RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of ketamine/esketamine on postoperative subjective quality of recovery (QoR). METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the impacts of perioperative ketamine/esketamine use and postoperative QoR. The primary outcome was subjective QoR (QoR-9, QoR-15, QoR-40) on postoperative day (POD) 1-3, whereas the secondary outcomes included pain severity, anxiety scores, depression scores, risk of adverse events (i.e. nausea, vomiting, dizziness, drowsiness), and length of stay. RESULTS: The analysis included 18 RCTs (1554 participants; ketamine: seven trials, esketamine: 11 trials), of which 15 were conducted in China. Ketamine/esketamine improved the QoR scores on PODs 1 and 2 compared with the control (standardised mean difference [SMD]: 0.63, P<0.0001 for POD 1; SMD: 0.56, P=0.04 for POD 2), without beneficial effect on POD 3. Subgroup analyses revealed significant differences in QoR scores on POD 1 by regimen (SMD: esketamine 1.14, ketamine 0.01) and country (SMD: China 0.82, other countries -0.21). The emotional domain of QoR was improved from PODs 1 to 3, whereas the other domains were only improved on POD 1. Lower postoperative anxiety (SMD: -0.48, P=0.003) and depression (SMD: -0.72, P=0.001) scores were also observed with ketamine/esketamine use. Furthermore, pain severity was reduced on PODs 1 and 2, with no difference in the risk of adverse events or length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrated that ketamine/esketamine use in the perioperative period is associated with improved early subjective QoR, pain severity, and psychological symptoms without an increase in the likelihood of adverse events. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO (CRD42023477580).
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Despite its high lifetime prevalence rate and the elevated disability caused by posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), treatments exhibit modest efficacy. In consideration of the abnormal connectivity between the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and amygdala in PTSD, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) modalities for PTSD management have been undertaken. However, previous RCTs have reported inconsistent results. The current network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy and acceptability of various NIBS protocols in PTSD management. METHODS: We systematically searched ClinicalKey, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, ProQuest, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify relevant RCTs. The targeted RCTs was those comparing the efficacy of NIBS interventions, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and transcutaneous cervical vagal nerve stimulation, in patients with PTSD. The NMA was conducted using a frequentist model. The primary outcomes were changes in the overall severity of PTSD and acceptability (to be specific, rates of dropouts for any reason). RESULTS: We identified 14 RCTs that enrolled 686 participants. The NMA demonstrated that among the investigated NIBS types, high-frequency rTMS over bilateral DLPFCs was associated with the greatest reduction in overall PTSD severity. Further, in comparison with the sham controls, excitatory stimulation over the right DLPFC with/without excitatory stimulation over left DLPFC were associated with significant reductions in PTSD-related symptoms, including depression and anxiety symptoms, and overall PTSD severity. CONCLUSIONS: This NMA demonstrated that excitatory stimulation over the right DLPFC with or without excitatory stimulation over left DLPFC were associated with significant reductions in PTSD-related symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023391562.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To investigate efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: Randomized sham-controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from major databases from the inception date of January 1990 to January 2023. Primary outcome was improvement in total symptoms of ADHD. Subgroup analysis focused on rTMS efficacy targeting different brain regions. Secondary outcomes were associations of rTMS with improvements in different symptoms of ADHD. Outcomes were expressed as effect size (ES) based on standardized mean difference (SMD) (continuous data), and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) (categorical data). RESULTS: Meta-analysis of six RCTs involving 169 participants demonstrated no difference in total ADHD symptoms between rTMS-treated participants and sham controls (SMD=-0.24,p=0.17). Subgroup analysis revealed better efficacy of rTMS than sham controls when targeting right prefrontal cortex (rPFC) (SMD=-0.49,p=0.03), but not left prefrontal cortex (lPFC) (SMD= 0.01,p=0.67). rTMS treatment correlated with better improvement in symptoms of inattention (SMD=-0.76,p=0.0002), but not hyperactivity (p=0.86), impulsivity (p=0.41), and depression (p=0.95). The apparently higher risk of dropout in the rTMS group than sham controls was not statistically significant (OR=1.65,p=0.26). CONCLUSIONS: Our study only supported the therapeutic efficacy of rTMS targeting rPFC for the symptoms of ADHD, especially inattention, but not that targeting lPFC. Further large-scale randomized sham-controlled trials are required to verify our findings.
RESUMO
Background: This meta-analysis aimed to synthesize current evidence on the association between the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Methods: Electronic databases were systematically searched for relevant studies that investigated the association between GNRI and long-term outcomes in hemodialysis patients until November 2023. The primary outcome was the association between the GNRI (i.e., low versus high) and overall mortality risk, while the secondary outcome was the relationship between the GNRI and cardiovascular mortality risk. Results: Thirty cohort studies involving 55,864 patients were included. A low GNRI was found to be significantly associated with increased overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.42, 95% confidence interval [CIs]: 2.10-2.79, p < 0.00001, I2 = 65%). Each unit increase in GNRI corresponded to a 5% reduction in mortality risk (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.93-0.96, p < 0.00001, I2 = 79%). The association remained consistent across Asian (HR = 2.45, 95% CI: 2.08-2.88, p < 0.00001, I2 = 70%) and non-Asian subgroups (HR = 2.3, 95% CI: 1.72-3.06, p < 0.00001, I2 = 23%). Meta-regression analysis of patient age (coefficient: -0.002; p = 0.896), male proportion (coefficient: 0.002; p = 0.875), percentage of diabetes mellitus (coefficient: -0.003; p = 0.605), and follow-up duration (coefficient: -0.003; p = 0.431) revealed that these moderator variables did not significantly influence the association between GNRI and overall mortality risk. Cardiovascular mortality risk also increased with low GNRI (HR, 1.93; 95%CI: 1.51-2.45, p < 0.00001; I2 = 2%). Similarly, an inverse association was observed between the GNRI values and cardiovascular mortality risk (HR, 0.94; 95% CI: 0.91-0.97; p < 0.0001; I2 = 65%) (per unit increase). Conclusion: The GNRI is a simple nutritional screening tool that can be used to effectively stratify patients undergoing hemodialysis globally. Further studies are warranted to determine whether nutrition optimization based on the GNRI improves long-term outcomes. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, CRD42023483729.
