Noninvasive Brain Stimulations for Unilateral Spatial Neglect after Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Nonrandomized Controlled Trials.

Background: Unilateral spatial neglect (USN) is the most frequent perceptual disorder after stroke. Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a tool that has been used in the rehabilitation process to modify cortical excitability and improve perception and functional capacity. Objective: To assess the impact of NIBS on USN after stroke. Methods: An extensive search was conducted up to July 2016. Studies were selected if they were controlled and noncontrolled trials examining transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), and theta burst stimulation (TBS) in USN after stroke, with outcomes measured by standardized USN and functional tests. Results: Twelve RCTs (273 participants) and 4 non-RCTs (94 participants) proved eligible. We observed a benefit in overall USN measured by the line bisection test with NIBS in comparison to sham (SMD -2.35, 95% CI -3.72, -0.98; p = 0.0001); the rTMS yielded results that were consistent with the overall meta-analysis (SMD -2.82, 95% CI -3.66, -1.98; p = 0.09). The rTMS compared with sham also suggested a benefit in overall USN measured by Motor-Free Visual Perception Test at both 1 Hz (SMD 1.46, 95% CI 0.73, 2.20; p < 0.0001) and 10 Hz (SMD 1.19, 95% CI 0.48, 1.89; p = 0.54). There was also a benefit in overall USN measured by Albert's test and the line crossing test with 1 Hz rTMS compared to sham (SMD 2.04, 95% CI 1.14, 2.95; p < 0.0001). Conclusions: The results suggest a benefit of NIBS on overall USN, and we conclude that rTMS is more efficacious compared to sham for USN after stroke.

Association between pre-operative statin use and major cardiovascular complications among patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery: the VISION study.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of pre-operative statin therapy on cardiovascular events in the first 30-days after non-cardiac surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted an international, prospective, cohort study of patients who were ≥45 years having in-patient non-cardiac surgery. We estimated the probability of receiving statins pre-operatively using a multivariable logistic model and conducted a propensity score analysis to correct for confounding. A total of 15 478 patients were recruited at 12 centres in eight countries from August 2007 to January 2011. The matched population consisted of 2845 patients (18.4%) treated with a statin and 4492 (29.0%) controls. The pre-operative use of statins was associated with lower risk of the primary outcome, a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS), or stroke at 30 days [relative risk (RR), 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.73-0.95; P = 0.007]. Statins were also associated with a significant lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.40-0.83; P = 0.003), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.76; P = 0.004), and MINS (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.73-0.98; P = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences in the risk of myocardial infarction or stroke. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery, pre-operative statin therapy was independently associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular outcomes at 30 days. These results require confirmation in a large randomized trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT00512109.

Effect of Lung Recruitment and Titrated Positive End-Expiratory Pressure (PEEP) vs Low PEEP on Mortality in Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effects of recruitment maneuvers and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) titration on clinical outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remain uncertain. Objective: To determine if lung recruitment associated with PEEP titration according to the best respiratory-system compliance decreases 28-day mortality of patients with moderate to severe ARDS compared with a conventional low-PEEP strategy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, randomized trial conducted at 120 intensive care units (ICUs) from 9 countries from November 17, 2011, through April 25, 2017, enrolling adults with moderate to severe ARDS. Interventions: An experimental strategy with a lung recruitment maneuver and PEEP titration according to the best respiratory-system compliance (n = 501; experimental group) or a control strategy of low PEEP (n = 509). All patients received volume-assist control mode until weaning. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality until 28 days. Secondary outcomes were length of ICU and hospital stay; ventilator-free days through day 28; pneumothorax requiring drainage within 7 days; barotrauma within 7 days; and ICU, in-hospital, and 6-month mortality. Results: A total of 1010 patients (37.5% female; mean [SD] age, 50.9 [17.4] years) were enrolled and followed up. At 28 days, 277 of 501 patients (55.3%) in the experimental group and 251 of 509 patients (49.3%) in the control group had died (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.42; P = .041). Compared with the control group, the experimental group strategy increased 6-month mortality (65.3% vs 59.9%; HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.38; P = .04), decreased the number of mean ventilator-free days (5.3 vs 6.4; difference, -1.1; 95% CI, -2.1 to -0.1; P = .03), increased the risk of pneumothorax requiring drainage (3.2% vs 1.2%; difference, 2.0%; 95% CI, 0.0% to 4.0%; P = .03), and the risk of barotrauma (5.6% vs 1.6%; difference, 4.0%; 95% CI, 1.5% to 6.5%; P = .001). There were no significant differences in the length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, ICU mortality, and in-hospital mortality. Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with moderate to severe ARDS, a strategy with lung recruitment and titrated PEEP compared with low PEEP increased 28-day all-cause mortality. These findings do not support the routine use of lung recruitment maneuver and PEEP titration in these patients. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01374022.

Aspiration thrombectomy prior to percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Trials of aspiration thrombectomy (AT) prior to primary percutaneous intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) have shown apparently inconsistent results and therefore generated uncertainty and controversy. To summarize the effects of AT prior to PCI versus conventional PCI in STEMI patients. METHODS: Searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL to June 2015 and review of reference lists of previous reviews. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AT prior to PCI with conventional PCI alone. Pairs of reviewers independently screened eligible articles; extracted data; and assessed risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to rate overall certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: Among 73 potential articles identified, 20 trials including 21,660 patients were eligible; data were complete for 20,866 patients. Moderate-certainty evidence suggested a non statistically significant decrease in overall mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95 % confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.01, risk difference (RD) 4/1,000 over 6 months), no impact on recurrent MI (RR 0.94, 95 % CI, 0.79 to 1.12) or major bleeding (RR 1.02, 95 % CI, 0.78 to 1.35), and an increase in stroke (RR 1.56, 95 % CI, 1.09 to 2.24, RD 3/1,000 over 6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate certainty evidence suggests aspiration thrombectomy is associated with a possible small decrease in mortality (4 less deaths/1000 over 6 months) and a small increase in stroke (3 more strokes/1000 over 6 months). Because absolute effects are very small and closely balanced, thrombectomy prior to primary PCI should not be used as a routine strategy.

Safety and Efficacy of Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy for Ischemic Heart Disease: A Systematic Review. / Segurança e Eficácia da Terapia com Células-tronco Mesenquimais Derivadas do Tecido Adiposo para Cardiopatia Isquêmica: Revisão Sistemática.

BACKGROUND: Cell therapy using adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs) shows great potential as a treatment for cardiovascular diseases. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to describe the safety and efficacy of ADSCs in ischemic heart disease. METHODS: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and LILACS (from inception to March 2024) for clinical studies involving ADSCs in patients with ischemic heart disease. We excluded studies involving patients with other types of heart disease, studies using mesenchymal stem cells derived from other tissues, as well as ongoing studies. Two independent reviewers screened the retrieved citations, extracted relevant data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included trials, using the Cochrane Collaboration criteria modified by McMaster University and Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). We used a narrative synthesis to present the results. RESULTS: Ten studies (comprising 29 publications) met our inclusion criteria, including 8 randomized controlled trials and 2 uncontrolled trials. No severe adverse events associated with ADSC therapy were reported. While most efficacy endpoints did not reach statistical significance, there were reports of improved ischemic area, functional capacity, symptoms, and contractility in patients treated with ADSCs. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from our review suggest that ADSC therapy is generally safe for patients with ischemic heart disease. However, further investigation is warranted to confirm its efficacy, particularly with larger clinical trials and in specific conditions where improvements in microcirculation may have a notable impact on clinical outcomes.

FUNDAMENTO: A terapia celular utilizando células-tronco mesenquimais derivadas do tecido adiposo (ADSC, sigla em inglês) apresenta grande potencial como tratamento para doenças cardiovasculares. OBJETIVO: Realizamos uma revisão sistemática para descrever a segurança e a eficácia das ADSC na cardiopatia isquêmica. MÉTODOS: Pesquisamos na PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL e LILACS (desde o início até março de 2024) por estudos clínicos envolvendo ADSC em pacientes com cardiopatia isquêmica. Excluímos estudos envolvendo pacientes com outros tipos de doenças cardíacas, estudos utilizando células-tronco mesenquimais derivadas de outros tecidos, bem como estudos em andamento. Dois revisores independentes realizaram a triagem das citações recuperadas, extraíram dados relevantes e avaliaram o risco de viés nos ensaios incluídos, utilizando os critérios da Colaboração Cochrane modificados pela Universidade McMaster e o Índice Metodológico para Estudos Não-Randomizados (MINORS). Utilizamos uma síntese narrativa para apresentar os resultados. RESULTADOS: Dez estudos (compreendendo 29 publicações) preencheram nossos critérios de inclusão, incluindo 8 ensaios controlados randomizados e 2 ensaios não controlados. Não foram relatados eventos adversos graves associados à terapia com ADSC. Embora a maioria dos desfechos de eficácia não tenha alcançado significância estatística, houve relatos de melhora da área isquêmica, capacidade funcional, sintomas e contratilidade em pacientes tratados com ADSC. CONCLUSÕES: Os resultados da nossa revisão sugerem que a terapia com ADSC é geralmente segura para pacientes com cardiopatia isquêmica. Contudo, são necessárias mais investigações para confirmar a sua eficácia, particularmente em ensaios clínicos de maior escala e em condições específicas onde as melhorias na microcirculação podem ter um impacto notável nos desfechos clínicos.

Methodological guidelines and publications of benefit-risk assessment for health technology assessment: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: To map the available methodological guidelines and documents for conducting and reporting benefit-risk assessment (BRA) during health technologies' life cycle; and to identify methodological guidelines for BRA that could serve as the basis for the development of a BRA guideline for the context of health technology assessment (HTA) in Brazil. DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: Searches were conducted in three main sources up to March 2023: (1) electronic databases; (2) grey literature (48 HTA and regulatory organisations) and (3) manual search and contacting experts. We included methodological guidelines or publications presenting methods for conducting or reporting BRA of any type of health technologies in any context of the technology's life cycle. Selection process and data charting were conducted by independent reviewers. We provided a structured narrative synthesis of the findings. RESULTS: From the 83 eligible documents, six were produced in the HTA context, 30 in the regulatory and 35 involved guidance for BRA throughout the technology's life cycle. We identified 129 methodological approaches for BRA in the documents. The most commonly referred to descriptive frameworks were the Problem, Objectives, Alternatives, Consequences, Trade-offs, Uncertainty, Risk and Linked decisions and the Benefit-Risk Action Team. Multicriteria decision analysis was the most commonly cited quantitative framework. We also identified the most cited metric indices, estimation and utility survey techniques that could be used for BRA. CONCLUSIONS: Methods for BRA in HTA are less established. The findings of this review, however, will support and inform the elaboration of the Brazilian methodological guideline on BRA for HTA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/69T3V.

Methodological guidelines and publications of benefit-risk assessment for health technology assessment: a scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Benefit-risk assessment (BRA) is used in multiple phases along the health technology's life-cycle to evaluate the balance between the benefits and risks, as it is fundamental to all stakeholders. BRA and its methodological approaches have been applied primarily in the context of regulatory agencies. However, BRA's application and extent in the context of health technology assessment (HTA) bodies remain less clear. Our goal is to perform a scoping review to identify and map methodological guidelines and publications on methods of BRA. This will be done considering the different phases of the life-cycle of health technologies to underline both the depth and extent of research concerning BRA, especially in the context of HTA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review protocol was developed following the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley, and the updated guidelines by the Joanna Briggs Institute. We will include methodological publications that provide recommendations or guidelines on methods for BRA. We will conduct electronic searches on Medline (PubMed) and EMBASE (Ovid) databases; manual searches on the main websites of HTA bodies and drug regulatory organisations; and contact experts in the field. Systematic extraction forms will be used to screen and assess the identified publications by independent assessors. We will provide a qualitative synthesis using descriptive statistics and visual tools. Results will be summarised in systematic evidence tables and comparative evidence scoping charts. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will use data publicly available and does not require ethics approval. The results of this scoping review will contribute to scientific knowledge and act as a basis for methodologists, guideline developers and researchers for the development of BRA to inform regulatory decisions, reimbursement and coverage decision making. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed articles, conferences, policy briefs and workshops. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/69T3V).

Multicriteria decision analysis in health care decision in oncology: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) has been used to inform health decisions in health technology assessments (HTA) processes. This is particularly important to complex treatment decisions in oncology. AREAS COVERED: Five databases (PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, Web of Science and CRD's NHS Economic Evaluation Database) were searched for studies comparing health technologies in oncology, involving the concept MCDA. The ISPOR MCDA Good Practices Guidelines were used to assess the reporting quality. Study selection, appraisal, and data extraction were performed by two reviewers. Fifteen studies were included. The main decision problem was related to health technology assessment of cancer treatments. Clinicians and public health experts were the most frequent stakeholders. The most frequently included criteria comprised therapeutic benefit, and socio-economic impact. Value measurement approach, direct rating techniques, and additive model for aggregation were used in most studies. Uncertainty analysis revealed the impact of posology and costs on the studies' results. All studies showed some level of overlapping decision criteria. EXPERT OPINION: There is considerable diversity of methods in MCDA for healthcare decision-making in oncology. The evidence presented can serve as a resource when considering which stakeholders, criteria, and techniques to include in future MCDA studies in oncology.

Effects of 3D image-guided brachytherapy compared to 2D conventional brachytherapy on clinical outcomes in patients with cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analyses.

PURPOSE: To assess the effects of three-dimensional image-guided brachytherapy (3D BT) compared to bi-dimensional BT (2D BT) on clinical outcomes in patients with cervical cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and LILACS for studies assessing the effects of 3D BT versus 2D BT on clinical outcomes. Two reviewers independently screened retrieved citations, extracted data and assessed risk of bias from eligible studies. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated from Kaplan-Meier curves considering the number of events, their timing and the followup of censored patients. We conducted meta-analyses of HR using the inverse-variance random-effects method. Risk Difference (RD) for toxicities were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects method. We used the GRADE system to rate the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Twenty observational studies involving 4287 patients were included. The meta-analyses assessing the effect of 3D BT versus 2D BT on overall survival resulted in a HR of 0.78 (95%CI 0.62-0.98), HR of 0.75 (95%CI 0.62-0.90) for pelvic disease-free survival, HR of 0.93 (95%CI 0.81-1.06) for metastatic disease-free survival, and HR of 0.77 (95%CI 0.59-0.99) for local control. Grade 3-4 global and gastrointestinal toxicities were, respectively, 9% lower (95%CI 6% to 11%) and 5% lower (95%CI 2% to 8%) in patients receiving 3D BT versus 2D BT. Certainty of evidence was very low for all assessed outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our study may suggest a benefit of 3D BT over conventional 2D BT on important clinical outcomes.

Perioperative Troponin Screening Identifies Patients at Higher Risk for Major Cardiovascular Events in Noncardiac Surgery.

Myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (MINS) includes patients with traditional myocardial infarction and those with ischemic myocardial injury after surgery. This study evaluated the prognostic value of MINS on major cardiovascular events and 30-day mortality, and determined independent preoperative predictors of MINS in patients after noncardiac surgery. This multicenter prospective cohort study was part of the VISION Study. The sample consisted of 2504 patients who underwent noncardiac surgery at 2 tertiary hospitals in Brazil between September 2008 and July 2012. Troponin Ts were measured 6-12 hours, and on days 1-3 after surgery. Cox regression analyses were performed to identify independent variables of major outcomes. A total of 314 (13%) patients were diagnosed with MINS, of which 26 (8%) died. Length-of-hospital stay of MINS patients was 3 times higher (18 ± 22 days vs 5.8 ± 11 days). In multivariate analysis, 30-day mortality was significantly higher among patients with MINS (hazard ratio [HR] 3.17 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.56-6.41)), and major bleeding (HR 5.76 (95% CI 2.75-12.05)), sepsis (HR 5.08 (95% CI 2.25-11.46)), active cancer (HR 4.22 (95% CI 1.98-8.98)), and general surgery (HR 3.11 (95% CI 1.51-6.41)). Multivariable analysis indicated a higher chance of MINS in patients ≥75 years of age, history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, heart failure, coronary disease, and end-stage renal failure. The incidence of MINS within 30 days after noncardiac surgery is related to higher mortality. Postoperative troponin monitoring in elder patients and with risk factors for atherosclerotic disease may help reduce postoperative cardiovascular events.

Mindfulness Practice for Glycemic Control: Could it be a New Strategy for an Old Problem? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) requires a complex and organized care that includes patient's lifestyle change. Additionally, emotional well-being is an important part of self-management, and it may impair the individual's adherence. Therefore, equipping the patients with the necessary coping and self-care techniques may be an important step in managing diabetes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of interventions using established mindfulness-based protocols on glycemic control of individuals with T2DM. METHODS: Data sources: Two electronic databases (PubMed and EMBASE) were searched from inception to December 2019. We limited our search to published studies in English, Spanish and Portuguese languages. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials that assessed the effects of mindfulness in individuals with T2DM were selected. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data from the included trials. Data were pooled using inverse-variance random-effects meta-analyses. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. RESULTS: Four randomized trials were included. There were no differences in blood glucose change (mean difference between groups (MD) -0.73mg/dl; 95% CI, -10.49; 9.02; I2 =0%; very low quality of evidence) or glycated hemoglobin (MD 0.05%; 95%CI -0.22 to 0.32; I2 =29%; very low quality of evidence). CONCLUSION: Although the quality of current evidence is very low, our findings suggest that established protocols involving mindfulness have no effect on blood glucose or glycated hemoglobin in individuals with T2DM. Indeed, large-scale trials are needed to evaluate the contribution of mindfulness to glycemic control in clinical practice. PROSPERO Registration ID: RD42020161940.

Challenges for the development of alternative low-cost ventilators during COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. / Desafios para o desenvolvimento de ventiladores alternativos de baixo custo durante a pandemia de COVID-19 no Brasil.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought concerns to managers, healthcare professionals, and the general population related to the potential mechanical ventilators' shortage for severely ill patients. In Brazil, there are several initiatives aimed at producing alternative ventilators to cover this gap. To assist the teams that work in these initiatives, we provide a discussion of some basic concepts on physiology and respiratory mechanics, commonly used mechanical ventilation terms, the differences between triggering and cycling, the basic ventilation modes and other relevant aspects, such as mechanisms of ventilator-induced lung injury, respiratory drive, airway heating and humidification, cross-contamination risks, and aerosol dissemination. After the prototype development phase, preclinical bench-tests and animal model trials are needed to determine the safety and performance of the ventilator, following the minimum technical requirements. Next, it is mandatory going through the regulatory procedures as required by the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária - ANVISA). The manufacturing company should be appropriately registered by ANVISA, which also must be notified about the conduction of clinical trials, following the research protocol approval by the Research Ethics Committee. The registration requisition of the ventilator with ANVISA should include a dossier containing the information described in this paper, which is not intended to cover all related matters but to provide guidance on the required procedures.

A pandemia por COVID-19 tem deixado os gestores, os profissionais de saúde e a população preocupados com a potencial escassez de ventiladores pulmonares para suporte de pacientes graves. No Brasil, há diversas iniciativas com o intuito de produzir ventiladores alternativos para ajudar a suprir essa demanda. Para auxiliar as equipes que atuam nessas iniciativas, são expostos alguns conceitos básicos sobre fisiologia e mecânica respiratória, os termos comumente utilizados no contexto da ventilação mecânica, as fases do ciclo ventilatório, as diferenças entre disparo e ciclagem, os modos ventilatórios básicos e outros aspectos relevantes, como mecanismos de lesão pulmonar induzida pela ventilação mecânica, pacientes com drive respiratório, necessidade de umidificação de vias aéreas, risco de contaminação cruzada e disseminação de aerossóis. Após a fase de desenvolvimento de protótipo, são necessários testes pré-clínicos de bancada e em modelos animais, a fim de determinar a segurança e o desempenho dos equipamentos, seguindo requisitos técnicos mínimos exigidos. Então, é imprescindível passar pelo processo regulatório exigido pela Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA). A empresa responsável pela fabricação do equipamento deve estar regularizada junto à ANVISA, que também deve ser notificada da condução dos testes clínicos em humanos, seguindo protocolo de pesquisa aprovado pelo Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa. O registro do ventilador junto à ANVISA deve ser acompanhado de um dossiê, composto por documentos e informações detalhadas neste artigo, que não tem o propósito de esgotar o assunto, mas de nortear os procedimentos necessários.

Segurança e Eficácia da Terapia com Células-tronco Mesenquimais Derivadas do Tecido Adiposo para Cardiopatia Isquêmica: Revisão Sistemática / Safety and Efficacy of Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy for Ischemic Heart Disease: A Systematic Review

Resumo Fundamento A terapia celular utilizando células-tronco mesenquimais derivadas do tecido adiposo (ADSC, sigla em inglês) apresenta grande potencial como tratamento para doenças cardiovasculares. Objetivo Realizamos uma revisão sistemática para descrever a segurança e a eficácia das ADSC na cardiopatia isquêmica. Métodos Pesquisamos na PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL e LILACS (desde o início até março de 2024) por estudos clínicos envolvendo ADSC em pacientes com cardiopatia isquêmica. Excluímos estudos envolvendo pacientes com outros tipos de doenças cardíacas, estudos utilizando células-tronco mesenquimais derivadas de outros tecidos, bem como estudos em andamento. Dois revisores independentes realizaram a triagem das citações recuperadas, extraíram dados relevantes e avaliaram o risco de viés nos ensaios incluídos, utilizando os critérios da Colaboração Cochrane modificados pela Universidade McMaster e o Índice Metodológico para Estudos Não-Randomizados (MINORS). Utilizamos uma síntese narrativa para apresentar os resultados. Resultados Dez estudos (compreendendo 29 publicações) preencheram nossos critérios de inclusão, incluindo 8 ensaios controlados randomizados e 2 ensaios não controlados. Não foram relatados eventos adversos graves associados à terapia com ADSC. Embora a maioria dos desfechos de eficácia não tenha alcançado significância estatística, houve relatos de melhora da área isquêmica, capacidade funcional, sintomas e contratilidade em pacientes tratados com ADSC. Conclusões Os resultados da nossa revisão sugerem que a terapia com ADSC é geralmente segura para pacientes com cardiopatia isquêmica. Contudo, são necessárias mais investigações para confirmar a sua eficácia, particularmente em ensaios clínicos de maior escala e em condições específicas onde as melhorias na microcirculação podem ter um impacto notável nos desfechos clínicos.

Abstract Background Cell therapy using adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs) shows great potential as a treatment for cardiovascular diseases. Objective We conducted a systematic review to describe the safety and efficacy of ADSCs in ischemic heart disease. Methods We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and LILACS (from inception to March 2024) for clinical studies involving ADSCs in patients with ischemic heart disease. We excluded studies involving patients with other types of heart disease, studies using mesenchymal stem cells derived from other tissues, as well as ongoing studies. Two independent reviewers screened the retrieved citations, extracted relevant data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included trials, using the Cochrane Collaboration criteria modified by McMaster University and Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). We used a narrative synthesis to present the results. Results Ten studies (comprising 29 publications) met our inclusion criteria, including 8 randomized controlled trials and 2 uncontrolled trials. No severe adverse events associated with ADSC therapy were reported. While most efficacy endpoints did not reach statistical significance, there were reports of improved ischemic area, functional capacity, symptoms, and contractility in patients treated with ADSCs. Conclusions The findings from our review suggest that ADSC therapy is generally safe for patients with ischemic heart disease. However, further investigation is warranted to confirm its efficacy, particularly with larger clinical trials and in specific conditions where improvements in microcirculation may have a notable impact on clinical outcomes.

Comparison of Biological and Mechanical Prostheses for Heart Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: The choice of a mechanical (MP) or biological prosthesis (BP) for patients with valvular heart disease undergoing replacement is still not a consensus. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the clinical outcomes of MP or BP placement in those patients. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared biological prostheses and mechanical prostheses in patients with valvular heart diseases and assessed the outcomes. RCTs were searched in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, SCOPUS and Web of Science (from inception to November 2014) databases. Meta-analyses were performed using inverse variance with random effects models. The GRADE system was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A P-value lower than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of four RCTs were included in the meta-analyses (1,528 patients) with follow up ranging from 2 to 20 years. Three used old generation mechanical and biological prostheses, and one used contemporary prostheses. No significant difference in mortality was found between BP and MP patients (risk ratio (RR = 1.07; 95% CI 0.99-1.15). The risk of bleeding was significantly lower in BP patients than MP patients (RR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.78); however, reoperations were significantly more frequent in BP patients (RR = 3.60; 95% CI 2.44-5.32). There were no statistically significant differences between BP and MP patients with respect to systemic arterial embolisms and infective endocarditis (RR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.66-1.31, RR = 1.21; CI95% 0.78-1.88, respectively). Results in the trials with modern and old prostheses were similar. CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate and the risk of thromboembolic events and endocarditis were similar between BP and MP patients. The risk of bleeding was approximately one third lower for BP patients than for MP patients, while the risk of reoperations was more than three times higher for BP patients.

Effects of perioperative statin use on cardiovascular complications in patients submitted to non-cardiac surgery: protocol for a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence suggests statins may reduce major perioperative vascular events. However, evidence is limited to observational studies, underpowered trials, and non-comprehensive systematic reviews. This review aims to assess the effects of perioperative statin use on cardiovascular complications in patients submitted to non-cardiac surgery. METHODS: We will search MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and CINAHL for randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of perioperative statin use in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery and reporting cardiovascular complications. For patients already using statins for hyperlipidemia, a preoperative loading dose of statin is required in the experimental group. We will place no language or publication restriction on our search. Teams of two reviewers will independently assess eligibility and risk of bias, and will extract data from the included trials. Our primary outcome is a combination of cardiovascular mortality or non-fatal myocardial infarction. We will also assess the following outcomes: individual components of the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, total myocardial infarction, elevated troponin in the first seven postoperative days, total stroke, total venous thromboembolism, postoperative atrial fibrillation, elevation of creatine phosphokinase or liver enzymes, and rates of myalgia or rhabdomyolysis. We will conduct meta-analyses using random-effects model and will use trial sequential analysis to establish monitoring boundaries to limit global type I error due to repetitive testing for our primary outcome. We will rate the quality of evidence using the GRADE system. DISCUSSION: The results of this systematic review may help to inform clinical practice and also the design of future large-scale randomized trials. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016035987.

Statistical analysis plan for the Alveolar Recruitment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Trial (ART). A randomized controlled trial. / Plano de análise estatística para o Alveolar Recruitment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Trial (ART). Ensaio controlado randomizado.

BACKGROUND: The Alveolar Recruitment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Trial (ART) is an international multicenter randomized pragmatic controlled trial with allocation concealment involving 120 intensive care units in Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Malaysia, Spain, and Uruguay. The primary objective of ART is to determine whether maximum stepwise alveolar recruitment associated with PEEP titration, adjusted according to the static compliance of the respiratory system (ART strategy), is able to increase 28-day survival in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome compared to conventional treatment (ARDSNet strategy). OBJECTIVE: To describe the data management process and statistical analysis plan. METHODS: The statistical analysis plan was designed by the trial executive committee and reviewed and approved by the trial steering committee. We provide an overview of the trial design with a special focus on describing the primary (28-day survival) and secondary outcomes. We describe our data management process, data monitoring committee, interim analyses, and sample size calculation. We describe our planned statistical analyses for primary and secondary outcomes as well as pre-specified subgroup analyses. We also provide details for presenting results, including mock tables for baseline characteristics, adherence to the protocol and effect on clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: According to best trial practice, we report our statistical analysis plan and data management plan prior to locking the database and beginning analyses. We anticipate that this document will prevent analysis bias and enhance the utility of the reported results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01374022.

FUNDAMENTAÇÃO: O estudo Alveolar Recruitment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Trial (ART) é um ensaio clínico internacional, multicêntrico, randomizado, pragmático e controlado com ocultação da alocação que envolve 120 unidades de terapia intensiva no Brasil, Argentina, Colômbia, Espanha, Itália, Polônia, Portugal, Malásia e Uruguai, com o objetivo primário de determinar se o recrutamento alveolar gradual máximo associado com titulação da pressão positiva expiratória final, ajustada segundo a complacência estática do sistema respiratório (estratégia ART), é capaz de aumentar, quando comparada aos resultados do tratamento convencional (estratégia ARDSNet), a sobrevivência em 28 dias de pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo. OBJETIVO: Descrever o processo de gerenciamento dos dados e o plano de análise estatística em um ensaio clínico internacional. MÉTODOS: O plano de análise estatística foi delineado pelo comitê executivo e revisado pelo comitê diretivo do ART. Foi oferecida uma visão geral do delineamento do estudo, com foco especial na descrição de desfechos primário (sobrevivência aos 28 dias) e secundários. Foram descritos o processo de gerenciamento dos dados, o comitê de monitoramento de dados, a análise interina e o cálculo do tamanho da amostra. Também foram registrados o plano de análise estatística para os desfechos primário e secundários, e os subgrupos de análise pré-especificados. Detalhes para apresentação dos resultados, inclusive modelos de tabelas para as características basais, adesão ao protocolo e efeito nos desfechos clínicos, foram fornecidos. CONCLUSÃO: Em acordo com as melhores práticas em ensaios clínicos, submetemos nossos planos de análise estatística e de gerenciamento de dados para publicação antes do fechamento da base de dados e início das análises. Antecipamos que este documento deve prevenir viés em análises e incrementar a utilidade dos resultados a serem relatados. REGISTRO DO ESTUDO: Número no registro ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01374022.

Effects of alveolar recruitment maneuvers on clinical outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To assess the effects of alveolar recruitment maneuvers (ARMs) on clinical outcomes in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: We conducted a search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science (from inception to July 2014) databases for all (i.e. no language restriction) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of ARMs versus no ARMs in adults with ARDS. Four teams of two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of the studies identified during the search and appraised the risk of bias and extracted data from those which were assessed as meeting the inclusion criteria. Data were pooled using the random-effects model. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to establish monitoring boundaries to limit global type I error due to repetitive testing for our primary outcome (in-hospital mortality). The GRADE system was used to rate the quality of evidence. RESULTS: Our database search identified ten RCTs (1,594 patients, 612 events) which satisfied the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis assessing the effect of ARMs on in-hospital mortality showed a risk ratio (RR) of 0.84 [95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.74-0.95; I(2) = 0 %], although the quality of evidence was considered to be low due to the risk of bias in the included trials and the indirectness of the evidence--that is, ARMs were usually conducted together with other ventilatory interventions which may affect the outcome of interest. There were no differences in the rates of barotrauma (RR 1.11; 95 % CI 0.78-1.57; I(2) = 0 %) or need for rescue therapies (RR 0.76, 95 % CI 0.41-1.40; I(2) = 56 %). Most trials found no difference between groups in terms of duration of mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital. The TSA showed that the available evidence for the effect of ARMs on in-hospital mortality is precise in the case of a type I error of 5 %, but it is not precise with a type I error of 1 %. CONCLUSIONS: Although ARMs may decrease the mortality of patients with ARDS without increasing the risk for major adverse events, current evidence is not definitive. Large-scale ongoing trials addressing this question may provide data better applicable to clinical practice.

Comparison of Biological and Mechanical Prostheses for Heart Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials / Comparação de Próteses Biológicas e Mecânicas para Cirurgia de Válvula Cardíaca: Revisão Sistemática de Estudos Controlados Randomizados

Abstract Background: The choice of a mechanical (MP) or biological prosthesis (BP) for patients with valvular heart disease undergoing replacement is still not a consensus. Objective: We aimed to determine the clinical outcomes of MP or BP placement in those patients. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared biological prostheses and mechanical prostheses in patients with valvular heart diseases and assessed the outcomes. RCTs were searched in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, SCOPUS and Web of Science (from inception to November 2014) databases. Meta-analyses were performed using inverse variance with random effects models. The GRADE system was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A P-value lower than 0.05 was considered significant. Results: A total of four RCTs were included in the meta-analyses (1,528 patients) with follow up ranging from 2 to 20 years. Three used old generation mechanical and biological prostheses, and one used contemporary prostheses. No significant difference in mortality was found between BP and MP patients (risk ratio (RR = 1.07; 95% CI 0.99-1.15). The risk of bleeding was significantly lower in BP patients than MP patients (RR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.78); however, reoperations were significantly more frequent in BP patients (RR = 3.60; 95% CI 2.44-5.32). There were no statistically significant differences between BP and MP patients with respect to systemic arterial embolisms and infective endocarditis (RR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.66-1.31, RR = 1.21; CI95% 0.78-1.88, respectively). Results in the trials with modern and old prostheses were similar. Conclusions: The mortality rate and the risk of thromboembolic events and endocarditis were similar between BP and MP patients. The risk of bleeding was approximately one third lower for BP patients than for MP patients, while the risk of reoperations was more than three times higher for BP patients.

Resumo Fundamento: A escolha de próteses mecânicas ou biológicas para pacientes com doença de válvula cardíaca ainda não é um consenso. Objetivo: Determinar os desfechos clínicos de próteses mecânicas e biológicas nesses pacientes. Métodos: Conduzimos uma revisão sistemática e metanálise e estudos controlados randomizados (RCTs) que compararam próteses mecânicas e biológicas em pacientes com doenças de válvulas cardíaca, e avaliamos seus resultados. A busca por RCTs foi feita nas bases de dados MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, SCOPUS e Web of Science (do início a novembro de 2014). As metanálises foram realizadas usando variação inversa com modelos de efeitos aleatórios. Usamos o sistema GRADE para avaliar a qualidade da evidência. Um valor menor que 0,05 foi considerado significativo. Resultados: Um total de quatro RCTs foi incluído na metanálise (1528 pacientes) com acompanhamento de 2 a 20 anos. Em três estudos, foram utilizadas próteses mecânicas e biológicas mais antigas, e em um estudo próteses contemporâneas. Não foi observada diferença de mortalidade entre os pacientes que receberam próteses mecânicas e biológicas (risco relativo, RR = 1,07; IC95% 0,99-1,15). O risco de sangramento foi significativamente mais baixo nos pacientes que receberam próteses biológicas que naqueles com próteses mecânicas (RR = 0,64; IC95% 0,52-0,78). Contudo, as reoparações foram mais frequentes em pacientes com próteses biológicas (RR = 3,60; IC95% 2,44-5,32). Não houve diferenças estatisticamente significativas entre pacientes com próteses biológicas e mecânicas em relação à embolia arterial sistêmica e endocardite infecciosa (RR = 0,93; IC95% 0,66-1,31; RR = 1,21; IC95% 0,78-1,88, respectivamente). Resultados entre os estudos com próteses modernas e antigas foram similares. Conclusões: A taxa de mortalidade e o risco de eventos tromboembólicos e endocardite foram similares entre os pacientes que receberam próteses biológicas e mecânicas. O risco de sangramentos foi aproximadamente um terço menor nos pacientes com próteses biológicas que mecânicas, ao passo que o risco de reoperação foi mais que três vezes maior nos pacientes com próteses biológicas.

Plano de análise estatística para o Alveolar Recruitment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Trial (ART). Ensaio controlado randomizado / Statistical analysis plan for the Alveolar Recruitment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Trial (ART). A randomized controlled trial

RESUMO Fundamentação: O estudo Alveolar Recruitment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Trial (ART) é um ensaio clínico internacional, multicêntrico, randomizado, pragmático e controlado com ocultação da alocação que envolve 120 unidades de terapia intensiva no Brasil, Argentina, Colômbia, Espanha, Itália, Polônia, Portugal, Malásia e Uruguai, com o objetivo primário de determinar se o recrutamento alveolar gradual máximo associado com titulação da pressão positiva expiratória final, ajustada segundo a complacência estática do sistema respiratório (estratégia ART), é capaz de aumentar, quando comparada aos resultados do tratamento convencional (estratégia ARDSNet), a sobrevivência em 28 dias de pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo. Objetivo: Descrever o processo de gerenciamento dos dados e o plano de análise estatística em um ensaio clínico internacional. Métodos: O plano de análise estatística foi delineado pelo comitê executivo e revisado pelo comitê diretivo do ART. Foi oferecida uma visão geral do delineamento do estudo, com foco especial na descrição de desfechos primário (sobrevivência aos 28 dias) e secundários. Foram descritos o processo de gerenciamento dos dados, o comitê de monitoramento de dados, a análise interina e o cálculo do tamanho da amostra. Também foram registrados o plano de análise estatística para os desfechos primário e secundários, e os subgrupos de análise pré-especificados. Detalhes para apresentação dos resultados, inclusive modelos de tabelas para as características basais, adesão ao protocolo e efeito nos desfechos clínicos, foram fornecidos. Conclusão: Em acordo com as melhores práticas em ensaios clínicos, submetemos nossos planos de análise estatística e de gerenciamento de dados para publicação antes do fechamento da base de dados e início das análises. Antecipamos que este documento deve prevenir viés em análises e incrementar a utilidade dos resultados a serem relatados. Registro do estudo: Número no registro ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01374022.

ABSTRACT Background: The Alveolar Recruitment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Trial (ART) is an international multicenter randomized pragmatic controlled trial with allocation concealment involving 120 intensive care units in Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Malaysia, Spain, and Uruguay. The primary objective of ART is to determine whether maximum stepwise alveolar recruitment associated with PEEP titration, adjusted according to the static compliance of the respiratory system (ART strategy), is able to increase 28-day survival in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome compared to conventional treatment (ARDSNet strategy). Objective: To describe the data management process and statistical analysis plan. Methods: The statistical analysis plan was designed by the trial executive committee and reviewed and approved by the trial steering committee. We provide an overview of the trial design with a special focus on describing the primary (28-day survival) and secondary outcomes. We describe our data management process, data monitoring committee, interim analyses, and sample size calculation. We describe our planned statistical analyses for primary and secondary outcomes as well as pre-specified subgroup analyses. We also provide details for presenting results, including mock tables for baseline characteristics, adherence to the protocol and effect on clinical outcomes. Conclusion: According to best trial practice, we report our statistical analysis plan and data management plan prior to locking the database and beginning analyses. We anticipate that this document will prevent analysis bias and enhance the utility of the reported results. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01374022.