Treatment of critical bleeding events in patients with immune thrombocytopenia: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Critical bleeding events in adults and children with ITP are medical emergencies; however, evidence-based treatment protocols are lacking. Due to the severe thrombocytopenia, (typically platelet count less than 20 × 109/L), a critical bleed portends a high risk of death or disability. We plan to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatments for critical bleeding in patients with ITP that will inform evidence-based recommendations. METHODS: Literature searches will be conducted in four electronic databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and PubMed. Eligible studies will be randomized controlled trials or observational studies that enrolled patients with ITP describing one or more interventions for the management of critical bleeding. Title and abstract screening, full-text screening, data extraction, and risk of bias evaluation will be conducted independently and in duplicate using Covidence and Excel. Outcomes will be pooled for meta-analysis where appropriate or summarized descriptively. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology will be used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Primary outcomes of interest will include frequency of critical bleeds, mortality and bleeding-related mortality, bleeding resolution, platelet count, and disability. DISCUSSION: Evidence-based treatments for critical bleeding in patients with ITP are needed to improve patient outcomes and standardize care in the emergency setting. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: CRD42020161206.

Analysis of volatile organic compounds and potential odour compounds in food contact paperboard using headspace two-dimensional GC-QTOF-MS.

The objective was to establish a robust and reliable approach for the characterisation of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) present in food contact paperboard. This was achieved through the utilisation of headspace solid-phase microextraction in tandem with comprehensive two-dimensional (2D) gas chromatography (GC) and quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (HS-SPME-GC × GC-QTOF-MS). The experimental parameters were optimised, involving the use of a DVB/C-WR/PDMS fibre at a temperature of 80 °C for a duration of 30 min. A total of 344 VOCs comprising aldehydes, ketones, alcohols, ethers, esters, alkanes and aromatic compounds, were tentatively identified in the samples. Twelve compounds believed to be from biogenic sources had a high odour impact making them major contributors to potential taint from the paperboard samples. Significant attention should be devoted to five compounds namely, 2-methylnaphthalene, 2-pentyl-furan, furfural, 1-octen-3-one and 1-octen-3-ol due to their potential adverse impact on the organoleptic qualities of packaged food items and their potential toxicity.Abbreviations: C-WR: carbon wide range; DVB: divinylbenzene; GC-MS: gas chromatography - mass spectrometry; GCxGC-QTOF-MS: comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography coupled to quadrupole-time-of-flight - mass spectrometry; HS-SPME: headspace - solid phase microextraction; LOD: limit of detection; LOQ: limit of quantification; OAV: odor activity values; PDMS: polydimethylsiloxane; RI: retention index; TTC: threshold of toxicological concern; VOC: volatile organic compound.

Authentication of recycled and virgin polyethylene terephthalate based on UPLC-Q-TOF-MS using non-volatile organic compounds and chemometrics.

Plastic packaging waste, such as polyethylene terephthalate (PET) has increased significantly in recent decades, arousing a considerable and serious public concern regarding the environment, economy, and policy. Plastic recycling is a useful tool to mitigate this issue. Here, a feasible study was performed to investigate the potential of a novel method for identifying virgin and recycled PET. Ultra-performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UPLC-Q-TOF-MS) was combined with various chemometrics, as a simple and reliable method that achieved a high discrimination rate for 105 batches of virgin PET (v-PET) and recycled PET (r-PET) based on 202 non-volatile organic compounds (NVOCs). Making use of orthogonal partial least-squares discrimination analysis (OPLS-DA) together with non-parametric tests, 26 marker compounds (i.e. 12 intentionally added substances (IAS) and 14 non-intentionally added substances (NIAS) as well as 31 marker compounds (i.e. 11 IAS and 20 NIAS) obtained from positive and combination of positive and negative ionization modes of UPLC-Q-TOF-MS, respectively, were successfully identified. Moreover, 100% accuracy was obtained using a decision tree (DT). Cross-discrimination based on misclassified samples using various chemometrics allowed the prediction accuracy to be improved and to identify a large sample set, thus greatly enhancing the application scope of this method. The possible origins of these detected compounds can be the plastic itself, as well as contamination from food, medicine, pesticides, industry-related substances, and degradation and polymerization products. As many of these compounds are toxic, especially those pesticide related, this indicates an urgent requirement for closed loop recycling. Overall, this analytical method provides a quick, accurate, and robust way to distinguish virgin from recycled PET and thus addresses the issue of potential virgin PET adulteration thereby detecting fraud in the area of PET recycling.

Cost-effectiveness of endovascular thrombectomy with alteplase versus endovascular thrombectomy alone for acute ischemic stroke secondary to large vessel occlusion.

BACKGROUND: Recent randomized trials have suggested that endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) alone may provide similar functional outcomes as the current standard of care, EVT combined with intravenous alteplase treatment, for acute ischemic stroke secondary to large vessel occlusion. We conducted an economic evaluation of these 2 therapeutic options. METHODS: We constructed a decision analytic model with a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients to assess the cost-effectiveness of EVT with intravenous alteplase treatment versus EVT alone for acute ischemic stroke secondary to large vessel occlusion from both the societal and public health care payer perspectives. We used studies and data published in 2009-2021 for model inputs, and acquired cost data for Canada and China, representing high- and middle-income countries, respectively. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) using a lifetime horizon and accounted for uncertainty using 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. All costs are reported in 2021 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: In Canada, the difference in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained between EVT with alteplase and EVT alone was 0.10 from both the societal and health care payer perspectives. The difference in cost was $2847 from a societal perspective and $2767 from the payer perspective. In China, the difference in QALYs gained was 0.07 from both perspectives, and the difference in cost was $1550 from the societal perspective and $1607 from the payer perspective. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the distributions of modified Rankin Scale scores at 90 days after stroke were the most influential factor on ICERs. For Canada, compared to EVT alone, the probability that EVT with alteplase would be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per QALY gained was 58.7% from a societal perspective and 58.4% from a payer perspective. The corresponding values for at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $47 185 (3 times the Chinese gross domestic product per capita in 2021) were 65.2% and 67.4%. INTERPRETATION: For patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion eligible for immediate treatment with both EVT alone and EVT with intravenous alteplase treatment, it is uncertain whether EVT with alteplase is cost-effective compared to EVT alone in Canada and China.

Case report: Olaparib as an experimental therapy in a BRCA2-mutated patient with metastatic ovarian adenocarcinoma that originated from liver cancer.

Secondary ovarian tumor [secondary tumor of the ovary (STO)] is not a frequent disease. To date, there is still a lack of standard treatment for STO due to the relative heterogeneity. Liver cancer metastasis to the ovary is extremely rare, with only 17 living cases having been reported so far, making it impossible to launch large-scale prospective studies and formulate the standard intervention for patients. We herein report a rare case of STO with liver primary cancer metastasis to the ovary and omentum in a 66-year-old woman. The patient underwent debulking surgery with the removal of the uterus, bilateral fallopian tubes, bilateral ovaries, appendix, and a large part of the omentum majus. Next-generation sequencing was conducted after the operation, identifying BRCA2 mutation. Because strongly refusing chemotherapy, she received olaparib as an experimental therapy. After the administration of surgery and olaparib, the serum value of cancer antigen 125 (CA125) and alpha fetoprotein (AFP) decreased dramatically and basically remained within the normal range. So far, she has achieved nearly 2-year survival and lives a relatively normal life with good quality.

Instruments assessing risk of bias of randomized trials frequently included items that are not addressing risk of bias issues.

OBJECTIVES: To establish whether items included in instruments published in the last decade assessing risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are indeed addressing risk of bias. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus from 2010 to October 2021 for instruments assessing risk of bias of RCTs. By extracting items and summarizing their essential content, we generated an item list. Items that two reviewers agreed clearly did not address risk of bias were excluded. We included the remaining items in a survey in which 13 experts judged the issue each item is addressing: risk of bias, applicability, random error, reporting quality, or none of the above. RESULTS: Seventeen eligible instruments included 127 unique items. After excluding 61 items deemed as clearly not addressing risk of bias, the item classification survey included 66 items, of which the majority of respondents deemed 20 items (30.3%) as addressing risk of bias; the majority deemed 11 (16.7%) as not addressing risk of bias; and there proved substantial disagreement for 35 (53.0%) items. CONCLUSION: Existing risk of bias instruments frequently include items that do not address risk of bias. For many items, experts disagree on whether or not they are addressing risk of bias.

Methodology for the Guidelines on Evaluation and Management of Hypoparathyroidism and Primary Hyperparathyroidism.

To develop guidelines for hypoparathyroidism and primary hyperparathyroidism, the panel assembled a panel of experts in parathyroid disorders, general endocrinologists, representatives of the Hypoparathyroidism Association, and systematic review and guideline methodologists. The guideline panel referred to a formal process following the Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) methodology to issue GRADEd recommendations. In this approach, panelists and methodologists formatted the questions, conducted systematic reviews, evaluated risk of bias, assessed certainty of evidence, and presented a summary of findings in a transparent fashion. For most recommendations, the task forces used a less structured approach largely based on narrative reviews to issue non-GRADEd recommendations. The panel issued Eight GRADEd recommendations (seven for hypoparathyroidism and one for hyperparathyroidism). Each GRADEd recommendation is linked to the underlying body of evidence and judgments regarding the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations, values and preferences, and costs, feasibility, acceptability and equity. This article summarizes the methodology for issuing GRADEd and non-GRADEd recommendations for patients with hypoparathyroidism or hyperparathyroidism. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

The Efficacy and Safety of Medical and Surgical Therapy in Patients With Primary Hyperparathyroidism: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Both medical and surgical therapy represent potential management options for patients with asymptomatic primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT). Because uncertainty remains regarding both medical and surgical therapy, this systematic review addresses the efficacy and safety of medical therapy in asymptomatic patients or symptomatic patients who decline surgery and surgery in asymptomatic patients. We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PubMed from inception to December 2020, and included randomized controlled trials in patients with PHPT that compared nonsurgical management with medical therapy versus without medical therapy and surgery versus no surgery in patients with asymptomatic PHPT. For surgical complications we included observational studies. Paired reviewers addressed eligibility, assessed risk of bias, and abstracted data for patient-important outcomes. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses to pool relative risks and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals and used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess quality of evidence for each outcome. For medical therapy, 11 trials reported in 12 publications including 438 patients proved eligible: three addressed alendronate, one denosumab, three cinacalcet, two vitamin D, and two estrogen therapy. Alendronate, denosumab, vitamin D, and estrogen therapy all increased bone density. Cinacalcet probably reduced serum calcium and parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels. Cinacalcet and vitamin D may have a small or no increase in overall adverse events. Very-low-quality evidence raised the possibility of an increase in serious adverse events with alendronate and denosumab. The trials also provided low-quality evidence for increased bleeding and mastalgia with estrogen therapy. For surgery, six trials presented in 12 reports including 441 patients proved eligible. Surgery achieved biochemical cure in 96.1% (high quality). We found no convincing evidence supporting an impact of surgery on fracture, quality of life, occurrence of kidney stones, and renal function, but the evidence proved low or very low quality. Surgery was associated with an increase in bone mineral density. For patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic PHPT, who are not candidates for parathyroid surgery, cinacalcet probably reduced serum calcium and PTH levels; anti-resorptives increased bone density. For patients with asymptomatic PHPT, surgery usually achieves biochemical cure. These results can help to inform patients and clinicians regarding use of medical therapy and surgery in PHPT. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Management of Primary Hyperparathyroidism.

Since the last international guidelines were published in 2014 on the evaluation and management of primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT), new information has become available with regard to evaluation, diagnosis, epidemiology, genetics, classical and nonclassical manifestations, surgical and nonsurgical approaches, and natural history. To provide the most current summary of these developments, an international group, consisting of over 50 experts in these various aspects of PHPT, was convened. This paper provides the results of the task force that was assigned to review the information on the management of PHPT. For this task force on the management of PHPT, two questions were the subject of systematic reviews using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology. The full report addressing surgical and nonsurgical management of PHPT, utilizing the GRADE methodology, is published separately in this series. In this report, we summarize the results of that methodological review and expand them to encompass a much larger body of new knowledge that did not specifically fit the criteria of the GRADE methodology. Together, both the systematic and narrative reviews of the literature, summarized in this paper, give the most complete information available to date. A panel of experts then considered the last set of international guidelines in light of the newer data and assessed the need for their revision. This report provides the evidentiary background to the guidelines report. In that report, evidence from all task forces is synthesized into a summary statement and revised guidelines for the evaluation and management of PHPT. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Endovascular thrombectomy and intravenous alteplase in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion: A clinical practice guideline.

AIM: Whether or not use of intravenous alteplase in combination with endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) improves outcomes versus EVT alone, for acute stroke patients with large vessel occlusion presenting directly to a comprehensive stroke center, is uncertain. METHODS: Six randomized trials exploring this issue were published, and we synthesized this evidence to inform a rapid guideline based on the Guidelines International Network principles and guided by the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We enlisted an international panel that included 4 patient partners and 1 caregiver, individuals from 6 countries. The panel considered low certainty evidence that EVT alone, relative to EVT with intravenous alteplase, possibly results in a small decrease in the proportion of patients that achieve functional independence and possibly a small increase in mortality. Both effect estimates were downgraded twice due to very serious imprecision. The panel also considered moderate certainty evidence that EVT alone probably decreases symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, versus EVT with alteplase, and combination therapy was more costly than EVT alone. As a result of the low certainty for improved recovery without impairment and mortality for combination therapy versus EVT alone, and moderate certainty for increased harm with combination therapy, the panel made a weak recommendation in favor of EVT alone for stroke patients eligible for both treatments, and initially presenting directly to a comprehensive stroke center that provides both treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with this weak recommendation, optimal patient management will likely often include co-treatment with intravenous alteplase, depending on local circumstances and patient presentation.

Endovascular thrombectomy with or without intravenous alteplase for acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Among patients who had an ischaemic stroke presenting directly to a stroke centre where endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is immediately available, there is uncertainty regarding the role of intravenous thrombolysis agents before or concurrently with EVT. To support a rapid guideline, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the impact of EVT alone versus EVT with intravenous alteplase in patients who had an acute ischaemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion. METHODS: In November 2021, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, clincialtrials.gov and the ISRCTN registry for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EVT alone versus EVT with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke. We conducted meta-analyses using fixed effects models and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: In total 6 RCTs including 2334 participants were eligible. Low certainty evidence suggests that, compared with EVT and alteplase, there is possibly a small decrease in the proportion of patients independent with EVT alone (risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.05; risk difference (RD) -1.5%; 95% CI -5.4% to 2.5%), and possibly a small increase in mortality with EVT alone (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.29; RD 1.2%, 95% CI -2.0% to 4.9%) . Moderate certainty evidence suggests that there is probably a small decrease in symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) with EVT alone (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.07; RD -1.0%; 95%CI -1.8% to 0.27%). CONCLUSIONS: Low certainty evidence suggests that there is possibly a small decrease in the proportion of patients that achieve functional independence and a small increase in mortality with EVT alone. Moderate certainty evidence suggests that there is probably a small decrease in sICH with EVT alone. The accompanying guideline provides contextualised guidance based on this body of evidence. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021249873.

Efficacy and Safety of Pharmacoprophylaxis for Venous Thromboembolism in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacoprophylaxis regimens for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. A total of 15 studies were included. Low molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) and fondaparinux may be equally effective in reducing VTE risk (OR 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-7.39). Pooled estimate suggested uncertain effects of augmented LMWH dosing on VTE prophylaxis compared with standard dosing (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.07-4.39), but may increase major bleeding (OR 3.03, 95% CI 0.38-23.96). Very low-quality evidence showed an inconclusive effect of extended prophylaxis on VTE (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.15-1.90) and major bleeding (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.92-1.68) compared with restricted prophylaxis. Standard LMWH dosing may be effective and safe. Current evidences are insufficient to support extended prophylaxis.

Clinical trials in COVID-19 management & prevention: A meta-epidemiological study examining methodological quality.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of Covid-19 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and examine the association between trial characteristics and the likelihood of finding a significant effect. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review to identify RCTs (up to October 21, 2020) evaluating drugs or blood products to treat or prevent Covid-19. We extracted trial characteristics (number of centers, funding sources, and sample size) and assessed risk of bias (RoB) using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. We performed logistic regressions to evaluate the association between RoB due to randomization, single vs. multicentre, funding source, and sample size, and finding a statistically significant effect. RESULTS: We included 91 RCTs (n = 46,802); 40 (44%) were single-center, 23 (25.3%) enrolled <50 patients, 28 (30.8%) received industry funding, and 75 (82.4%) had high or probably high RoB. Thirty-eight trials (41.8%) reported a statistically significant effect. RoB due to randomization and being a single-center trial were associated with increased odds of finding a statistically significant effect. CONCLUSIONS: There is high variability in RoB among Covid-19 trials. Researchers, funders, and knowledge-users should be cognizant of the impact of RoB due to randomization and single-center trial status in designing, evaluating, and interpreting the results of RCTs. REGISTRATION: CRD42020192095.

Definition of a critical bleed in patients with immune thrombocytopenia: Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Platelet Immunology.

BACKGROUND: Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an autoimmune disease characterized by low platelet counts and increased risk of bleeding. In preparation for an upcoming guideline, the ITP Emergency Management Guideline Panel, including clinical experts in hematology, emergency medicine, research methodology, and patient representatives, identified the need for a standardized definition of a critical ITP bleed. The goal of the definition was to distinguish critical bleeds from bleeds that may not require urgent treatment, typically in the context of severe thrombocytopenia. METHODS: The panel met in person and virtually to achieve consensus on the criteria for critical bleeding events among patients with ITP. Existing ITP bleeding scores and published definitions of major bleeds in patients receiving anticoagulation informed the definition of a critical ITP bleed. The Platelet Immunology Scientific Standardization Committee (SSC) of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis endorsed the definition. RESULTS: A critical ITP bleed was defined as: (a) a bleed in a critical anatomical site including intracranial, intraspinal, intraocular, retroperitoneal, pericardial, or intramuscular with compartment syndrome; or (2) an ongoing bleed that results in hemodynamic instability or respiratory compromise. CONCLUSION: The definition of a critical ITP bleed was developed by the ITP Emergency Management Guideline Panel and endorsed by the Platelet Immunology SSC. It incorporates both anatomic and physiologic risk and pertains to patients with confirmed or suspected ITP who typically have severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count below 20 × 109 /L).

Comparing Renal Replacement Therapy Modalities in Critically Ill Patients With Acute Kidney Injury: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare different modalities of renal replacement therapy in critically ill adults with acute kidney injury. DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to 25 May, 2020. We included randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of different renal replacement therapy modalities in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. STUDY SELECTION: Ten reviewers (working in pairs) independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. DATA EXTRACTION: We performed random-effects frequentist network meta-analyses and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to assess certainty of evidence. The primary analysis was a four-node analysis: continuous renal replacement therapy, intermittent hemodialysis, slow efficiency extended dialysis, and peritoneal dialysis. The secondary analysis subdivided these four nodes into nine nodes including continuous veno-venous hemofiltration, continuous veno-venous hemodialysis, continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration, continuous arterio-venous hemodiafiltration, intermittent hemodialysis, intermittent hemodialysis with hemofiltration, slow efficiency extended dialysis, slow efficiency extended dialysis with hemofiltration, and peritoneal dialysis. We set the minimal important difference threshold for mortality as 2.5% (relative difference, 0.04). DATA SYNTHESIS: Thirty randomized controlled trials (n = 3,774 patients) proved eligible. There may be no difference in mortality between continuous renal replacement therapy and intermittent hemodialysis (relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.93-1.18; low certainty), whereas continuous renal replacement therapy demonstrated a possible increase in mortality compared with slow efficiency extended dialysis (relative risk, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.85-1.33; low certainty) and peritoneal dialysis (relative risk, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.92-1.49; low certainty). Continuous renal replacement therapy may increase renal recovery compared with intermittent hemodialysis (relative risk, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.91-1.45; low certainty), whereas both continuous renal replacement therapy and intermittent hemodialysis may be worse for renal recovery compared with slow efficiency extended dialysis and peritoneal dialysis (low certainty). Peritoneal dialysis was probably associated with the shortest duration of renal support and length of ICU stay compared with other interventions (low certainty for most comparisons). Slow efficiency extended dialysis may be associated with shortest length of hospital stay (low or moderate certainty for all comparisons) and days of mechanical ventilation (low certainty for all comparisons) compared with other interventions. There was no difference between continuous renal replacement therapy and intermittent hemodialysis in terms of hypotension (relative risk, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.16; moderate certainty) or other complications of therapy, but an increased risk of hypotension and bleeding was seen with both modalities compared with peritoneal dialysis (low or moderate certainty). Complications of slow efficiency extended dialysis were not sufficiently reported to inform comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this network meta-analysis suggest there is no difference in mortality between continuous renal replacement therapy and intermittent hemodialysis although continuous renal replacement therapy may increases renal recovery compared with intermittent hemodialysis. Slow efficiency extended dialysis with hemofiltration may be the most effective intervention at reducing mortality. Peritoneal dialysis is associated with good efficacy, and the least number of complications however may not be practical in all settings. Importantly, all conclusions are based on very low to moderate certainty evidence, limited by imprecision. At the very least, ICU clinicians should feel comfortable that the differences between continuous renal replacement therapy, intermittent hemodialysis, slow efficiency extended dialysis, and, where clinically appropriate, peritoneal dialysis are likely small, and any of these modalities is a reasonable option to employ in critically ill patients.

Corticosteroids in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Corticosteroids are now recommended for patients with severe COVID-19 including those with COVID-related ARDS. This has generated renewed interest regarding whether corticosteroids should be used in non-COVID ARDS as well. The objective of this study was to summarize all RCTs examining the use of corticosteroids in ARDS. METHODS: The protocol of this study was pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020200659). We searched online databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CDC library of COVID research, CINAHL, and COCHRANE. We included RCTs that compared the effect of corticosteroids to placebo or usual care in adult patients with ARDS, including patients with COVID-19. Three reviewers abstracted data independently and in duplicate using a pre-specified standardized form. We assessed individual study risk of bias using the revised Cochrane ROB-2 tool and rated certainty in outcomes using GRADE methodology. We pooled data using a random effects model. The main outcome for this review was 28-day-mortality. RESULTS: We included 18 RCTs enrolling 2826 patients. The use of corticosteroids probably reduced mortality in patients with ARDS of any etiology (2740 patients in 16 trials, RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.95, ARR 8.0%, 95% CI 2.2-12.5%, moderate certainty). Patients who received a longer course of corticosteroids (over 7 days) had higher rates of survival compared to a shorter course. CONCLUSION: The use of corticosteroids probably reduces mortality in patients with ARDS. This effect was consistent between patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS, corticosteroid types, and dosage.

Minimal important difference estimates for patient-reported outcomes: A systematic survey.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to develop an inventory summarizing all anchor-based minimal important difference (MID) estimates for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) available in the medical literature. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Patient-Reported Outcome and Quality of Life Instruments Database internal library (January 1989-October 2018). We included primary studies empirically calculating an anchor-based MID estimate for any PROM in adults and adolescents. Pairs of reviewers independently screened and selected studies, extracted data, and evaluated the credibility of the MIDs. RESULTS: We identified 585 eligible studies, the majority conducted in Europe (n = 211) and North America (n = 179), reporting 5,324 MID estimates for 526 distinct PROMs. Investigators conducted their studies in the context of patients receiving surgical (n = 105, 18%), pharmacological (n = 85, 15%), rehabilitation (n = 65, 11%), or a combination of interventions (n = 194, 33%). Of all MID estimates, 59% (n = 3,131) used a global rating of change anchor. Major credibility limitations included weak correlation (n = 1,246, 23%) or no information regarding the correlation (n = 3,498, 66%) between the PROM and anchor and imprecision in the MID estimate (n = 2,513, 47%). CONCLUSION: A large number of MIDs for assisting in the interpretation of PROMs exist. The MID inventory will facilitate the use of MID estimates to inform the interpretation of the magnitude of treatment effects in clinical research and guideline development.

Evidence-based Guideline for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Vancomycin: 2020 Update by the Division of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, Chinese Pharmacological Society.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines or recommendations often require timely and regular updating as new evidence emerges, because this can alter the risk-benefit trade-off. The scientific process of developing and updating guidelines accompanied by adequate implementation can improve outcomes. To promote better management of patients receiving vancomycin therapy, we updated the guideline for the therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of vancomycin published in 2015. METHODS: Our updated recommendations complied with standards for developing trustworthy guidelines, including timeliness and rigor of the updating process, as well as the use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We also followed the methodology handbook published by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and the Spanish National Health System. RESULTS: We partially updated the 2015 guideline. Apart from adults, the updated guideline also focuses on pediatric patients and neonates requiring intravenous vancomycin therapy. The guideline recommendations involve a broadened range of patients requiring TDM, modified index of TDM (both 24-hour area under the curve and trough concentration), addition regarding the necessity and timing of repeated TDM, and initial dose for specific subpopulations. Overall, 1 recommendation was deleted and 3 recommendations were modified. Eleven new recommendations were added, and no recommendation was made for 2 clinical questions. CONCLUSIONS: We updated an evidence-based guideline regarding the TDM of vancomycin using a rigorous and multidisciplinary approach. The updated guideline provides more comprehensive recommendations to inform rational and optimized vancomycin use and is thus of greater applicability.

Efficacité et innocuité du plasma de convalescent en cas de forme grave de COVID-19, extrapolée de données relatives à d'autres formes graves d'infections respiratoires virales : revue systématique et méta-analyse.

CONTEXTE: On ne connaît pas encore avec certitude l'innocuité et l'efficacité du plasma de convalescent comme traitement de la forme grave de la maladie à coronavirus 2019 (COVID-2019). Afin d'appuyer la conception de lignes directrices sur la prise en charge de la COVID-19, nous avons effectué une revue systématique et une méta-analyse sur l'utilisation du plasma de convalescent pour le traitement de cette maladie et d'autres formes graves d'infections respiratoires virales. MÉTHODES: En mars 2020, nous avons effectué des recherches dans des bases de données biomédicales internationales et chinoises, des registres d'essais cliniques et des sources prépubliées afin de recenser des essais randomisés et contrôlés (ERC) et des études non randomisées comparant les issues de patients ayant reçu du plasma de convalescent à celles de patients n'en ayant pas reçu. Ont été inclus les patients ayant une infection aiguë attribuable à un coronavirus, au virus de l'influenza ou au virus Ebola. Nous avons également réalisé une méta-analyse à l'aide d'un modèle à effets aléatoires et évalué la qualité des données probantes au moyen de l'approche GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). RÉSULTATS: Sur les 1099 études uniques initialement repérées, 6 étaient admissibles, et aucune d'entre elles ne portait sur des patients atteints de la COVID-19. Une étude non randomisée (n = 40) sur l'administration de plasma de convalescent à des patients atteints du coronavirus du syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère (SRAS-CoV) a fourni des données peu concluantes sur le taux de mortalité (risque relatif [RR] 0,10; intervalle de confiance [IC] de 95 % 0,01 à 1,70). Des estimations regroupées provenant de 4 ERC sur l'influenza (n = 572) n'ont pas montré d'effet manifeste sur le taux de mortalité (4 ERC; RR 0,94; IC de 95 % 0,49 à 1,81), le rétablissement complet (2 ERC; rapports de cotes [RC] 1,04; IC de 95 % 0,69 à 1,64) et la durée d'hospitalisation (3 ERC; différence moyenne [DM] −1,62; IC de 95 % −3,82 à 0,58 jours). La qualité des données était très faible pour tous les paramètres relatifs à l'efficacité. Dans les ERC sur l'influenza, aucun ou peu d'événements indésirables graves ont été associés au plasma de convalescent (RR 0,85; IC de 95 % 0,56 à 1,29; données de faible qualité). INTERPRÉTATION: Les études portant sur des formes graves d'infections respiratoires virales autres que la COVID-19 ont fourni des données indirectes de très faible qualité semblant indiquer que le plasma de convalescent n'offre aucun bénéfice ou offre des bénéfices minimes pour le traitement de la COVID-19, de même que des données de faible qualité montrant qu'il n'entraîne pas d'événements indésirables graves.

Efficacité et innocuité des corticostéroïdes dans le traitement de la COVID-19 selon des données pour la COVID-19, d'autres infections aux coronavirus, l'influenza, la pneumonie extrahospitalière et le syndrome de détresse respiratoire aiguë : revue systématique et méta-analyse.

CONTEXTE: Il existe très peu de données directes sur l'administration de corticostéroïdes aux patients atteints de la maladie à coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). Les données indirectes sur des maladies associées devront donc guider les conclusions quant aux bénéfices et aux préjudices associés à cette pratique. Dans le but d'appuyer la rédaction d'une ligne directrice sur la prise en charge de la COVID-19, nous avons réalisé des revues systématiques sur les effets des corticostéroïdes dans le traitement de la COVID-19 et de maladies respiratoires aiguës sévères associées. MÉTHODES: Dans des bases de données biomédicales chinoises et internationales et des sources de prépublications, nous avons cherché les essais randomisés et contrôlés (ERC) et les études d'observation comparant des patients atteints de la COVID-19, du syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère (SRAS) ou du syndrome respiratoire du Moyen-Orient (SRMO) ayant reçu des corticostéroïdes à des patients semblables n'ayant pas reçu ce type de médicaments. Pour le syndrome de détresse respiratoire aiguë (SDRA), l'influenza et la pneumonie extrahospitalière (PEH), nous avons mis à jour les revues systématiques rigoureuses les plus récentes. Nous avons réalisé des méta-analyses à effets aléatoires pour cerner les risques relatifs, puis nous avons utilisé le risque de référence des patients atteints de la COVID-19 pour calculer les effets absolus. RÉSULTATS: Pour le SDRA, selon 1 petite étude de cohorte sur des patients atteints de la COVID-19 et 7 ERC sur des patients atteints d'une autre maladie (risque relatif : 0,72, intervalle de confiance [IC] de 95 % 0,55­0,93, différence entre les moyennes [DM] 17,3 % plus faible, données de faible qualité), les corticostéroïdes pourraient réduire le risque de mortalité. Chez les patients atteints d'une forme grave de COVID-19 sans SDRA, 2 études d'observation ont généré des données directes de très faible qualité montrant une augmentation du risque de mortalité avec l'administration de corticostéroïdes (rapport de risques 2,30, IC de 95 % 1,00­5,29, DM 11,9 % plus élevé). C'est aussi le cas de données observationnelles sur l'influenza. Des données observationnelles de très faible qualité sur le SRAS et le SRMO montrent peu ou pas de réduction dans le risque de mortalité. Des essais randomisés et contrôlés sur la PEH suggèrent que les corticostéroïdes pourraient réduire le risque de mortalité (risque relatif 0,70, IC de 95 % 0,50­0,98, DM 3,1 % plus faible, données de très faible qualité), et augmenter le risque d'hyperglycémie. INTERPRÉTATION: Les corticostéroïdes pourraient réduire le risque de mortalité pour les patients atteints de la COVID-19 avec SDRA. Pour les patients atteints d'une forme grave de COVID-19 sans SDRA, les données sur les bénéfices provenant de différentes sources sont incohérentes et de très faible qualité.