professional developments activities are needed to more consistently improve ADRS among certified endoscopists.

Resveratrol for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic disorder that is characterised by insulin resistance and hyperglycaemia, which over time may give rise to vascular complications. Resveratrol is a plant-derived nutritional supplement shown to have anti-diabetic properties in many animal models. Less evidence is available on its safety and efficacy in the management of T2DM in humans. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of resveratrol formulations for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, as well as the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. The date of the last search was December 2018 for all databases. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing effects of oral resveratrol (any dose or formulation, duration, or frequency of administration) with placebo, no treatment, other anti-diabetic medications, or diet or exercise, in adults with a diagnosis of T2DM. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently identified and included RCTs, assessed risk of bias, and extracted study-level data. Study authors were contacted for any missing information or for clarification of reported data. We assessed studies for certainty of the evidence using the GRADE instrument. MAIN RESULTS: We identified three RCTs with a total of 50 participants. Oral resveratrol not combined with other plant polyphenols was administered at 10 mg, 150 mg, or 1000 mg daily for a period ranging from four weeks to five weeks. The comparator intervention was placebo. Overall, all three included studies had low risk of bias. None of the three included studies reported long-term, patient-relevant outcomes such as all-cause mortality, diabetes-related complications, diabetes-related mortality, health-related quality of life, or socioeconomic effects. All three included studies reported that no adverse events were observed, indicating that no deaths occurred (very low-quality evidence for adverse events, all-cause mortality, and diabetes-related mortality). Resveratrol versus placebo showed neutral effects for glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels (mean difference (MD) 0.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.02 to 0.2; P = 0.09; 2 studies; 31 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Due to the short follow-up period, HbA1c results have to be interpreted cautiously. Similarly, resveratrol versus placebo showed neutral effects for fasting blood glucose levels (MD 2 mg/dL, 95% CI -2 to 7; P = 0.29; 2 studies; 31 participants), and resveratrol versus placebo showed neutral effects for insulin resistance (MD -0.35, 95% CI -0.99 to 0.28; P = 0.27; 2 studies; 36 participants). We found eight ongoing RCTs with approximately 800 participants and two studies awaiting assessment, which, when published, could contribute to the findings of this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently, research is insufficient for review authors to evaluate the safety and efficacy of resveratrol supplementation for treatment of adults with T2DM. The limited available research does not provide sufficient evidence to support any effect, beneficial or adverse, of four to five weeks of 10 mg to 1000 mg of resveratrol in adults with T2DM. Adequately powered RCTs reporting patient-relevant outcomes with long-term follow-up periods are needed to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of resveratrol supplementation in the treatment of T2DM.

The effect of restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies on longer-term outcomes after cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

PURPOSE: Blood transfusions are frequently administered in cardiac surgery. Despite a large number of published studies comparing a "restrictive" strategy with a "liberal" strategy, no clear consensus has emerged to guide blood transfusion practice in cardiac surgery patients. The purpose of this study was to identify, critically appraise, and summarize the evidence on the overall effect of restrictive transfusion strategies compared with liberal transfusion strategies on mortality, other clinical outcomes, and transfusion-related outcomes in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery. SOURCE: We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP) and Cochrane CENTRAL (Wiley) from inception to 1 December 2017 and queried clinical trial registries and conference proceedings for randomized-controlled trials of liberal vs restrictive transfusion strategies in cardiac surgery. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: From 7,908 citations, we included ten trials (9,101 patients) and eight companion publications. Overall, we found no significant difference in mortality between restrictive and liberal transfusion strategies (risk ratio [RR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.54; I2 = 33%; seven trials; 8,661 patients). The use of a restrictive transfusion strategy did not appear to adversely impact any of the secondary clinical outcomes. As expected, the proportion of patients who received red blood cells (RBCs) in the restrictive group was significantly lower than in the liberal group (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.73; I2 = 56%; 5 trials; 8,534 patients). Among transfused patients, a restrictive transfusion strategy was associated with fewer transfused RBC units per patient than a liberal transfusion strategy. CONCLUSIONS: In adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery, a restrictive transfusion strategy reduces RBC transfusion without impacting mortality rate or the incidence of other perioperative complications. Nevertheless, further large trials in subgroups of patients, potentially of differing age, are needed to establish firm evidence to guide transfusion in cardiac surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42017071440); registered 20 April, 2018.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les transfusions sanguines sont fréquentes après une chirurgie cardiaque. Malgré le nombre important d'études publiées comparant une stratégie « restrictive ¼ à une stratégie « libérale ¼, aucun consensus clair n'est apparu pour guider la pratique de la transfusion sanguine chez les patients de chirurgie cardiaque. L'objectif de cette étude était d'identifier, d'évaluer de façon critique et de résumer les données probantes sur l'effet global des stratégies de transfusion restrictives comparativement aux stratégies libérales sur la mortalité, les autres devenirs cliniques, et les devenirs liés à la transfusion chez des patients adultes subissant une chirurgie cardiaque. SOURCE: Nous avons réalisé des recherches dans les bases de données MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP) et Cochrane CENTRAL (Wiley) de leur création jusqu'au 1er décembre 2017 et avons exploré les registres d'études cliniques et les actes de conférence pour en tirer les études randomisées contrôlées évaluant des stratégies transfusionnelles restrictives vs libérales en chirurgie cardiaque. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Sur 7908 citations, nous avons inclus dix études (9101 patients) et huit publications connexes. Globalement, nous n'avons observé aucune différence significative en matière de mortalité entre les stratégies transfusionnelles restrictives et libérales (risque relatif [RR], 1,08; intervalle de confiance [IC] 95 %, 0,76 à 1,54; I2 = 33 %; sept études; 8661 patients). Le recours à une stratégie de transfusion restrictive n'a semblé avoir aucun impact négatif sur quelque résultat clinique secondaire que ce soit. Comme anticipé, la proportion de patients ayant reçu des érythrocytes dans le groupe restrictif était significativement plus basse que dans le groupe libéral (RR, 0,68; IC 95 %, 0,64 à 0,73; I2 = 56 %; 7 études; 8534 patients). Parmi les patients transfusés, une stratégie de transfusion restrictive a été associée à un nombre moindre d'unités d'érythrocytes transfusées par patient que dans une stratégie transfusionnelle libérale. CONCLUSION: Dans une population de patients adultes subissant une chirurgie cardiaque, une stratégie transfusionnelle restrictive réduit la transfusion d'érythrocytes sans avoir d'impact sur le taux de mortalité ou sur l'incidence d'autres complications périopératoires. D'autres grandes études sur différents sous-groupes de patients, peut-être d'âges différents, sont toutefois nécessaires afin d'établir des données probantes concluantes pour guider les transfusions en chirurgie cardiaque. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: PROSPERO (CRD42017071440); enregistrée le 20 avril 2018.

The Efficacy of Split-Dose Bowel Preparations for Polyp Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Split-dose bowel preparation leads to superior colon cleansing for colonoscopy. However, the magnitude of benefit in detecting colonic polyps is uncertain. We performed a systematic review to synthesize the data on whether using a split-dose bowel preparation regimen improves the detection of polyps when compared with other dosing methods or regimen products. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases (from the inception to June 2017) for randomized controlled trials that assessed the following: split-dose vs day-before, split-dose vs same-day (as colonoscopy), or different types of split-dose regimens for patients undergoing colonoscopy. We excluded studies limited to inpatients, children, or individuals with inflammatory bowel disease. We compared the number of patients undergoing colonoscopy with recorded detection of polyps, adenomas, advanced adenomas, sessile serrated polyps (SSPs), right colonic adenomas, right colonic polyps, or right colonic SSPs. RESULTS: Twenty-eight trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria (8,842 participants). Of the seven trials comparing split-dose vs day-before bowel preparation regimens, there was an increased detection rate of adenomas (risk ratio (RR) 1.26, 95% confidence intervals (CIs): 1.10-1.44; 4 trials; 1,258 participants), advanced adenomas (RR 1.53, 95% CI: 1.22-1.92; 3 trials; 1,155 participants), and SSPs (RR 2.48, 95% CI: 1.21-5.09; 2 trials; 1,045 participants). Pooled estimates from 8 trials (1,587 participants) evaluating split-dose vs same-day bowel preparations yielded no evidence of statistical difference. For various split-dose vs split-dose trials, 14 fulfilled the criteria (5,496 participants) and no superior split-regimen was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with day-before bowel preparation regimens, split-dose bowel preparations regimens increase the detection of adenomas, advanced adenomas, and have the greatest benefit in SSP detection.

Vitamins and Minerals for Migraine Prophylaxis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the findings of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of vitamins and minerals for migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: We systematically searched bibliographic databases and relevant websites for parallel and crossover RCTs reporting efficacy and/or safety of vitamins and/or minerals for migraine prophylaxis. Our primary outcomes were migraine frequency (number of attacks) and duration (hours). Secondary outcomes were severity (intensity), days with migraine, and adverse events. Meta-analysis was conducted when analyzable data were available from at least two trials. RESULTS: Eighteen placebo-controlled trials met our eligibility criteria. Only coenzyme Q10 and magnesium contributed to meta-analyses. In adults, compared with placebo, coenzyme Q10 did not significantly decrease migraine frequency (mean difference (MD) -0.44 (-2.14 to 1.26); I2 53%; 2 trials; 97 participants; moderate strength of the evidence), duration (MD -1.97 (-4.82 to 0.87); I2 0%; 2 trials; 97 participants; moderate strength of the evidence), or severity (ratio of means (RoM) -0.05 (-0.20 to 0.11); I2 0%; 2 trials; 97 participants). In adults, compared with placebo, magnesium did not significantly decrease migraine severity (RoM -0.17 (-0.36 to 0.02); I2 48%; 3 trials; 226 participants; low strength of the evidence). Meta-analysis of other vitamins and minerals, and other outcomes were not feasible due to a lack of sufficiently reported data. CONCLUSIONS: Based on insufficient evidence, it is unknown if coenzyme Q10 and magnesium are effective for migraine prophylaxis in adults. High-quality, adequately powered RCTs are needed to fully evaluate the efficacy and safety of vitamins and minerals for migraine prophylaxis.

Can authorship bias be detected in meta-analysis?

PURPOSE: Statistical approaches have been developed to detect bias in individual trials, but guidance on how to detect systematic differences at a meta-analytical level is lacking. In this paper, we elucidate whether author bias can be detected in a cohort of randomized trials included in a meta-analysis. METHODS: We utilized mortality data from 35 trials (10,880 patients) included in our previously published meta-analysis. First, we linked each author with their trial (or trials). Then we calculated author-specific odds ratios using univariate cross table methods. Finally, we tested the effect of authorship by comparing each author's estimated odds ratio with all other pooled estimated odds ratios using meta-regression. RESULTS: The median number of investigators named as authors on the primary trial reports was six (interquartile range: 5-8, range: 2-32). The results showed that the slope of author effect for mortality ranged from - 1.35 to 0.71. We identified only one author team showing a marginally significant effect (- 0.39; 95% confidence interval, - 0.78 to 0.00). This author team has a history of retractions due to data manipulations and ethical violations. CONCLUSION: When combining trial-level data to produce a pooled effect estimate, investigators must consider sources of potential bias. Our results suggest that systematic errors can be detected using meta-regression, although further research is needed to examine the sensitivity of this model. Systematic reviewers will benefit from the availability of methods to guard against the dissemination of results with the potential to mislead decision-making.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Des approches statistiques ont été élaborées pour détecter les biais dans les essais individuels, mais nous manquons d'orientations sur les méthodes à utiliser pour les détecter au niveau des méta-analyses. Dans cet article, nous étudions s'il est possible de détecter des biais liés à l'auteur dans un ensemble d'essais randomisés inclus dans une méta-analyse. MéTHODES: Nous avons utilisé les données sur la mortalité tirées de 35 essais (10 880 patients) inclus dans notre méta-analyse publiée antérieurement. Nous avons tout d'abord lié chaque auteur à son étude (ou à ses études). Nous avons ensuite calculé des rapports de cotes (odds ratios) spécifiques utilisant des méthodes de tableaux unifactoriels croisés. Enfin, nous avons testé l'effet « auteur ¼ en comparant les rapports de cotes estimés de chaque auteur avec le rapport de cotes groupé de tous les autres auteurs au moyen d'une métarégression. RéSULTATS: Le nombre médian d'investigateurs cité comme auteurs dans les publications principales des essais était de six (plage interquartile : 5 à 8, limites : 2 à 32). Les résultats ont montré que la pente de l'effet « auteur ¼ pour la mortalité allait de -1,35 à 0,71. Nous n'avons identifié qu'une seule équipe d'auteurs ayant un effet peu à la limite de la significativité (-0,39; intervalle de confiance à 95 % : -0,78 à 0,00). Cette équipe a un historique de rétractions de publications en raison de manipulations des données et de violations de l'éthique. CONCLUSION: Lorsqu'ils combinent les données des essais pour produire une estimation groupée de l'effet, les investigateurs doivent envisager les sources de biais potentiels. Nos résultats suggèrent que des erreurs systématiques peuvent être détectées en utilisant une métarégression bien qu'il soit nécessaire de poursuivre les recherches pour évaluer la sensibilité de ce modèle. Les réviseurs systématiques tireront parti de la disponibilité de méthodes les protégeant de la dissémination de résultats susceptibles de fausser des prises de décision potentielles.

Combining population-based administrative health records and electronic medical records for disease surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Administrative health records (AHRs) and electronic medical records (EMRs) are two key sources of population-based data for disease surveillance, but misclassification errors in the data can bias disease estimates. Methods that combine information from error-prone data sources can build on the strengths of AHRs and EMRs. We compared bias and error for four data-combining methods and applied them to estimate hypertension prevalence. METHODS: Our study included rule-based OR and AND methods that identify disease cases from either or both data sources, respectively, rule-based sensitivity-specificity adjusted (RSSA) method that corrects for inaccuracies using a deterministic rule, and probabilistic-based sensitivity-specificity adjusted (PSSA) method that corrects for error using a statistical model. Computer simulation was used to estimate relative bias (RB) and mean square error (MSE) under varying conditions of population disease prevalence, correlation amongst data sources, and amount of misclassification error. AHRs and EMRs for Manitoba, Canada were used to estimate hypertension prevalence using validated case definitions and multiple disease markers. RESULTS: The OR method had the lowest RB and MSE when population disease prevalence was 10%, and the RSSA method had the lowest RB and MSE when population prevalence increased to 20%. As the correlation between data sources increased, the OR method resulted in the lowest RB and MSE. Estimates of hypertension prevalence for AHRs and EMRs alone were 30.9% (95% CI: 30.6-31.2) and 24.9% (95% CI: 24.6-25.2), respectively. The estimates were 21.4% (95% CI: 21.1-21.7), for the AND method, 34.4% (95% CI: 34.1-34.8) for the OR method, 32.2% (95% CI: 31.8-32.6) for the RSSA method, and ranged from 34.3% (95% CI: 34.1-34.5) to 35.9% (95% CI, 35.7-36.1) for the PSSA method, depending on the statistical model. CONCLUSIONS: The OR and AND methods are influenced by correlation amongst the data sources, while the RSSA method is dependent on the accuracy of prior sensitivity and specificity estimates. The PSSA method performed well when population prevalence was high and average correlations amongst disease markers was low. This study will guide researchers to select a data-combining method that best suits their data characteristics.

The Relation Between Periodontal Disease and Vitamin D.

BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence regarding the association between vitamin D and periodontal disease. The purpose of this study was to explore that relation. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used data from the Canadian Health Measures Survey for respondents 13-79 years of age. Vitamin D status was determined by measuring plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentrations. Periodontal disease was defined by gingival index (GI) and calculated loss of attachment (LOA). Statistical analyses included bivariate tests and multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: At the bivariate level, 25(OH)D concentrations below the cutoff levels of 50 nmol/L and 75 nmol/L were associated with GI. However, multiple regression analyses for GI revealed no association with mean 25(OH)D level or either concentration. Although no significant association between LOA and 25(OH)D status was identified at the bivariate level, a statistically significant association was observed between LOA and 25(OH)D levels < 75 nmol/L on multiple regression analysis. However, mean 25(OH)D concentrations and those < 50 nmol/L were not associated with LOA on multiple regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Vitamin D status was inversely associated with GI at the bivariate level, but not at the multivariate level. Conversely, vitamin D status was not associated with LOA at the bivariate level, but it was inversely associated with LOA at the multivariate level. These results provide modest evidence supporting a relation between low plasma 25(OH)D concentrations and periodontal disease as measured by GI and LOA.

Point-of-care viscoelastic hemostatic testing in cardiac surgery patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Thromboelastography and rotational thromboelastometry are point-of-care (POC) viscoelastic tests used to help guide blood product administration. It is unclear whether these tests improve clinical or transfusion-related outcomes. The objective of this study was to appraise data from randomized trials evaluating the benefit of POC testing in cardiac surgery patients. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients transfused with blood products and all-cause mortality. SOURCE: Medline (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library-Wiley), Web of Science, Biosis, Scopus, and CINAHL databases, as well as clinical trial registries and conference proceedings were queried from inception to February 2018. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We identified 1,917 records, 11 of which were included in our analysis (8,294 patients). Point-of-care testing was not associated with a difference in the proportion of patients transfused with any blood product (risk ratio [RR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.02; I2 = 51%; four trials, 7,623 patients), or all-cause mortality (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.13; I2 = 5%; six trials, 7,931 patients). Nevertheless, POC testing was weakly associated with a decrease in the proportion of patients receiving red blood cells (RBC) (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85 to 0.96; I2 = 0%; seven trials, 8,029 patients), and heterogeneous reductions in frozen plasma (FP) (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.99; I2 = 87%; six trials, 7,989 patients) and platelets (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.90; I2 = 65%; seven trials, 8,029 patients). Meta-analysis of the number of units of RBCs and FP was not possible due to heterogeneity in reporting, however POC testing significantly reduced the units of platelets transfused (standard mean difference, -0.09; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.00; four trials, 7,643 patients). CONCLUSION: Our review indicates that in cardiac surgery patients, POC viscoelastic hemostatic testing is not associated with a reduction in the proportion of patients receiving any blood product or all-cause mortality. However, viscoelastic testing is weakly associated with a reduction in proportion of patients transfused with specific blood products. Presently, the benefits associated with viscoelastic testing in cardiac surgery patients are insufficiently robust to recommend routine implementation of this technology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD4201706577). Registered 11 May 2017.

Incorporating Dynamic Assessment of Fluid Responsiveness Into Goal-Directed Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Dynamic tests of fluid responsiveness have been developed and investigated in clinical trials of goal-directed therapy. The impact of this approach on clinically relevant outcomes is unknown. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate whether fluid therapy guided by dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness compared with standard care improves clinically relevant outcomes in adults admitted to the ICU. DATA SOURCES: Randomized controlled trials from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to December 2016, conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently identified randomized controlled trials comparing dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness with standard care for acute volume resuscitation in adults admitted to the ICU. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently abstracted trial-level data including population characteristics, interventions, clinical outcomes, and source of funding. Our primary outcome was mortality at longest duration of follow-up. Our secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and frequency of renal complications. The internal validity of trials was assessed in duplicate using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 13 trials enrolling 1,652 patients. Methods used to assess fluid responsiveness included stroke volume variation (nine trials), pulse pressure variation (one trial), and stroke volume change with passive leg raise/fluid challenge (three trials). In 12 trials reporting mortality, the risk ratio for death associated with dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.42-0.83; I = 0%; n = 1,586). The absolute risk reduction in mortality associated with dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness was -2.9% (95% CI, -5.6% to -0.2%). Dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness was associated with reduced duration of ICU length of stay (weighted mean difference, -1.16 d [95% CI, -1.97 to -0.36]; I = 74%; n = 394, six trials) and mechanical ventilation (weighted mean difference, -2.98 hr [95% CI, -5.08 to -0.89]; I = 34%; n = 334, five trials). Three trials were adjudicated at unclear risk of bias; the remaining trials were at high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: In adult patients admitted to intensive care who required acute volume resuscitation, goal-directed therapy guided by assessment of fluid responsiveness appears to be associated with reduced mortality, ICU length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. High-quality clinical trials in both medical and surgical ICU populations are warranted to inform routine care.

Nonnutritive sweeteners and cardiometabolic health: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies.

BACKGROUND: Nonnutritive sweeteners, such as aspartame, sucralose and stevioside, are widely consumed, yet their long-term health impact is uncertain. We synthesized evidence from prospective studies to determine whether routine consumption of non-nutritive sweeteners was associated with long-term adverse cardiometabolic effects. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library (inception to January 2016) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated interventions for nonnutritive sweeteners and prospective cohort studies that reported on consumption of non-nutritive sweeteners among adults and adolescents. The primary outcome was body mass index (BMI). Secondary outcomes included weight, obesity and other cardiometabolic end points. RESULTS: From 11 774 citations, we included 7 trials (1003 participants; median follow-up 6 mo) and 30 cohort studies (405 907 participants; median follow-up 10 yr). In the included RCTs, nonnutritive sweeteners had no significant effect on BMI (mean difference -0.37 kg/m2; 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.10 to 0.36; I2 9%; 242 participants). In the included cohort studies, consumption of nonnutritive sweeteners was associated with a modest increase in BMI (mean correlation 0.05, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.06; I2 0%; 21 256 participants). Data from RCTs showed no consistent effects of nonnutritive sweeteners on other measures of body composition and reported no further secondary outcomes. In the cohort studies, consumption of nonnutritive sweeteners was associated with increases in weight and waist circumference, and higher incidence of obesity, hypertension, metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular events. Publication bias was indicated for studies with diabetes as an outcome. INTERPRETATION: Evidence from RCTs does not clearly support the intended benefits of nonnutritive sweeteners for weight management, and observational data suggest that routine intake of nonnutritive sweeteners may be associated with increased BMI and cardiometabolic risk. Further research is needed to fully characterize the long-term risks and benefits of nonnutritive sweeteners. Protocol registration: PROSPERO-CRD42015019749.

Validation of administrative case ascertainment algorithms for chronic childhood arthritis in Manitoba, Canada.

We validated case ascertainment algorithms for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) in the provincial health administrative databases of Manitoba, Canada. A population-based pediatric rheumatology clinical database from April 1st 1980 to March 31st 2012 was used to test case definitions in individuals diagnosed at ≤15 years of age. The case definitions varied the number of diagnosis codes (1, 2, or 3), time frame (1, 2 or 3 years), time between diagnoses (ever, >1 day, or ≥8 weeks), and physician specialty. Positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported. A case definition of 1 hospitalization or ≥2 diagnoses in 2 years by any provider ≥8 weeks apart using diagnosis codes for rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis produced a sensitivity of 89.2% (95% CI 86.8, 91.6), specificity of 86.3% (95% CI 83.0, 89.6), and PPV of 90.6% (95% CI 88.3, 92.9) when seronegative enthesopathy and arthropathy (SEA) was excluded as JIA; and sensitivity of 88.2% (95% CI 85.7, 90.7), specificity of 90.4% (95% CI 87.5, 93.3), and PPV of 93.9% (95% CI 92.0, 95.8) when SEA was included as JIA. This study validates case ascertainment algorithms for JIA in Canadian administrative health data using diagnosis codes for both rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and ankylosing spondylitis, to better reflect current JIA classification than codes for RA alone. Researchers will be able to use these results to define cohorts for population-based studies.

Update on efficacy of the approved remdesivir regimen for treatment of COVID-19: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Efficacy of remdesivir for COVID-19 remains unclear. We updated our published systematic review to better inform on the use of remdesivir for COVID-19. METHODS: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) among hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Meta-analysis was conducted using an inverse variance, random-effects model, presenting relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) and their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical heterogeneity was calculated using the I2 statistic. In addition, we conducted trial sequential analysis (TSA). Outcomes with additional data were clinical progression, hospitalisation days, and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: We included nine RCTs (12,876 individuals). Three trials each were of a low, unclear, and a high risk of bias. Compared with no treatment/placebo, remdesivir (100mg daily, over 10 days) significantly improved clinical progression (RR 1.06, CI 1.02-1.11), but did not significantly reduce hospitalisation days (MD -0.48, CI -2.18-1.21) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.92, CI 0.84-1.01). TSA suggested that further information is not required to conclude on the efficacy of remdesivir in improving clinical progression, and that, while more information is required for hospitalisation days and all-cause mortality, further RCTs to prove fewer hospitalisation days may be futile, as efficacy of remdesivir for this outcome is unlikely. CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir appeared promising for COVID-19, but there is insufficient evidence of its efficacy. High quality RCTs are needed for a stronger evidence base.