Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Evid Based Integr Med ; 29: 2515690X241258403, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38826036

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: A systematic review and meta-analysis have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of alkalinization for COVID-19 patients based on current evidence to determine the impact of alkalinization on COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (Pubmed), Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov for studies evaluating the efficacy of alkalinization up to 30 April 2023. Based on the PRISMA 2020 statement criteria a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies were performed. RESULTS: The results of our meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in mortality rate in the alkalinization group compared to controls (RR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.56-0.95; I2 = 0%). However, our subgroup analysis showed no significant improvement in RCT-only studies (RR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.59-1.05; I2 = 0%), the recovery rate was significantly higher in the alkalinization group (RR 2.13, 95% CI: 1.39-3.26; I2 = 0%), duration of recovery also has improved in alkalinization group (SMD 0.76, 95% CI: 0.33-1.18; I2 = 0%). The results of our meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in the duration of hospitalization in the alkalinization group compared to controls with very low certainty of evidence (SMD -0.66, 95% CI: -0.97 to -0.35; I2 = 36%). CONCLUSION: With low certainty of evidence, alkalinization (by sodium bicarbonate) can be an efficient and safe adjuvant treatment for COVID-19 patients. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to strengthen the available evidence.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Bicarbonato de Sodio , Humanos , Bicarbonato de Sodio/uso terapéutico , SARS-CoV-2 , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
Mult Scler Relat Disord ; 81: 105128, 2024 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37979408

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is a chronic autoimmune disease, affecting over 2.5 million people worldwide. There has been growing concern about the impact of COVID-19 on the clinical course of MS. However, these findings remain controversial, and there is a lack of high-quality evidence to establish the relationship between COVID-19 and MS. METHODS: A comprehensive search was done to identify relevant studies reporting relapse rate in patients with MS (pwMS), those comparing the relapse rate of COVID-19 pwMS and MS controls, and studies investigating the effect of COVID-19 on relapse rate of pwMS. The results were presented as proportion of COVID-19 pwMS experiencing relapse and odds ratio determining the impact of COVID-19 on relapse rate. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in the analyses. The proportion of COVID-19 positive pwMS with relapse was 7.71 per 100 cases (95 % confidence interval, CI: 4.41-13.89, I2=96 %). Quantitative evaluation of studies with pwMS without COVID-19 did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in relapse rate of patients with COVID-19 (OR: 0.75, 95 %CI: 0.44-1.29, I2= 54 %). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not alter the lack of significance of association between COVID-19 and MS relapse. Sensitivity analysis excluding the outlying study was largely in favor of no difference between the groups (OR:1.00, 95 %CI: 0.72-1.38, I2=34 %) CONCLUSION: The results of this review does not suggest that COVID-19 influences the relapse rate in pwMS. While the findings alleviate the concerns regarding the co-occurrence of the diseases, further studies are needed to investigate the effects of confounding factors.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Autoinmunes , COVID-19 , Esclerosis Múltiple , Humanos , Enfermedad Crónica , Oportunidad Relativa
3.
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc ; 47: 101243, 2023 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37484065

RESUMEN

Introduction: The appropriate oxygen target post-resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients is uncertain. We sought to compare lower versus higher oxygen targets in patients following OHCA. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov until January 2023 to include all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated conservative vs. liberal oxygen therapy in OHCA patients. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 90 days while our secondary outcomes were the level of neuron-specific enolase (NSE) at 48 h, ICU length of stay (LOS), and favorable neurological outcome (the proportion of patients with Cerebral Performance Category scores of 1-2 at end of follow-up). We used RevMan 5.4 to pool risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs). Results: Nine trials with 1971 patients were included in our review. There was no significant difference between the conservative and liberal oxygen target groups regarding the rate of all-cause mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.13; I2 = 55%). There were no significant differences between the two groups when assessing favorable neurological outcome (RR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.10; I2 = 4%), NSE at 48 h (MD 0.04, 95% CI: -0.67 to 0.76; I2 = 0%), and ICU length of stay (MD -2.86 days, 95% CI: -8.00 to 2.29 days; I2 = 0%). Conclusions: Conservative oxygen therapy did not decrease mortality, improve neurologic recovery, or decrease ICU LOS as compared to a liberal oxygen regimen. Future large-scale RCTs comparing homogenous oxygen targets are needed to confirm these findings.

4.
Indian Heart J ; 75(4): 304-307, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37328138

RESUMEN

A few mostly underpowered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been used to study the impact of blood pressure (BP) targets in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients. We aimed to perform an updated meta-analysis to compare the outcomes between the higher BP target and the lower BP target groups following OHCA. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library until December 2022. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using RevMan 5.4. Our search yielded four RCTs with a total of 1114 patients. Regarding our primary outcome of all-cause mortality, there was no significant difference between higher versus lower BP target goals in post-OHCA patients (OR 1.12, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.45). Furthermore, there were no significant differences between the two groups in good neurological outcome, the incidence of arrhythmia, need for renal replacement therapy, and the levels of neuron-specific enolase at 48 h. The length of ICU stay of patients treated with the higher BP target was significantly lower but by a small margin. These findings do not support the use of a higher BP target but are subject to confirmation by large-scale RCTs investigating homogenous BP goals.


Asunto(s)
Hipertensión , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario , Humanos , Presión Sanguínea , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/epidemiología , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/terapia
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...