Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 8: 744512, 2021.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34733865

RESUMEN

Background: Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients treated with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are still at risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after sustained virologic response (SVR). This study aimed to investigate the role of diabetes mellitus (DM) as a potential predictive risk factor in developing de novo HCC in HCV-infected patients after DAA treatment. Methods: This study was registered on PROSPERO under registration number CRD42021230457. We performed a systematic search in four medical databases from inception through November 3rd, 2020. Studies were eligible if they reported on HCV-infected patients treated with DAAs and compared the frequency of de novo HCC in patients with and without DM. We calculated pooled odds ratios, unadjusted (UHR), and adjusted hazard ratios (AHR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in meta-analysis. Results: We included 30 articles in our systematic review and meta-analysis. DM proved to be a significant risk factor of HCC in DAA-treated HCV patients in unadjusted (UHR = 1.44, CI: 1.15-1.79) and adjusted analyses (AHR = 1.31, CI: 1.06-1.62). In the group of patients achieving SVR after DAA therapy, DM increased the risk of HCC in unadjusted (UHR = 1.3, CI: 1.09-1.51) analysis; however, in adjusted results, the risk was non-significant (AHR = 1.07, CI: 0.89-1.28). In patients with advanced liver fibrosis, DM was a risk factor for HCC in adjusted (AHR = 1.36, CI: 1.03-1.8), but not in unadjusted analysis (UHR = 1.11, CI: 0.8-1.42). Conclusions: DM is an independent risk factor of de novo HCC after DAA treatment in HCV-infected patients. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=230457, identifier: CRD42021230457.

2.
BMJ Open ; 11(8): e050464, 2021 08 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34446497

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Sepsis and septic shock have mortality rates between 20% and 50%. In sepsis, the immune response becomes dysregulated, which leads to an imbalance between proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory mediators. When standard therapeutic measures fail to improve patients' condition, additional therapeutic alternatives are applied to reduce morbidity and mortality. One of the most recent alternatives is extracorporeal cytokine adsorption with a device called CytoSorb. This study aims to compare the efficacy of standard medical therapy and continuous extracorporeal cytokine removal with CytoSorb therapy in patients with early refractory septic shock. Furthermore, we compare the dosing of CytoSorb adsorber device changed every 12 or 24 hours. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: It is a prospective, randomised, controlled, open-label, international, multicentre, phase III study. Patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be randomly assigned to receive standard medical therapy (group A) or-in addition to standard treatment-CytoSorb therapy. CytoSorb treatment will be continuous and last for at least 24 hours, CytoSorb adsorber device will be changed every 12 (group B) or 24 hours (group C). Our primary outcome is shock reversal (no further need or a reduced (≤10% of the maximum dose) vasopressor requirement for 3 hours) and time to shock reversal (number of hours elapsed from the start of the treatment to shock reversal).Based on sample size calculation, 135 patients (1:1:1) will need to be enrolled in the study. A predefined interim analysis will be performed after reaching 50% of the planned sample size, therefore, the corrected level of significance (p value) will be 0.0294. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Scientific and Research Ethics Committee of the Hungarian Medical Research Council (OGYÉI/65049/2020). Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04742764; Pre-results.


Asunto(s)
Hemoperfusión , Choque Séptico , Citocinas , Humanos , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Estudios Prospectivos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Proyectos de Investigación , Choque Séptico/terapia
3.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 4189, 2021 02 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33602961

RESUMEN

Acute liver failure (ALF) is a potentially life-threatening condition. Liver support therapies can be applied as a bridging-to-transplantation or bridging-to-recovery; however, results of clinical trials are controversial. Our aim was to compare liver support systems in acute and hyperacute liver failure with network meta-analysis. After systematic search, randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing liver support therapies in adults with acute or hyperacute liver failure were included. In-hospital mortality was the primary outcome, the secondary outcomes were hepatic encephalopathy and mortality-by-aetiology. A Bayesian-method was used to perform network meta-analysis and calculate surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values to rank interventions. Eleven RCTs were included. BioLogic-DT and molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS) resulted in the lowest mortality (SUCRAs: 76% and 73%, respectively). In non-paracetamol-poisoned patients, BioLogic-DT, charcoal hemoperfusion and MARS may be equally efficient regarding mortality (SUCRAs: 53%, 52% and 52%, respectively). Considering hepatic encephalopathy, extracorporeal liver assist device (ELAD) may be the most effective option (SUCRA: 78%). However, in pairwise meta-analysis, there were no statistically significant differences between the interventions in the outcomes. In conclusion, MARS therapy seems to be the best available option in reducing mortality. Further research is needed on currently available and new therapeutic modalities. (CRD42020160133).


Asunto(s)
Fallo Hepático Agudo/terapia , Prótesis e Implantes/efectos adversos , Teorema de Bayes , Hemoperfusión/instrumentación , Hemoperfusión/métodos , Humanos , Hígado/fisiopatología , Trasplante de Hígado/instrumentación , Trasplante de Hígado/métodos , Metaanálisis en Red , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
4.
Ann Intensive Care ; 11(1): 10, 2021 Jan 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33462764

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The role of artificial and bioartificial liver support systems in acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is still controversial. We aimed to perform the first network meta-analysis comparing and ranking different liver support systems and standard medical therapy (SMT) in patients with ACLF. METHODS: The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020155850). A systematic search was conducted in five databases. We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of artificial or bioartificial liver support systems on survival in patients with ACLF. Ranking was performed by calculating the surface under cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve values. The RoB2 tool and a modified GRADE approach were used for the assessment of the risk of bias and quality of evidence (QE). RESULTS: In the quantitative synthesis 16 trials were included, using MARS®, Prometheus®, ELAD®, plasma exchange (PE) and BioLogic-DT®. Overall (OS) and transplant-free (TFS) survival were assessed at 1 and 3 months. PE significantly improved 3-month OS compared to SMT (RR 0.74, CrI: 0.6-0.94) and ranked first on the cumulative ranking curves for both OS outcomes (SUCRA: 86% at 3 months; 77% at 1 month) and 3-month TFS (SUCRA: 87%) and second after ELAD for 1-month TFS (SUCRA: 76%). Other comparisons did not reach statistical significance. QE was moderate for PE concerning 1-month OS and both TFS outcomes. Other results were of very low certainty. CONCLUSION: PE seems to be the best currently available liver support therapy in ACLF regarding 3-month OS. Based on the low QE, randomized trials are needed to confirm our findings for already existing options and to introduce new devices.

5.
Trials ; 21(1): 809, 2020 Sep 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32993779

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Early reports indicate that COVID-19 may require intensive care unit (ICU) admission in 5-26% and overall mortality can rise to 11% of the recognised cases, particularly affecting the elderly. There is a lack of evidence-based targeted pharmacological therapy for its prevention and treatment. We aim to compare the effects of a World Health Organization recommendation-based education and a personalised complex preventive lifestyle intervention package (based on the same WHO recommendation) on the outcomes of the COVID-19. METHODS: PROACTIVE-19 is a pragmatic, randomised controlled clinical trial with adaptive "sample size re-estimation" design. Hungarian population over the age of 60 years without confirmed COVID-19 will be approached to participate in a telephone health assessment and lifestyle counselling voluntarily. Volunteers will be randomised into two groups: (A) general health education and (B) personalised health education. Participants will go through questioning and recommendation in 5 fields: (1) mental health, (2) smoking habits, (3) physical activity, (4) dietary habits, and (5) alcohol consumption. Both groups A and B will receive the same line of questioning to assess habits concerning these topics. Assessment will be done weekly during the first month, every second week in the second month, then monthly. The composite primary endpoint will include the rate of ICU admission, hospital admission (longer than 48 h), and mortality in COVID-19-positive cases. The estimated sample size is 3788 subjects per study arm. The planned duration of the follow-up is a minimum of 1 year. DISCUSSION: These interventions may boost the body's cardiovascular and pulmonary reserve capacities, leading to improved resistance against the damage caused by COVID-19. Consequently, lifestyle changes can reduce the incidence of life-threatening conditions and attenuate the detrimental effects of the pandemic seriously affecting the older population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study has been approved by the Scientific and Research Ethics Committee of the Hungarian Medical Research Council (IV/2428- 2 /2020/EKU) and has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT04321928 ) on 25 March 2020.


Asunto(s)
Betacoronavirus/patogenicidad , Infecciones por Coronavirus/prevención & control , Educación en Salud , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Pandemias/prevención & control , Neumonía Viral/prevención & control , Conducta de Reducción del Riesgo , Ensayos Clínicos Adaptativos como Asunto , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Consumo de Bebidas Alcohólicas/efectos adversos , COVID-19 , Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecciones por Coronavirus/mortalidad , Infecciones por Coronavirus/virología , Ejercicio Físico , Conducta Alimentaria , Femenino , Estado de Salud , Interacciones Huésped-Patógeno , Humanos , Hungría , Masculino , Salud Mental , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico , Neumonía Viral/mortalidad , Neumonía Viral/virología , Ensayos Clínicos Pragmáticos como Asunto , Factores Protectores , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2 , Fumar/efectos adversos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA