Shorter versus longer-course of antibiotic therapy for urinary tract infections in pediatric population: an updated meta-analysis.

Urinary tract infections (UTI) affect between 3% to 7.5% of the febrile pediatric population each year, being one of the most common bacterial infections in pediatrics. Nevertheless, there is no consensus in the medical literature regarding the duration of per oral (p.o.) antibiotic therapy for UTI among these patients. Therefore, our meta-analysis aims to assess the most effective therapy length in this scenario. PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing short (≤ 5 days) with long-course (≥ 7 days) per os (p.o.) antibiotic therapy for children with UTI. Statistical analysis was performed using R Studio version 4.2.1, heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics, and the risk of bias was evaluated using the RoB-2 tool. Risk Ratios (RR) with p < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Seventeen studies involving 1666 pediatric patients were included. Of these, 890 patients (53.4%) were randomized to receive short-course therapy. Patients undergoing short-course therapy showed higher treatment failure rates (RR 1.61; 95% CI 1.15-2.27; p = 0.006). Furthermore, there were no statistically significant differences between groups regarding reinfection (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.47-1.13; p = 0156) and relapse rates (RR 1.47; 95% CI 0.8-2.71; p = 0.270).  Conclusion: In summary, our results suggest that long-course p.o. antibiotic therapy is associated with a lower rate of treatment failure when compared to short-course p.o. antibiotic therapy. There was no statistical difference between both courses regarding reinfection and relapse rates within 15 months.    PROSPERO identifier: CRD42023456745. What is Known: • Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are common in children, affecting around 7.5% of those under 18. • The optimal duration of antibiotic treatment for pediatric UTIs has been a subject of debate. What is New: • Short-course therapy (5 or fewer days) was associated with a significantly higher failure rate when compared to long-course therapy. • There was no significant difference in reinfection and relapse rates within 15 months between short and long-course therapy.

Safety and Serum Estradiol Levels in Hormonal Treatments for Vulvovaginal Atrophy in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Vulvo-vaginal atrophy (VVA) or genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is a common condition among breast cancer (BC) patients, especially those undergoing antiestrogen therapy. Despite being an option in refractory cases, the safety of hormonal treatment remains uncertain in this population. The aim of this study was to review the safety and serum estrogen levels of hormonal therapy in patients with BC history presenting with VVA symptoms. Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for studies comparing different hormonal treatment options for VVA in breast cancer survivors. Statistical analysis was performed using a random effects model and heterogeneity using Cochran's Q-statistic and the I2 index. We included 17 studies, of which 5 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Treatment modalities included in this study were topical vaginal estradiol and estriol preparations, vaginally applied testosterone, DHEA, and ospemifene. We found that, among patients treated with the estriol and estradiol preparations, there was an average increase of 7.67 pg/mL (SMD 7.67 pg/mL; 95% CI -1.00, 16.35; p < .001). Analysis of the testosterone group found temporary peaks of serum estradiol levels, but 1 study showed persistent elevation above normal postmenopausal levels. One study with prasterone revealed no elevation of serum estradiol concentration. One study with ospemifene demonstrated no increase in the risk of BC recurrence. In conclusion, among treatments available for BC survivors, low-dose vaginal estrogen showed the smallest changes in serum estradiol levels and had the most evidence, but safety remains unclear, especially for patients on aromatase inhibitors. Alternative treatments such as ospemifene need more data supporting safety and efficacy. These results suggest that concerns related to cancer recurrence should keep aiming for the lowest possible concentration.

Impact of the HIV infection in Hodgkin lymphoma individuals: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a rare lymphoproliferative disorder that occurs in about 10% of all cancer cases. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is associated with an increased occurrence of a wide range of cancers, including HL due to progressive immunosuppression and co-infection with oncogenic viruses. However, the aim of this systematic review is to obtain evidence about the impact of the HIV infection in HL individuals. METHODS: We will obtain studies through PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. The inclusion criteria will be observational studies (sectional, cohort, and case-control) that describe the impact of the HIV infection in HL individuals. Outcomes of interest include mortality, prevalence, causes of hospitalization, time between HIV diagnosis and HL diagnosis in days, comorbidities (systemic hypertension, diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, others), T CD4 + cells/mm3 at HIV diagnosis and at HL diagnosis, viral load (log10 copies/mL) at HL diagnosis, and history of treatment abandon. Two reviewers, independently, will extract the data from each included study. Meta-analysis will then be carried out using fixed-effects or random-effects model, using the mean difference for continuous outcomes and the relative risk for dichotomous outcomes. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The quality of evidence for each outcome will be assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Review Manager V.5.3.5 will be used for synthesis and subgroup analysis. To assess heterogeneity, we will compute the I2 statistics. Additionally, a quantitative synthesis will be performed if the included studies are sufficiently homogenous. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be a review of the published data, and thus it is not necessary to obtain ethical approval. The findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289520.