Noninvasive liver disease assessment to identify portal hypertension: Systematic and narrative reviews supporting the AASLD Practice Guideline.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Portal hypertension is a serious complication of cirrhosis, which leads to life-threatening complications. HVPG, a surrogate of portal pressure, is the reference standard test to assess the severity of portal hypertension. However, since HVPG is limited by its invasiveness and availability, noninvasive liver disease assessments to assess portal pressure, especially clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH), are needed. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We conducted a systematic review of Ovid MEDLINE(R) Ovid EMBASE, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus from each database's inception to April 22, 2022. We included only studies in English that examined ≥50 patients in single liver disease etiologies, which compared noninvasive tests (blood and/or imaging) to HVPG for predicting clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH; defined as HVPG ≥ 10 mm Hg) in patients with chronic liver disease. Outcomes included measures of diagnostic test accuracy. Additionally, a narrative review of studies not eligible for the systematic review is also provided. Nine studies with 2492 patients met the inclusion criteria. There was substantial heterogeneity with regard to liver disease studied and cutoff values used to detect CSPH. Blood-based tests, including aspartate-to-platelet ratio index (APRI) (56% sensitivity and 68% specificity) and FIB-4 (54% sensitivity and 73% specificity) had low accuracy measures. Imaging-based tests (transient elastography and shear wave elastography detection of liver stiffness measurement [LSM]) had better accuracy but also had substantial variation; at 15 kPa, TE sensitivity was 90%-96% and specificity was 48%-50%, while at 25 kPa, its sensitivity and specificity were 57%-85% and 82%-93%, respectively. The narrative review suggested that imaging-based tests are the best available noninvasive liver disease assessment to detect CSPH; CSPH is highly unlikely to be present at an LSM ≤15 kPa and likely to be present at an LSM ≥25 kPa. CONCLUSIONS: While imaging-based noninvasive liver disease assessment appeared to have higher accuracy than blood-based tests to detect CSPH, only 9 studies fit the a priori established inclusion criteria for the systematic review. In addition, there was substantial study heterogeneity and variation in cutoffs for LSM to detect CSPH, limiting the ability to establish definitive cutoffs to detect CSPH.

Accuracy of blood-based biomarkers for staging liver fibrosis in chronic liver disease: A systematic review supporting the AASLD Practice Guideline.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Blood-based biomarkers have been proposed as an alternative to liver biopsy for noninvasive liver disease assessment in chronic liver disease. Our aims for this systematic review were to evaluate the diagnostic utility of selected blood-based tests either alone, or in combination, for identifying significant fibrosis (F2-4), advanced fibrosis (F3-4), and cirrhosis (F4), as compared to biopsy in chronic liver disease. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We included a comprehensive search of databases including Ovid MEDLINE(R), EMBASE, Cochrane Database, and Scopus through to April 2022. Two independent reviewers selected 286 studies with 103,162 patients. The most frequently identified studies included the simple aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index and fibrosis (FIB)-4 markers (with low-to-moderate risk of bias) in HBV and HCV, HIV-HCV/HBV coinfection, and NAFLD. Positive (LR+) and negative (LR-) likelihood ratios across direct and indirect biomarker tests for HCV and HBV for F2-4, F3-4, or F4 were 1.66-6.25 and 0.23-0.80, 1.89-5.24 and 0.12-0.64, and 1.32-7.15 and 0.15-0.86, respectively; LR+ and LR- for NAFLD F2-4, F3-4, and F4 were 2.65-3.37 and 0.37-0.39, 2.25-6.76 and 0.07-0.87, and 3.90 and 0.15, respectively. Overall, the proportional odds ratio indicated FIB-4 <1.45 was better than aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index <0.5 for F2-4. FIB-4 >3.25 was also better than aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index >1.5 for F3-4 and F4. There was limited data for combined tests. CONCLUSIONS: Blood-based biomarkers are associated with small-to-moderate change in pretest probability for diagnosing F2-4, F3-4, and F4 in viral hepatitis, HIV-HCV coinfection, and NAFLD, with limited comparative or combination studies for other chronic liver diseases.

Imaging-based noninvasive liver disease assessment for staging liver fibrosis in chronic liver disease: A systematic review supporting the AASLD Practice Guideline.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Transient elastography (TE), shear wave elastography, and/or magnetic resonance elastography (MRE), each providing liver stiffness measurement (LSM), are the most studied imaging-based noninvasive liver disease assessment (NILDA) techniques. To support the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidelines on NILDA, we summarized the evidence on the accuracy of these LSM methods to stage liver fibrosis (F). APPROACH AND RESULTS: A comprehensive search for studies assessing LSM by TE, shear wave elastography, or MRE for the identification of significant fibrosis (F2-4), advanced fibrosis (F3-4), or cirrhosis (F4), using histopathology as the standard of reference by liver disease etiology in adults or children from inception to April 2022 was performed. We excluded studies with <50 patients with a single disease entity and mixed liver disease etiologies (with the exception of HCV/HIV coinfection). Out of 9447 studies, 240 with 61,193 patients were included in this systematic review. In adults, sensitivities for the identification of F2-4 ranged from 51% to 95%, for F3-4 from 70% to 100%, and for F4 from 60% to 100% across all techniques/diseases, whereas specificities ranged from 36% to 100%, 74% to 100%, and 67% to 99%, respectively. The largest body of evidence available was for TE; MRE appeared to be the most accurate method. Imaging-based NILDA outperformed blood-based NILDA in most comparisons, particularly for the identification of F3-4/F4. In the pediatric population, imaging-based NILDA is likely as accurate as in adults. CONCLUSIONS: LSM from TE, shear wave elastography, and MRE shows acceptable to outstanding accuracy for the detection of liver fibrosis across various liver disease etiologies. Accuracy increased from F2-4 to F3-4 and was the highest for F4. Further research is needed to better standardize the use of imaging-based NILDA, particularly in pediatric liver diseases.

Measuring Documentation Burden in Healthcare.

BACKGROUND: The enactment of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act and the wide adoption of electronic health record (EHR) systems have ushered in increasing documentation burden, frequently cited as a key factor affecting the work experience of healthcare professionals and a contributor to burnout. This systematic review aims to identify and characterize measures of documentation burden. METHODS: We integrated discussions with Key Informants and a comprehensive search of the literature, including MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and gray literature published between 2010 and 2023. Data were narratively and thematically synthesized. RESULTS: We identified 135 articles about measuring documentation burden. We classified measures into 11 categories: overall time spent in EHR, activities related to clinical documentation, inbox management, time spent in clinical review, time spent in orders, work outside work/after hours, administrative tasks (billing and insurance related), fragmentation of workflow, measures of efficiency, EHR activity rate, and usability. The most common source of data for most measures was EHR usage logs. Direct tracking such as through time-motion analysis was fairly uncommon. Measures were developed and applied across various settings and populations, with physicians and nurses in the USA being the most frequently represented healthcare professionals. Evidence of validity of these measures was limited and incomplete. Data on the appropriateness of measures in terms of scalability, feasibility, or equity across various contexts were limited. The physician perspective was the most robustly captured and prominently focused on increased stress and burnout. DISCUSSION: Numerous measures for documentation burden are available and have been tested in a variety of settings and contexts. However, most are one-dimensional, do not capture various domains of this construct, and lack robust validity evidence. This report serves as a call to action highlighting an urgent need for measure development that represents diverse clinical contexts and support future interventions.

Lack of patient-centered evaluation of outcomes in intermittent claudication literature.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease, characterized as arterial atherosclerotic disease, can lead to insufficient flow in the lower extremities and ischemia, with the most common clinical manifestation being intermittent claudication (IC). In 2022, the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) developed appropriate use criteria for the management of IC that used this systematic review as a source of evidence. The objective of this study is to synthesize the findings of the systematic review and identify evidence gaps. METHODS: A comprehensive search of literature databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus was conducted from January 1, 2000, to November 30, 2022. Noncomparative and comparative observational studies and randomized controlled trials were included. Included studies evaluated exercise therapy, endovascular or open revascularization for the treatment of IC. Outcomes of interest (freedom from major adverse limb event, health-related quality of life, and walking distance) were compared in various subgroups (age, sex, diabetes, smoking status, anatomical location of disease, and optimal medical therapy). RESULTS: Twenty-six studies reported the outcomes of interest for the evidence map. The general conclusions of the studies that reported freedom from major adverse limb events were that reintervention rates for endovascular therapy at ≥2 years were >20%, major amputation rates were often not reported, and, after endovascular therapy, the 1-month mortality was low (<2%). Quality of life and walking distance data were sparse, limited to only endovascular intervention, and insufficient to make any strong conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: IC in patients with peripheral arterial disease poses a significant socioeconomic and health care burden. Major, consequential gaps exist in the IC literature with respect to the assessment of patient reported outcome measures, standardized measures of walking distance and the comparative effectiveness of initial exercise therapy vs invasive intervention. The evidence gaps identified by the Society for Vascular Surgery appropriate use criteria on IC systematic review serve as a guide for future research efforts to optimize care for this patient population.

A systematic review supporting the Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines on the management of heritable aortopathies.

BACKGROUND: To support the development of clinical practice guidelines on the management of patients with genetic aortopathies and arteriopathies, a writing committee from the Society for Vascular Surgery has commissioned this systematic review. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and searched multiple databases for studies addressing six questions identified by the Society for Vascular Surgery guideline committee about evaluating and managing patients with genetic aortopathies and arteriopathies. Studies were selected and appraised by pairs of independent reviewers. RESULTS: We included 12 studies in this systematic review. We did not identify studies about the long-term outcomes of endovascular repair for aortic aneurysm in patients with heritable aortopathy or about new aortic events in pregnant women with a history of aortic dissection (AD) or aneurysm. A small case series demonstrated a 100% survival rate and 100% aortic intervention-free survival at 15 months (range, 7-28 months) after endograft repair for type B AD. A positive genetic diagnosis was discovered in 36% of patients with aortic aneurysms and dissections who had no risk factors for hereditary aortopathies, and these patients had a mortality rate of 11% at a median follow-up duration of 5 months. Black patients had lower 30-day mortality than White patients (5.6% vs 9.0%, respectively), but they had a higher overall aortic reintervention rate at 30 days after AD repair (47% vs 27%, respectively). Aortic reinterventions owing to aneurysmal expansion and endoleak at 30 days were higher in Black patients than White patients. The certainty of evidence was judged to be very low across all the outcomes evaluated in this systematic review. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence suggests high survival after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B AD in young patients with heritable aortopathies, but with limited long-term follow-up. Genetic testing in patients with acute aortic aneurysms and dissections had a high yield. It was positive for most patients with risk factors for hereditary aortopathies and in more than one-third for all other patients, and was associated with new aortic events within 15 years.

The association of sensitivity and specificity with disease prevalence: analysis of 6909 studies of diagnostic test accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Sensitivity and specificity are characteristics of a diagnostic test and are not expected to change as the prevalence of the target condition changes. We sought to evaluate the association between prevalence and changes in sensitivity and specificity. METHODS: We retrieved data from meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2003-2020). We used mixed-effects random-intercept linear regression models to evaluate the association between prevalence and logit-transformed sensitivity and specificity. The model evaluated all meta-analyses as nested within each systematic review. RESULTS: We analyzed 6909 diagnostic test accuracy studies from 552 meta-analyses that were included in 92 systematic reviews. For sensitivity, compared with the lowest quartile of prevalence, the second, third and fourth quartiles were associated with significantly higher odds of identifying a true positive case (odds ratio [OR] 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.26; OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.23-1.41; OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.37-1.58; respectively). For specificity, compared with the lowest quartile of prevalence, the second, third and fourth quartiles were associated with significantly lower odds of identifying a true negative case (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69-0.80; OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.60-0.70; OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.44-0.51; respectively). Pooled regression coefficients from bivariate models conducted within each meta-analysis showed that prevalence was positively associated with sensitivity and negatively associated with specificity. Findings were consistent across subgroups. INTERPRETATION: In this large sample of diagnostic studies, higher prevalence was associated with higher estimated sensitivity and lower estimated specificity. Clinicians should consider the implications of disease prevalence and spectrum when interpreting the results from studies of diagnostic test accuracy.

Secondary Prophylaxis of Gastric Variceal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

There is no clear consensus regarding the optimal approach for secondary prophylaxis of gastric variceal bleeding (GVB) in patients with cirrhosis. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the efficacy of available treatments. A comprehensive search of several databases from each database's inception to March 23, 2021, was conducted to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Outcomes of interest were rebleeding and mortality. Results were expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to rate the certainty of evidence. We included 9 RCTs with 647 patients who had histories of GVB and follow-ups >6 weeks. A total of 9 interventions were included in the NMA. Balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) was associated with a lower risk of rebleeding when compared with ß-blockers (RR, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01-0.26; low certainty), and endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS)-cyanoacrylate (CYA) (RR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04-0.77; low certainty). ß-blockers were associated with a higher risk of rebleeding compared with most interventions and with increased mortality compared with EIS-CYA (RR, 4.12, 95% CI, 1.50-11.36; low certainty), and EIS-CYA + nonselective ß-blockers (RR, 5.61; 95% CI, 1.91-16.43; low certainty). Analysis based on indirect comparisons suggests that BRTO may be the best intervention in preventing rebleeding, whereas ß-blocker monotherapy is likely the worst in preventing rebleeding and mortality. Head-to-head RCTs are needed to validate these results.

A systematic review supporting the Society for Vascular Surgery Guidelines on the management of carotid artery disease.

BACKGROUND: To support the development of guidelines on the management of carotid disease, a writing committee from the Society for Vascular Surgery has commissioned this systematic review. METHODS: We searched multiple data bases for studies addressing five questions: medical management vs carotid revascularization (CEA) in asymptomatic patients, CEA vs carotid artery stenting (CAS) in symptomatic low surgical risk patients, the optimal timing of revascularization after acute stroke, screening high-risk patients for carotid disease, and the optimal sequence of interventions in patients with combined coronary and carotid disease. Studies were selected and appraised by pairs of independent reviewers. Meta-analyses were performed when feasible. RESULTS: Medical management compared with carotid interventions in asymptomatic patients was associated with better early outcome during the first 30 days. However, CEA was associated with significantly lower long-term rate of stroke/death at 5 years. In symptomatic low-risk surgical patients, CEA was associated with a lower risk of stroke, but a significant increase in myocardial infarction compared with CAS during the first 30 days. When the long-term outcome of transfemoral CAS vs CEA in symptomatic patients were examined using preplanned pooled analysis of individual patient data from four randomized trials, the risk of death or stroke within 120 days of the index procedure was 5.5% for CEA and 8.7% for CAS, which lends support that, over the long term, CEA has a superior outcome compared with transfemoral CAS. When managing acute stroke, the comparison of CEA during the first 48 hours to that between day 2 and day 14 did not reveal a statistically significant difference on outcomes during the first 30 days. Registry data show good results with CEA performed in the first week, but not within the first 48 hours. A single risk factor, aside from peripheral artery disease, was associated with low carotid screening yield. Multiple risk factors greatly increase the yield of screening. Evidence on the timing of interventions in patients with combined carotid and coronary disease was sparse and imprecise. Patients without carotid symptoms, who had the carotid intervention first, compared with a combined carotid intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting, had better outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This updated evidence summary supports the Society for Vascular Surgery clinical practice guidelines for commonly raised clinical scenarios. CEA was superior to medical therapy in the long-term prevention of stroke/death over medical therapy. CEA was also superior to transfemoral CAS in minimizing long-term stroke/death for symptomatic low risk surgical patients. CEA should optimally be performed between 2 and 14 days from the onset of acute stroke. Having multiple risk factors increases the value of carotid screening.

Effect of TAVR Approach and Other Baseline Factors on the Incidence of Acute Kidney Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a well-known complication following a transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and is associated with higher morbidity and mortality. Objective: We aim to compare the risk of developing AKI after transfemoral (TF), transapical (TA), and transaortic (TAo) approaches following TAVR. Methods: We searched Medline and EMBASE databases from January 2009 to January 2021. We included studies that evaluated the risk of AKI based on different TAVR approaches. After extracting each study's data, we calculated the risk ratio and 95% confidence intervals using RevMan software 5.4. Publication bias was assessed by the forest plot. Results: Thirty-six (36) studies, consisting of 70,406 patients undergoing TAVR were included. Thirty-five studies compared TF to TA, and only seven investigations compared TF to TAo. AKI was documented in 4,857 out of 50,395 (9.6%) patients that underwent TF TAVR compared to 3,155 out of 19,721 (16%) patients who underwent TA-TAVR, with a risk ratio of 0.49 (95% CI, 0.36-0.66; p < 0.00001). Likewise, 273 patients developed AKI out of the 1,840 patients (14.8%) that underwent TF-TAVR in contrast to 67 patients out of the 421 patients (15.9%) that underwent TAo-TAVR, with a risk ratio of 0.51 (95% CI, 0.27-0.98; p = 0.04). There was no significant risk when we compared TA to TAo approaches, with a risk ratio of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.29-2.75; p = 0.84). Conclusion: The risk of post-TAVR AKI is significantly lower in patients who underwent TF-TAVR than those who underwent TA-TAVR or TAo-TAVR.

Pharmacologic Therapies in Patients With Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by frequent exacerbations. Purpose: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and adverse events (AEs) of pharmacologic interventions for adults with exacerbation of COPD. Data Sources: English-language searches of several bibliographic sources from database inception to 2 January 2019. Study Selection: 68 randomized controlled trials that enrolled adults with exacerbation of COPD treated in out- or inpatient settings other than intensive care and compared pharmacologic therapies with placebo, "usual care," or other pharmacologic interventions. Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently extracted data and rated study quality and strength of evidence (SOE). Data Synthesis: Compared with placebo or management without antibiotics, antibiotics given for 3 to 14 days were associated with increased exacerbation resolution at the end of the intervention (odds ratio [OR], 2.03 [95% CI, 1.47 to 2.80]; moderate SOE) and less treatment failure at the end of the intervention (OR, 0.54 [CI, 0.34 to 0.86]; moderate SOE), independent of severity of exacerbations in out- and inpatients. Compared with placebo in out- and inpatients, systemic corticosteroids given for 9 to 56 days were associated with less treatment failure at the end of the intervention (OR, 0.01 [CI, 0.00 to 0.13]; low SOE) but also with a higher number of total and endocrine-related AEs. Compared with placebo or usual care in inpatients, other pharmacologic interventions (aminophyllines, magnesium sulfate, anti-inflammatory agents, inhaled corticosteroids, and short-acting bronchodilators) had insufficient evidence, showing either no or inconclusive effects (with the exception of the mucolytic erdosteine) or improvement only in lung function. Limitation: Scant evidence for many interventions; several studies had unclear or high risk of bias and inadequate reporting of AEs. Conclusion: Antibiotics and systemic corticosteroids reduce treatment failure in adults with mild to severe exacerbation of COPD. Primary Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018111609).

Acute Treatments for Episodic Migraine in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Migraine is common and can be associated with significant morbidity, and several treatment options exist for acute therapy. Objective: To evaluate the benefits and harms associated with acute treatments for episodic migraine in adults. Data Sources: Multiple databases from database inception to February 24, 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews that assessed effectiveness or harms of acute therapy for migraine attacks. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Meta-analysis was performed with the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman variance correction or by using a fixed-effect model based on the Mantel-Haenszel method if the number of studies was small. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes included pain freedom, pain relief, sustained pain freedom, sustained pain relief, and adverse events. The strength of evidence (SOE) was graded with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. Findings: Evidence on triptans and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs was summarized from 15 systematic reviews. For other interventions, 115 randomized clinical trials with 28 803 patients were included. Compared with placebo, triptans and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs used individually were significantly associated with reduced pain at 2 hours and 1 day (moderate to high SOE) and increased risk of mild and transient adverse events. Compared with placebo, calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists (low to high SOE), lasmiditan (5-HT1F receptor agonist; high SOE), dihydroergotamine (moderate to high SOE), ergotamine plus caffeine (moderate SOE), acetaminophen (moderate SOE), antiemetics (low SOE), butorphanol (low SOE), and tramadol in combination with acetaminophen (low SOE) were significantly associated with pain reduction and increase in mild adverse events. The findings for opioids were based on low or insufficient SOE. Several nonpharmacologic treatments were significantly associated with improved pain, including remote electrical neuromodulation (moderate SOE), transcranial magnetic stimulation (low SOE), external trigeminal nerve stimulation (low SOE), and noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (moderate SOE). No significant difference in adverse events was found between nonpharmacologic treatments and sham. Conclusions and Relevance: There are several acute treatments for migraine, with varying strength of supporting evidence. Use of triptans, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, dihydroergotamine, calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists, lasmiditan, and some nonpharmacologic treatments was associated with improved pain and function. The evidence for many other interventions, including opioids, was limited.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the management of visceral artery aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: The evidence supporting management decisions of visceral artery aneurysms (VAAs) is sparse. Practice guidelines are needed to help patients and surgeons choose between endovascular and open surgery approaches. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and Scopus for studies of patients with VAAs. Studies were selected and appraised by pairs of independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed when appropriate. RESULTS: We included 80 observational studies that were mostly noncomparative. Data were available for 2845 aneurysms, comprising 1279 renal artery, 775 splenic artery, 359 hepatic artery, 226 pancreaticoduodenal and gastroduodenal arteries, 95 superior mesenteric artery, 87 celiac artery, 15 jejunal, ileal and colic arteries, and 9 gastric and gastroepiploic arteries. Differences in mortality between open and endovascular approaches were not statistically significant. The endovascular approach was used more often by surgeons. The endovascular approach was associated with shorter hospital stay and lower rates of cardiovascular complications but higher rates of reintervention. Postembolization syndrome rates ranged from 9% (renal) to 38% (splenic). Coil migration ranged from 8% (splenic) to 29% (renal). Otherwise, access site complication were low (<5%). Pseudoaneurysms tended to have higher mortality and reintervention rates. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provides event rates for outcomes important to patients with VAAs. Despite the low certainty warranted by the evidence, these rates along, with surgical expertise and anatomic feasibility, can help patients and surgeons in shared-decision making.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the management of visceral artery aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: The evidence supporting management decisions of visceral artery aneurysms (VAAs) is sparse. Practice guidelines are needed to help patients and surgeons choose between endovascular and open surgery approaches. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and Scopus for studies of patients with VAAs. Studies were selected and appraised by pairs of independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed when appropriate. RESULTS: We included 80 observational studies that were mostly noncomparative. Data were available for 2845 aneurysms, comprising 1279 renal artery, 775 splenic artery, 359 hepatic artery, 226 pancreaticoduodenal and gastroduodenal arteries, 95 superior mesenteric artery, 87 celiac artery, 15 jejunal, ileal and colic arteries, and 9 gastric and gastroepiploic arteries. Differences in mortality between open and endovascular approaches were not statistically significant. The endovascular approach was used more often by surgeons. The endovascular approach was associated with shorter hospital stay and lower rates of cardiovascular complications but higher rates of reintervention. Postembolization syndrome rates ranged from 9% (renal) to 38% (splenic). Coil migration ranged from 8% (splenic) to 29% (renal). Otherwise, access site complication were low (<5%). Pseudoaneurysms tended to have higher mortality and reintervention rates. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provides event rates for outcomes important to patients with VAAs. Despite the low certainty warranted by the evidence, these rates along, with surgical expertise and anatomic feasibility, can help patients and surgeons in shared-decision making.

Meditation for perioperative pain and anxiety: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Effective pain and anxiety management during the perioperative phase remains a challenge for patients undergoing surgeries and other invasive procedures. The current standard of care involves prescribing analgesics to treat these conditions; however, there has been recent interest in applying multimodal strategies that limit the use of these medications. One such modality is meditation, which has been shown to be effective in alleviating various physical and psychological symptoms in other settings. This systematic review aims to assess how current meditative practices affect perioperative pain and anxiety. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, APA PsycINFO, EBM Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science for all available dates. Our primary outcomes of interest were patient-reported pain and anxiety scores using the Visual Analog Scale, the Brief Pain Inventory, the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). For the HADS and STAI scales, only the anxiety and anxiety-state subgroups were reported, respectively. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 1746 articles. A total of 286 full-text articles were screened, and 16 studies were included in this systematic review. A total of eight studies assessed pain scores after invasive procedures; five reported improvements in pain scores, and three reported no change after meditative practices. Ten studies assessed anxiety outcomes after invasive procedures: nine reported a decrease in overall anxiety levels as a result of meditation practices while one study reported no change in anxiety scores. CONCLUSION: Data from this limited literature suggests that different meditation practices could be effective in alleviating pain and anxiety within the perioperative phase for patients undergoing various types of invasive procedures. Future prospective studies are needed to determine whether routine meditation in the perioperative setting is effective in mitigating perioperative pain and anxiety.

Safety implications of mask use: a systematic review and evidence map.

BACKGROUND: Widespread use of respiratory protection masks has become a critical component of public health response. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review synthesises the evidence on the acute physiological, cognitive and psychological impacts associated with different types of masks and provides an evidence map of research gaps. METHODS: A comprehensive search from 2000 to 2023 was conducted across multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, Scopus and PubMed). An umbrella systematic overview was conducted for physiological outcomes using existing systematic reviews. We conducted de novo systematic reviews for cognitive and psychological outcomes. Pairs of independent reviewers determined eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Certainty at an outcome level was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: The search resulted in 13 370 potential citations, leading to the inclusion of nine systematic reviews for physiological outcomes (87 primary studies) and 10 primary studies for cognitive and psychological outcomes (3815 participants), with the majority of participants being healthy adults. Studies evaluating physiological outcomes demonstrated that various types of masks have little to no significant difference in heart rate (surgical mask (mean difference (MD): 0.96 (-1.01 to 2.93)), N95 mask (MD: 1.63 (-2.79 to 6.05)) and cloth mask (MD: -0.94 (-6.39 to 4.52))) or respiratory rate during rest or exercise (surgical mask (MD: -1.35 (-3.00 to 0.29)), N95 mask (MD: 0.10 (-3.10 to 3.29)) and cloth mask (MD: -2.57 (-6.44 to 1.29)) (low certainty for most outcomes)). Mask use may be associated with very small changes in minute ventilation (surgical mask (MD: -13.9 (-20.30 to -7.53)) and N95 mask (MD: -16.3 (-28.7 to -3.9))), tidal volume (surgical mask (MD: -0.14 (-0.23 to -0.05)) and N95 mask (MD: -0.10 (-0.33 to 0.13))), oxygen saturation (surgical mask (MD: -0.59% (-0.87 to -0.30)), N95 mask (MD: -0.35% (-0.75 to 0.05)) and cloth mask (MD: -0.50% (-1.23; 0.24))), carbon dioxide partial pressure (surgical mask (standardised MD (SMD): 1.17 (0.70 to 1.64)) and N95 mask (SMD: 0.43 (0.08 to 0.79))) and exercise performance (surgical mask (SMD: -0.12 (-0.39 to 0.15)), N95 mask (SMD: -0.42 (-0.76 to -0.08)) and cloth mask (SMD: -0.26 (-0.54 to 0.02)) (low certainty for most outcomes)). Studies evaluating cognitive outcomes showed mixed results. Some studies reported reduced mental workload, and others showed no significant effect or decreased performance. The impact on attention, errors and reaction time was variable. These studies were small and at moderate to high risk of bias. Evidence was insufficient to estimate the effect of mask use on psychological outcomes (claustrophobia, depression and anxiety) as these studies were small, non-longitudinal and at high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: This evidence map provides a comprehensive insight into the multifaceted impact of respiratory protection mask use, and highlights the limited certainty in the available body of evidence. This evidence map supports the development of future research agenda.

Integrating large language models in systematic reviews: a framework and case study using ROBINS-I for risk of bias assessment.

Large language models (LLMs) may facilitate and expedite systematic reviews, although the approach to integrate LLMs in the review process is unclear. This study evaluates GPT-4 agreement with human reviewers in assessing the risk of bias using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool and proposes a framework for integrating LLMs into systematic reviews. The case study demonstrated that raw per cent agreement was the highest for the ROBINS-I domain of 'Classification of Intervention'. Kendall agreement coefficient was highest for the domains of 'Participant Selection', 'Missing Data' and 'Measurement of Outcomes', suggesting moderate agreement in these domains. Raw agreement about the overall risk of bias across domains was 61% (Kendall coefficient=0.35). The proposed framework for integrating LLMs into systematic reviews consists of four domains: rationale for LLM use, protocol (task definition, model selection, prompt engineering, data entry methods, human role and success metrics), execution (iterative revisions to the protocol) and reporting. We identify five basic task types relevant to systematic reviews: selection, extraction, judgement, analysis and narration. Considering the agreement level with a human reviewer in the case study, pairing artificial intelligence with an independent human reviewer remains required.

Collaborative Large Language Models for Automated Data Extraction in Living Systematic Reviews.

Objective: Data extraction from the published literature is the most laborious step in conducting living systematic reviews (LSRs). We aim to build a generalizable, automated data extraction workflow leveraging large language models (LLMs) that mimics the real-world two-reviewer process. Materials and Methods: A dataset of 10 clinical trials (22 publications) from a published LSR was used, focusing on 23 variables related to trial, population, and outcomes data. The dataset was split into prompt development (n=5) and held-out test sets (n=17). GPT-4-turbo and Claude-3-Opus were used for data extraction. Responses from the two LLMs were compared for concordance. In instances with discordance, original responses from each LLM were provided to the other LLM for cross-critique. Evaluation metrics, including accuracy, were used to assess performance against the manually curated gold standard. Results: In the prompt development set, 110 (96%) responses were concordant, achieving an accuracy of 0.99 against the gold standard. In the test set, 342 (87%) responses were concordant. The accuracy of the concordant responses was 0.94. The accuracy of the discordant responses was 0.41 for GPT-4-turbo and 0.50 for Claude-3-Opus. Of the 49 discordant responses, 25 (51%) became concordant after cross-critique, with an increase in accuracy to 0.76. Discussion: Concordant responses by the LLMs are likely to be accurate. In instances of discordant responses, cross-critique can further increase the accuracy. Conclusion: Large language models, when simulated in a collaborative, two-reviewer workflow, can extract data with reasonable performance, enabling truly 'living' systematic reviews.

The safety of intravenous peripheral administration of 3% hypertonic saline: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Three percent hypertonic saline (3% HTS) is used to treat several critical conditions such as severe and symptomatic hyponatremia and increased intracranial pressure. It has been traditionally administered through a central venous catheter (CVC). The avoidance of peripheral intravenous infusion of 3% HTS stems theoretically from the concern about the ability of the peripheral veins to tolerate hyperosmolar infusions. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the rate of complications associated with the infusion of 3% HTS using peripheral intravenous access. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the rate of complications related to the peripheral infusion of 3% HTS. We searched several databases for available studies that met the criteria until February 24th, 2022. We included ten studies conducted across three countries examining the incidence of infiltration, phlebitis, venous thrombosis, erythema, and edema. The overall event rate was calculated and transformed using the Freeman-Tukey arcsine method and pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. I2 was used to evaluate heterogeneity. Selected items from Newcastle-Ottawa Scale2 were used to assess the risk of bias in each included study. RESULTS: A total of 1200 patients were reported to have received peripheral infusion of 3% HTS. The analysis showed that peripherally administered 3% HTS has a low rate of complications. The overall incidence of each of the complications was as follows: infiltration 3.3%, (95% C.I. = 1.8-5.1%), phlebitis 6.2% (95% C.I. = 1.1-14.3%), erythema 2.3% (95% C.I. = 0.3-5.4%), edema 1.8% (95% C.I. = 0.0-6.2%), and venous thrombosis 1% (95% C.I. = 0.0-4.8%). There was one incident of venous thrombosis preceded by infiltration resulting from peripheral infusion of 3% HTS. CONCLUSIONS: Peripheral administration of 3% HTS is considered a safe and possibly preferred option as it carries a low risk of complications and is a less invasive procedure compared to CVC.