Ultrafiltration is better than diuretic therapy for volume-overloaded acute heart failure patients: a meta-analysis.

Studies on the effectiveness of ultrafiltration (UF) in patients hospitalized with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) have led to heterogeneous study outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the impact of UF therapy in ADHF patients. We searched the medical literature to identify well-designed studies comparing UF with the usual diuretic therapy in this setting. Systematic evaluation of 8 randomized controlled trials enrolling 801 participants showed greater fluid removal (difference in means 1372.5 mL, 95% CI 849.6 to 1895.4 mL; p < 0.001), weight loss (difference in means 1.592 kg, 95% CI 1.039 to 2.144 kg; p < 0.001) and lower incidences of worsening heart failure (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.94, p = 0.022) and rehospitalization for heart failure (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.82, p = 0.003) without a difference in renal impairment (OR 1.386, 95% CI 0.870 to 2.209; p = 0.169) or all-cause mortality (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.71, p = 0.546). UF increases fluid removal and weight loss and reduces rehospitalization and the risk of worsening heart failure in congestive patients, suggesting ultrafiltration as a safe and effective treatment option for volume-overloaded heart failure patients.

Naldemedine versus placebo in opioid-induced constipation: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a frequent adverse event among patients receiving chronic pain therapy that is requiring opioids. Naldemedine was approved by the Food and Drug Administration to treat OIC and appears to be more efficient than any other peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist. This meta-analysis aimed at assessing the available data on naldemedine in terms of efficacy. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed and ClinicalTrials on 24 May 2022 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing naldemedine to placebo among patients reporting OIC. RESULTS: Evaluation of 6 RCTs enrolling 2769 participants showed significantly greater respondence to treatment (OR=2.48; 95% CI: 2.02 to 3.06; p<0.00001), change in weekly spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) (mean difference=1.45; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.76; p<0.00001), complete SBMs (mean difference=0.89; 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.17; p<0.00001) and SBMs without straining (mean difference=0.89; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.17; p<0.00001) for patients treated with naldemedine. We found no difference in numeric pain rating scales after one (mean difference=0.05; 95% CI: -0.22 to 0.31; p=0.73) and two weeks of treatment (mean difference= -0.04; 95% CI: -0.31 to 0.22; p=0.75). Funding and clinical diversity were possible risks of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Naldemedine improves a variety of bowel function parameters while preserving analgesia, confirming its efficacy for patients with OIC. However, head-to-head trials are needed to establish naldemedine as treatment of first choice for laxative-refractory OIC. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022281353.

Uninterrupted or Minimally Interrupted Direct Oral Anticoagulant Therapy is a Safe Alternative to Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients Undergoing Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: An Updated Meta-Analysis.

Adequate anticoagulation during catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is crucial for the prevention of both thromboembolic events and life-threatening bleeding. The purpose of this updated meta-analysis is to compare the safety and efficacy of uninterrupted and minimally interrupted periprocedural direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) protocols and uninterrupted vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy in patients undergoing CA for AF based on the latest evidence. Randomized controlled trials, prospective observational studies, and retrospective registries comparing DOACs to VKAs were identified in multiple databases (Embase, MEDLINE via PubMed, CENTRAL, and Scopus). The primary outcomes were stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), major bleeding, and net clinical benefit. Forty-two studies with a total of 22,715 patients were included in the final analysis. The occurrence of major bleeding was significantly lower in patients assigned to uninterrupted DOAC treatment compared to VKAs (pooled odds ratio (POR): 0.71, confidence interval (CI): 0.51-0.99). The pooled analysis of both uninterrupted and minimally interrupted DOAC groups also showed significant reduction in major bleeding events (POR: 0.70, CI: 0.53-0.93). The incidence of thromboembolic events was low, with no significant difference between groups. This updated meta-analysis showed that DOAC therapy is as effective as VKA in preventing stroke and TIA. Minimally interrupted DOAC therapy is a non-inferior periprocedural anticoagulation strategy; however, uninterrupted DOAC therapy showed superiority compared to VKA with regard to major, life-threatening bleeding. Based on our in-depth analysis, we conclude that both DOAC strategies are equally safe and preferable alternatives to VKAs in patients undergoing CA for AF.

Compared efficacy of preservation solutions on the outcome of liver transplantation: Meta-analysis.

AIM: To compare the effects of the four most commonly used preservation solutions on the outcome of liver transplantations. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases up to January 31st, 2017. The inclusion criteria were comparative, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for deceased donor liver (DDL) allografts with adult and pediatric donors using the gold standard University of Wisconsin (UW) solution or histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK), Celsior (CS) and Institut Georges Lopez (IGL-1) solutions. Fifteen RCTs (1830 livers) were included; the primary outcomes were primary non-function (PNF) and one-year post-transplant graft survival (OGS-1). RESULTS: All trials were homogenous with respect to donor and recipient characteristics. There was no statistical difference in the incidence of PNF with the use of UW, HTK, CS and IGL-1 (RR = 0.02, 95%CI: 0.01-0.03, P = 0.356). Comparing OGS-1 also failed to reveal any difference between UW, HTK, CS and IGL-1 (RR = 0.80, 95%CI: 0.80-0.80, P = 0.369). Two trials demonstrated higher PNF levels for UW in comparison with the HTK group, and individual studies described higher rates of biliary complications where HTK and CS were used compared to the UW and IGL-1 solutions. However, the meta-analysis of the data did not prove a statistically significant difference: the UW, CS, HTK and IGL-1 solutions were associated with nearly equivalent outcomes. CONCLUSION: Alternative solutions for UW yield the same degree of safety and effectiveness for the preservation of DDLs, but further well-designed clinical trials are warranted.