Effects of Phosphodiesterase-5 Inhibitors in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major burden of healthcare worldwide. We aimed to determine the effects of PDE-5 inhibitors on clinical outcomes and haemodynamic parameters in patients with COPD. A PROSPERO-registered systematic review and meta-analysis (identification number CRD42021227578) were performed to analyse the effects of PDE-5 inhibitors in patients with COPD. Data were sourced from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials and "ClinicalTrials.gov." Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PDE-5 inhibitors with control in patients with COPD were included. Quality assessment was carried out using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomised trials. The pooled mean difference of 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and mean pulmonary arterial pressure based on inverse variance estimation were analysed with a fixed-effect model or random-effects model meta-analysis. Nine RCTs involving 414 patients were included in the review. There was no significant difference in 6MWD (mean difference = 22.06 metres, 95% confidence interval (CI), -5.80 to 49.91). However, there was a statistically significant difference between PDE-5 inhibitor and control groups in mean pulmonary artery pressure (mean difference = -3.83 mmHg, 95% CI, -5.93 to -1.74). Headaches were the most common adverse event, occurring significantly in the PDE-5 inhibitor intervention group (odds ratio 3.83, 95% CI, 1.49 to 9.86). This systematic review indicates that PDE-5 inhibitors do not improve exercise capacity despite some possible improvements in haemodynamic parameters in COPD patients.

Cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery in hip and knee replacement: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Hip and knee replacement represents a significant burden to the UK healthcare system. 'Enhanced recovery' pathways have been introduced in the National Health Service (NHS) for patients undergoing hip and knee replacement, with the aim of improving outcomes and timely recovery after surgery. To support policymaking, there is a need to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery pathways across jurisdictions. Our aim is to systematically summarise the published cost-effectiveness evidence on enhanced recovery in hip and knee replacement, both as a whole and for each of the various components of enhanced recovery pathways. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review will be conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Econlit and the National Health Service Economic Evaluations Database. Separate search strategies were developed for each database including terms relating to hip and knee replacement/arthroplasty, economic evaluations, decision modelling and quality of life measures.We will extract peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2017 reporting economic evaluations of preoperative, perioperative or postoperative enhanced recovery interventions within hip or knee replacement. Economic evaluations alongside cohort studies or based on decision models will be included. Only studies with patients undergoing elective replacement surgery of the hip or knee will be included. Data will be extracted using a predefined pro forma following best practice guidelines for economic evaluation, decision modelling and model validation.Our primary outcome will be the cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery (entire pathway and individual components) in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year. A narrative synthesis of all studies will be presented, focussing on cost-effectiveness results, study design, quality and validation status. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review is exempted from ethics approval because the work is carried out on published documents. The results of the review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed academic journal and at conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017059473.