Very-low Quality Research Articles

Effect of exercise on pain processing and motor output in people with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Guidelines recommend exercise as a core treatment for knee osteoarthritis. However, it is unclear how exercise affects measures of pain processing and motor function. The aim was to evaluate the effect of exercise on measures of pain processing and motor function in people with knee osteoarthritis. We searched five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) for studies on knee osteoarthritis, of any design, evaluating pain processing and motor function before and after exercise. Data were pooled with random-effects meta-analysis. Study quality was assessed using the Downs and Black and quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE. Eighteen studies were eligible and 16 were included. Following acute exercise, pressure pain threshold increased local to the study limb (standardised mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.26, [0.02, 0.51], n=159 from 5 studies), but there was no statistically significant change remote from the study limb (0.09, [-0.11, 0.29], n=90 from 4 studies). Following an exercise program (range 5-12 weeks) there were no statistically significant changes in pressure pain threshold (local 0.23, [-0.01, 0.47], n=218 from 8 studies; remote 0.33 [-0.13, 0.79], n=76 from 4 studies), temporal pain summation (0.38 [-0.08, 0.85], n=122 from 3 studies) or voluntary quadriceps muscle activation (4.23% [-1.84 to 10.30], n=139 from 4 studies). Very-low quality evidence suggests that pressure pain threshold increases following acute exercise. Very-low quality evidence suggests that pressure pain threshold, temporal pain summation or voluntary quadriceps activation do not change statistically significantly following exercise programs.

Techniques for preventing hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.

Techniques for preventing hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.

The use and abuse of meta-analysis.

The use and abuse of meta-analysis.

Ventriculoperitoneal shunt insertion in human immunodeficiency virus infected adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundHydrocephalus is a common, life threatening complication of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-related central nervous system opportunistic infection which can be treated by insertion of a ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS). In HIV-infected patients there is concern that VPS might be associated with unacceptably high mortality. To identify prognostic indicators, we aimed to compare survival and clinical outcome following VPS placement between all studied causes of hydrocephalus in HIV infected patients.MethodsThe following electronic databases were searched: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, LILACS, Research Registry, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, African Journals Online, and the OpenGrey database. We included observational studies of HIV-infected patients treated with VPS which reported of survival or clinical outcome. Data was extracted using standardised proformas. Risk of bias was assessed using validated domain-based tools.ResultsSeven Hunderd twenty-three unique study records were screened. Nine observational studies were included. Three included a total of 75 patients with tuberculous meningitis (TBM) and six included a total of 49 patients with cryptococcal meningitis (CM). All of the CM and two of the TBM studies were of weak quality. One of the TBM studies was of moderate quality. One-month mortality ranged from 62.5–100% for CM and 33.3–61.9% for TBM. These pooled data were of low to very-low quality and was inadequate to support meta-analysis between aetiologies. Pooling of results from two studies with a total of 77 participants indicated that HIV-infected patients with TBM had higher risk of one-month mortality compared with HIV non-infected controls (odds ratio 3.03; 95% confidence-interval 1.13–8.12; p = 0.03).ConclusionsThe evidence base is currently inadequate to inform prognostication in VPS insertion in HIV-infected patients. A population-based prospective cohort study is required to address this, in the first instance.

Regular (ICSI) versus ultra-high magnification (IMSI) sperm selection for assisted reproduction.

Subfertility is a condition found in up to 15% of couples of reproductive age. Gamete micromanipulation, such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), is very useful for treating couples with compromised sperm parameters. An alternative method of sperm selection has been described; the spermatozoa are selected under high magnification (over 6000x) and used for ICSI. This technique, named intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI), has a theoretical potential to improve reproductive outcomes among couples undergoing assisted reproduction techniques (ART). However, our previous version of this Cochrane Review was unable to find evidence that supported this possible beneficial effect. This is an update of Teixeira 2013. To identify, appraise, and summarise the available evidence regarding efficacy and safety of IMSI compared to ICSI in couples undergoing ART. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in these electronic databases: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, and in these trial registers: ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We also handsearched the reference lists of included studies and similar reviews. We performed the last electronic search on 18 November 2019. We only considered RCTs that compared ICSI and IMSI; we did not include quasi-randomised trials. We considered studies that permitted the inclusion of the same participant more than once (cross-over or per cycle trials) only if data regarding the first treatment of each participant were available. Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, and assessment of the risk of bias and quality of the evidence; we solved disagreements by consulting a third review author. We corresponded with study investigators to resolve any queries, as required. The updated search retrieved 535 records; we included 13 parallel-designed RCTs comparing IMSI and ICSI (four studies were added since the previous version), comprising 2775 couples (IMSI = 1256; ICSI = 1519). We are uncertain if IMSI improves live birth rates (risk ratio (RR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.39; 5 studies, 929 couples; I² = 1%), miscarriage rates per couple (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.48; 10 studies, 2297 couples; I² = 0%, very-low quality evidence), and miscarriage rate per pregnancy (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.20; 10 studies, 783 couples; I² = 0%, very-low quality evidence). We are uncertain if IMSI improves clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.37; 13 studies, 2775 couples; I² = 47%, very-low quality evidence). None of the included studies reported congenital abnormalities. We judged the evidence for all outcomes to be of very low-quality. We downgraded the quality of the evidence due to limitations of the included studies (risk of bias), inconsistency of results, and a strong indication of publication bias. The current evidence from randomised controlled trials does not support or refute the clinical use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI). We are very uncertain of the chances of having a live birth and of the risk of having a miscarriage. We found very low-quality evidence that IMSI may increase chances of a clinical pregnancy, which means that we are still very uncertain about any real difference. We did not find any trials reporting on the risk of congenital abnormalities. Well-designed and sufficiently powered trials are still required.

Prophylactic antibiotics for penetrating abdominal trauma: duration of use and antibiotic choice.

Penetrating abdominal trauma (PAT) is a common type of trauma leading to admission to hospital, which often progresses to septic complications. Antibiotics are commonly administered as prophylaxis prior to laparotomy for PAT. However, an earlier Cochrane Review intending to compare antibiotics with placebo identified no relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Despite this, many RCTs have been carried out that compare different agents and durations of antibiotic therapy. To date, no systematic review of these trials has been performed. To assess the effects of antibiotics in penetrating abdominal trauma, with respect to the type of agent administered and the duration of therapy. We searched the following electronic databases for relevant randomised controlled trials, from database inception to 23 July 2019; Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, MEDLINE Ovid In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE Ovid Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE, Embase Classic + Embase Ovid, ISI Web of Science (SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, CPCI-S & CPSI-SSH), and two clinical trials registers. We also searched reference lists from included studies. We applied no restrictions on language or date of publication. We included RCTs only. We included studies involving participants of all ages, which were conducted in secondary care hospitals only. We included studies of participants who had an isolated penetrating abdominal wound that breached the peritoneum, who were not already taking antibiotics. Two study authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We used standard Cochrane methods. We aggregated study results using a random-effects model. We also conducted trial sequential analysis (TSA) to help reduce type I and II errors in our analyses. We included 29 RCTs, involving a total of 4458 participants. We deemed 23 trials to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain. We are uncertain of the effect of a long course of antibiotic prophylaxis (> 24 hours) compared to a short course (≤ 24 hours) on abdominal surgical site infection (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.23; I² = 0%; 7 studies, 1261 participants; very low-quality evidence), mortality (Peto OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.73 to 3.82; I² = 8%; 7 studies, 1261 participants; very low-quality evidence), or intra-abdominal infection (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.80; I² = 0%; 6 studies, 111 participants; very-low quality evidence). Based on very low-quality evidence from fifteen studies, involving 2020 participants, which compared different drug regimens with activity against three classes of gastrointestinal flora (gram positive, gram negative, anaerobic), we are uncertain whether there is a benefit of one regimen over another. TSA showed the majority of comparisons did not cross the alpha adjusted boundary for benefit or harm, or reached the required information size, indicating that further studies are required for these analyses. However, in the three analyses which crossed the boundary for futility, further studies are unlikely to show benefit or harm. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain about the effect of either the duration of antibiotic prophylaxis, or the superiority of one drug regimen over another for penetrating abdominal trauma on abdominal surgical site infection rates, mortality, or intra-abdominal infections. Future RCTs should be adequately powered, test currently used antibiotics, known to be effective against gut flora, use methodology to minimise the risk of bias, and adequately report the level of peritoneal contamination encountered at laparotomy.

Psychosocial interventions for people with both severe mental illness and substance misuse.

Psychosocial interventions for people with both severe mental illness and substance misuse.

Metformin for prevention or delay of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its associated complications in persons at increased risk for the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Metformin for prevention or delay of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its associated complications in persons at increased risk for the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Interventions for Visual Field Defects in People With Stroke

BACKGROUND:Visual field defects are estimated to affect 20% to 57% of people who have had a stroke. Visual field defects can affect functional ability in activities of daily living (commonly affecting mobility, reading and driving), quality of life, ability to participate in rehabilitation, and depression and anxiety following stroke. There are many interventions for visual field defects, which are proposed to work by restoring the visual field (restitution); compensating for the visual field defect by changing behaviour or activity (compensation); substituting for the visual field defect by using a device or extraneous modification (substitution); or ensuring appropriate diagnosis, referral and treatment prescription through standardised assessment or screening, or both. OBJECTIVES:To determine the effects of interventions for people with visual field defects after stroke. SEARCH METHODS:We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO, and PDQT Databse, and clinical trials databases, including ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO Clinical Trials Registry, to May 2018. We also searched reference lists and trials registers, handsearched journals and conference proceedings, and contacted experts. SELECTION CRITERIA:Randomised trials in adults after stroke, where the intervention was specifically targeted at improving the visual field defect or improving the ability of the participant to cope with the visual field loss. The primary outcome was functional ability in activities of daily living and secondary outcomes included functional ability in extended activities of daily living, reading ability, visual field measures, balance, falls, depression and anxiety, discharge destination or residence after stroke, quality of life and social isolation, visual scanning, adverse events, and death. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two review authors independently screened abstracts, extracted data and appraised trials. We undertook an assessment of methodological quality for allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessors, method of dealing with missing data, and other potential sources of bias. We assessed the quality of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS:Twenty studies (732 randomised participants, with data for 547 participants with stroke) met the inclusion criteria for this review. However, only 10 of these studies compared the effect of an intervention with a placebo, control, or no treatment group, and eight had data which could be included in meta-analyses. Only two of these eight studies presented data relating to our primary outcome of functional abilities in activities of daily living. One study reported evidence relating to adverse events.Three studies (88 participants) compared a restitutive intervention with a control, but data were only available for one study (19 participants). There was very low-quality evidence that visual restitution therapy had no effect on visual field outcomes, and a statistically significant effect on quality of life, but limitations with these data mean that there is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about the effectiveness of restitutive interventions as compared to control.Four studies (193 participants) compared the effect of scanning (compensatory) training with a control or placebo intervention. There was low-quality evidence that scanning training was more beneficial than control or placebo on quality of life, measured using the Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) (two studies, 96 participants, mean difference (MD) 9.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.10 to 15.62). However, there was low or very-low quality evidence of no effect on measures of visual field, extended activities of daily living, reading, and scanning ability. There was low-quality evidence of no significant increase in adverse events in people doing scanning training, as compared to no treatment.Three studies (166 participants) compared a substitutive intervention (a type of prism) with a control. There was low or very-low quality evidence that prisms did not have an effect on measures of activities of daily living, extended activities of daily living, reading, falls, or quality of life, and very low-quality evidence that they may have an effect on scanning ability (one study, 39 participants, MD 9.80, 95% CI 1.91 to 17.69). There was low-quality evidence of an increased odds of an adverse event (primarily headache) in people wearing prisms, as compared to no treatment.One study (39 participants) compared the effect of assessment by an orthoptist to standard care (no assessment) and found very low-quality evidence that there was no effect on measures of activities of daily living.Due to the quality and quantity of evidence, we remain uncertain about the benefits of assessment interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:There is a lack of evidence relating to the effect of interventions on our primary outcome of functional ability in activities of daily living. There is limited low-quality evidence that compensatory scanning training may be more beneficial than placebo or control at improving quality of life, but not other outcomes. There is insufficient evidence to reach any generalised conclusions about the effect of restitutive interventions or substitutive interventions (prisms) as compared to placebo, control, or no treatment. There is low-quality evidence that prisms may cause minor adverse events.

Low-quality Evidence Suggests Digital Impressions (DIs) and Conventional Impressions Are Comparable for Marginal and Internal Fit, Very-low Quality Evidence for Interproximal and Occlusal Contacts is Insufficient to Draw Conclusion and There Is No Evidence Regarding Survival of Full-coverage Restorations

Digital versus conventional impressions for full-coverage restorations. Nagarkar SR, Perdigão J, Seong W-J, THeis-Mahon N. JADA 2018;149(2):139-47. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for profit sectors. Systematic review with meta-analysis of data.

Pharmacological interventions for the treatment of delirium in critically ill adults.

Pharmacological interventions for the treatment of delirium in critically ill adults.

Ultrasound-guided transvaginal ovarian needle drilling for clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovarian syndrome in subfertile women.

Ovulatory disturbance is a key diagnostic feature of polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), leading to infertility and correspondingly heavy disease burden. Many therapeutic strategies have been used to induce ovulation for women with PCOS who are infertile. Ultrasound-guided transvaginal ovarian needle drilling (UTND) is a novel surgical method used to induce ovulation for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS at the outpatients clinic. Nevertheless, the quality in most of the studies seemed low, and the safety and efficacy of UTND is still uncertain. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of UTND for subfertile women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS. We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and six other databases to November 2018. We checked conference abstracts from the 2018 ESHRE, reference lists, and clinical trials registries. We contacted experts and specialists in the field. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing UTND to laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD), and UTND combined with gonadotropins to gonadotropins alone for women of reproductive age with clomiphene-resistant PCOS and infertility. Two review authors independently screened appropriate trials for inclusion, assessed methodological quality and risk of bias, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were live birth rate and incidence of surgical complications (bleeding and infection). We included ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as a secondary outcome. Meta-analyses could only be conducted for the secondary outcomes pregnancy rate and ovulation rate in the comparison of UTND versus LOD using a random-effect model. We calculated odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence by applying GRADE criteria. We included five trials involving 639 clomiphene-resistant women with PCOS. Three studies compared UTND with LOD, and two compared UTND combined with gonadotropins with gonadotropins alone. The evidence was of low to very low quality. The main limitations were serious risk of bias due to poor reporting of methods, inconsistency resulting from heterogeneity, imprecision induced by limited sample size, and lack of reporting of clinically relevant outcomes such as live birth and surgical complications.UTND versus LODNo studies reported on the main outcome live birth. One study reported on surgical complications; however, the evidence for this outcome was of very low quality because it was based on one study with small sample size and there were no events in either arm. Thus, we are uncertain whether there is any difference in surgical complications between UTND and LOD.We are also uncertain whether there is any difference in pregnancy rate when comparing UTND with LOD (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.03; I2 = 56%; 3 RCTs, n = 473; very-low quality evidence). UTND may lead to a slight decrease in ovulation rate when compared to LOD (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.97; I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, n = 473; low-quality evidence). This suggests that among clomiphene-resistant women with PCOS using LOD with an expected ovulation rate of 69.5%, the ovulation rate among women using UTND may be between 50.6% and 68.8%No studies reported on the outcomes OHSS and multiple pregnancy. There was also insufficient evidence to reach a conclusion regarding miscarriage as there was only one study of very low quality.UTND combined with gonadotropins versus gonadotropins aloneNo studies reported on the main outcomes live birth and incidence of surgical complications. The evidence for the outcomes OHSS, pregnancy, ovulation, miscarriage, and multiple pregnancy in this comparison was of very low quality. Thus, we are uncertain whether there is any difference in these outcomes for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS using UTND combined with gonadotropins as compared with gonadotropins. Based on very low-quality evidence, It is uncertain whether there is any difference in pregnancy rate, incidence of surgical complications, and miscarriage rate between UTND and LOD in women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS. UTND may lead to a slight decrease in ovulation rate when compared to LOD. No studies reported on the outcomes live birth rate, incidence of OHSS, and multiple pregnancy rate. No studies reported on the main outcomes live birth and surgical complications for the comparison UTND combined with gonadotrophins versus gonadotrophins alone. The evidence for the outcomes OHSS, pregnancy, ovulation, miscarriage, and multiple pregnancy in this comparison was of very low quality. Thus, it is unclear if there is a difference in any of the outcomes between UTND combined with gonadotrophins versus gonadotrophins alone.

Physical activity for treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: Cochrane systematic review

BackgroundCurrent recommendations for patients with irritable bowel syndrome to partake in physical activity do not incorporate evidence from all available randomised control trials (RCTs), with little information regarding potential adverse effects.AimTo assess the benefits and harms of physical activity interventions in adults diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome.MethodTen electronic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched until 24 November 2017 for RCTs comparing a physical activity intervention with no intervention, usual care, or another intervention; assessing a validated measure of symptoms, quality of life (QoL), and bowel movement in any setting.ResultsNine RCTs with data for 326 participants were included. Interventions included yoga (n = 5), advice and support (n = 2), treadmill exercise (n = 1), and Qigong (n = 1) compared with usual care (n = 4), walking (n = 2), diet (n = 1), or medication only (n = 2). A meta-analysis of three studies demonstrated a large and statistically significant improvement in reported IBS symptoms (standardised mean difference −1.06, 95% confidence interval = −2.08 to −0.04; N = 84). However, evidence was rated as very low quality, providing very little confidence in the effect estimate. In additional meta-analyses, physical activity did not conclusively demonstrate improvements in QoL or abdominal pain. The quality of evidence was judged very low and low respectively, providing little confidence in the effect estimates. There was insufficient evidence to assess adverse effects due to poor trial reporting.ConclusionA small body of low to very-low quality evidence suggests physical activity may improve symptoms but not QoL or abdominal pain in people with irritable bowel syndrome but findings are uncertain.

Interventions for visual field defects in people with stroke.

Visual field defects are estimated to affect 20% to 57% of people who have had a stroke. Visual field defects can affect functional ability in activities of daily living (commonly affecting mobility, reading and driving), quality of life, ability to participate in rehabilitation, and depression and anxiety following stroke. There are many interventions for visual field defects, which are proposed to work by restoring the visual field (restitution); compensating for the visual field defect by changing behaviour or activity (compensation); substituting for the visual field defect by using a device or extraneous modification (substitution); or ensuring appropriate diagnosis, referral and treatment prescription through standardised assessment or screening, or both. To determine the effects of interventions for people with visual field defects after stroke. We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO, and PDQT Databse, and clinical trials databases, including ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO Clinical Trials Registry, to May 2018. We also searched reference lists and trials registers, handsearched journals and conference proceedings, and contacted experts. Randomised trials in adults after stroke, where the intervention was specifically targeted at improving the visual field defect or improving the ability of the participant to cope with the visual field loss. The primary outcome was functional ability in activities of daily living and secondary outcomes included functional ability in extended activities of daily living, reading ability, visual field measures, balance, falls, depression and anxiety, discharge destination or residence after stroke, quality of life and social isolation, visual scanning, adverse events, and death. Two review authors independently screened abstracts, extracted data and appraised trials. We undertook an assessment of methodological quality for allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessors, method of dealing with missing data, and other potential sources of bias. We assessed the quality of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. Twenty studies (732 randomised participants, with data for 547 participants with stroke) met the inclusion criteria for this review. However, only 10 of these studies compared the effect of an intervention with a placebo, control, or no treatment group, and eight had data which could be included in meta-analyses. Only two of these eight studies presented data relating to our primary outcome of functional abilities in activities of daily living. One study reported evidence relating to adverse events.Three studies (88 participants) compared a restitutive intervention with a control, but data were only available for one study (19 participants). There was very low-quality evidence that visual restitution therapy had no effect on visual field outcomes, and a statistically significant effect on quality of life, but limitations with these data mean that there is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about the effectiveness of restitutive interventions as compared to control.Four studies (193 participants) compared the effect of scanning (compensatory) training with a control or placebo intervention. There was low-quality evidence that scanning training was more beneficial than control or placebo on quality of life, measured using the Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) (two studies, 96 participants, mean difference (MD) 9.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.10 to 15.62). However, there was low or very-low quality evidence of no effect on measures of visual field, extended activities of daily living, reading, and scanning ability. There was low-quality evidence of no significant increase in adverse events in people doing scanning training, as compared to no treatment.Three studies (166 participants) compared a substitutive intervention (a type of prism) with a control. There was low or very-low quality evidence that prisms did not have an effect on measures of activities of daily living, extended activities of daily living, reading, falls, or quality of life, and very low-quality evidence that they may have an effect on scanning ability (one study, 39 participants, MD 9.80, 95% CI 1.91 to 17.69). There was low-quality evidence of an increased odds of an adverse event (primarily headache) in people wearing prisms, as compared to no treatment.One study (39 participants) compared the effect of assessment by an orthoptist to standard care (no assessment) and found very low-quality evidence that there was no effect on measures of activities of daily living.Due to the quality and quantity of evidence, we remain uncertain about the benefits of assessment interventions. There is a lack of evidence relating to the effect of interventions on our primary outcome of functional ability in activities of daily living. There is limited low-quality evidence that compensatory scanning training may be more beneficial than placebo or control at improving quality of life, but not other outcomes. There is insufficient evidence to reach any generalised conclusions about the effect of restitutive interventions or substitutive interventions (prisms) as compared to placebo, control, or no treatment. There is low-quality evidence that prisms may cause minor adverse events.

Predictors of Persistent Post-Surgical Pain after Total Knee Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

ABSTRACTIntroduction/Aim: Each year 67,000 Canadians undergo total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and approximately 20% develop persistent post-surgical pain (PPSP). A complaint associated with functional limitations, reduced quality of life, and increased care-seeking. We systematically reviewed observational studies to explore factors associated with PPSP after TKA.Methods: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, AMED, PsycINFO, SCOPUS and SPORTDiscuss from inception to October 31, 2018. When possible, we pooled estimates of association for all independent variables reported by more than one study. Random effects models were used for all meta-analysis. We assessed certainty in evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.Results: Twenty-five studies, involving 44,069 participants, were eligible for review. Mean age of enrolled patients was 68.56 ± 8.77 years and 76% were female. Eligible studies reported the association of 56 predictors with PPSP after TKA, which clustered into 6 groups: (1) patient characteristics, (2) clinical findings, (3) genetic factors, (4) surgical approach, (5) radiographic findings, and (6) peri-operative management. Low and very-low quality evidence showed that higher preoperative pain (OR = 3.82, 95%CI 1.27 to 11.47) and female sex (OR = 1.23, 95%CI 1.08 to 1.4) were significantly associate with PSPP after TKA. Neither older age (OR = 0.97, 95%CI 0.88 to 1.07), higher BMI (OR = 1.07, 95%CI 1.00 to 1.13), or mood disorders (OR = 1.14, 95%CI 1.0 to 1.3) were predictors of PPSP following TKA.Discussion/Conclusions: Addressing high peri-operative pain may be important in reducing PPSP after TKA.

Deep brain stimulation for dystonia.

Dystonia is a painful and disabling disorder, characterised by painful, involuntary posturing of the affected body region(s). Deep brain stimulation is an intervention typically reserved for severe and drug-refractory cases, although uncertainty exists regarding its efficacy, safety, and tolerability. To compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of deep brain stimulation (DBS) versus placebo, sham intervention, or best medical care, including botulinum toxin and resective or lesional surgery, in adults with dystonia. We identified studies by searching the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, four clinical trial registries, four grey literature databases, and reference lists of included articles. We ran the last search of all elements of the search strategy, with no language restrictions, on 29 May 2018. Double-blind, parallel, randomised, controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DBS with sham stimulation, best medical care, or placebo in adults with dystonia. Two independent review authors assessed records, selected included studies, extracted data onto a standardised (or prespecified) data extraction form, and evaluated the risk of bias. We resolved disagreements by consensus or by consulting a third review author. We conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model, to estimate pooled effects and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence with GRADE methods. The primary efficacy outcome was symptom improvement on any validated symptomatic rating scale, and the primary safety outcome was adverse events. We included two RCTs, enrolling a total of 102 participants. Both trials evaluated the effect of DBS on the internal globus pallidus nucleus, and assessed outcomes after three and six months of stimulation. One of the studies included participants with generalised and segmental dystonia; the other included participants with focal (cervical) dystonia. We assessed both studies at high risk for performance and for-profit bias. One study was retrospectively registered with a clinical trial register, we judged the second at high risk of detection bias.Low-quality evidence suggests that DBS of the internal globus pallidus nucleus may improve overall cervical dystonia-related symptoms (mean difference (MD) 9.8 units, 95% CI 3.52 to 16.08 units; 1 RCT, 59 participants), cervical dystonia-related functional capacity (MD 3.8 units, 95% CI 1.41 to 6.19; 1 RCT, 61 participants), and mood at three months (MD 3.1 units, 95% CI 0.73 to 5.47; 1 RCT, 61 participants).Low-quality evidence suggests that In people with cervical dystonia, DBS may slightly improve the overall clinical status (MD 2.3 units, 95% CI 1.15 to 3.45; 1 RCT, 61 participants). We are uncertain whether DBS improves quality of life in cervical dystonia (MD 3 units, 95% CI -7.71 to 13.71; 1 RCT, 57 participants; very low-quality evidence), or emotional state (MD 2.4 units, 95% CI -6.2 to 11.00; 1 RCT, 56 participants; very low-quality evidence).Low-quality evidence suggests that DBS of the internal globus pallidus nucleus may improve generalised or segmental dystonia-related symptoms (MD 14.4 units, 95% CI 8.0 to 20.8; 1 RCT, 40 participants), overall clinical status (MD 3.5 units, 95% CI 2.33 to 4.67; 1 RCT, 37 participants), physical functioning-related quality of life (MD 6.3 units, 95% CI 1.06 to 11.54; 1 RCT, 33 participants), and overall dystonia-related functional capacity at three months (MD 3.1 units, 95% CI 1.71 to 4.48; 1 RCT, 39 participants). We are uncertain whether DBS improves physical functioning-related quality of life (MD 5.0 units, 95% CI -2.14 to 12.14, 1 RCT, 33 participants; very low-quality evidence), or mental health-related quality of life (MD -4.6 units, 95% CI -11.26 to 2.06; 1 RCT, 30 participants; very low-quality evidence) in generalised or segmental dystonia.We pooled outcomes related to safety and tolerability, since both trials used the same intervention and comparison. We found very low-quality evidence of inconclusive results for risk of adverse events (relative risk (RR) 1.58, 95% 0.98 to 2.54; 2 RCTs, 102 participants), and tolerability (RR 1.86, 95% CI 0.16 to 21.57; 2 RCTs,102 participants). DBS of the internal globus pallidus nucleus may reduce symptom severity and improve functional capacity in adults with cervical, segmental or generalised moderate to severe dystonia (low-quality evidence), and may improve quality of life in adults with generalised or segmental dystonia (low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether the procedure improves quality of life in cervical dystonia (very low-quality evidence). We are also uncertain about the safety and tolerability of the procedure in adults with either cervical and generalised, or segmental dystonia (very-low quality evidence).We could draw no conclusions for other populations with dystonia (i.e. children and adolescents, and adults with other types of dystonia), or for other DBS protocols (i.e. other target nuclei or stimulation paradigms). Further research is needed to establish the long-term efficacy and safety of DBS of the internal globus pallidus nucleus.

Scalp block for analgesia after craniotomy: A meta-analysis.

Background and Aims:A previous meta-analysis reported that scalp block had limited benefits (low-quality evidence) compared to no-scalp block modalities for analgesia after craniotomy. However, it included studies using two different pain intensity measurement scales. Therefore, we performed another meta-analysis using a single scale.Methods:We conducted the search for all randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of scalp block on postcraniotomy pain compared to no-scalp block in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and PubMed database. We assessed the quality of included studies employing GRADE approach. We performed random-effects inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis of outcomes including pain intensity assessed by a 0--10 visual analog scale and opioid consumption during the first 24 h postoperative period using RevMan 5.3.Results:A total of 10 studies (551 patients) were included. It revealed a statistically significant mean pain intensity reduction in scalp block group when compared to no-scalp block at very early and early 24 h period (seven trials, very low-quality evidence, mean difference (MD) = −1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): −2.23 to -0.05, I2 = 70%; nine trials, very low-quality evidence, MD = −1.16, 95% CI: −2.09 to −0.24, I2 = 57%, respectively). There was also reduction in the opioid requirements over the first 24 h postoperatively.Conclusion:Scalp block might be useful at <6 h postcraniotomy with very-low quality evidence. Additionally, it had uncertain but moderate effect on reducing total 24 h opioid consumption. Therefore, more studies are needed to reach optimal information size.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of interventions for acute diarrhea and gastroenteritis in children: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BackgroundMany interventions have shown effectiveness in reducing the duration of acute diarrhea and gastroenteritis (ADG) in children. Yet, there is lack of comparative efficacy of interventions that seem to be better than placebo among which, the clinicians must choose. Our aim was to determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of the pharmacological and nutritional interventions for reducing the duration of ADG in children.MethodsData sources included Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, and Global-Health up to May 2017. Eligible trials compared zinc (ZN), vitamin A, micronutrients (MN), probiotics, prebiotics, symbiotics, racecadotril, smectite(SM), loperamide, diluted milk, lactose-free formula(LCF), or their combinations, to placebo or standard treatment (STND), or among them. Two reviewers independently performed screening, review, study selection and extraction. The primary outcome was diarrhea duration. Secondary outcomes were stool frequency at day 2, diarrhea at day 3, vomiting and side effects. We performed a random effects Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine the direct and indirect evidence for each outcome. Mean differences and odds ratio with their credible intervals(CrI) were calculated. Coherence and transitivity assumptions were assessed. Meta-regression, subgroups and sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of effect modifiers. Summary under the cumulative curve (SUCRA) values with their CrI were calculated. We assessed the evidence quality and classified the best interventions using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development & Evaluation (GRADE) approach for each paired comparison.ResultsA total of 174 studies (32,430 children) proved eligible. Studies were conducted in 42 countries of which most were low-and middle-income countries (LMIC). Interventions were grouped in 27 categories. Most interventions were better than STND. Reduction of diarrhea varied from 12.5 to 51.1 hours. The combinations Saccharomyces boulardii (SB)+ZN, and SM+ZN were considered the best interventions (i.e., GRADE quality of evidence: moderate to high, substantial superiority to STND, reduction in duration of 35 to 40 hours, and large SUCRA values), while symbiotics (combination of probiotics+prebiotics), ZN, loperamide and combinations ZN+MN and ZN+LCF were considered inferior to the best and better than STND [Quality: moderate to high, superior to STND, and reduction of 17 to 25 hours]. In subgroups analyses, effect of ZN was higher in LMIC and was not present in high-income countries (HIC). Vitamin A, MN, prebiotics, kaolin-pectin, and diluted milk were similar to STND [Quality: moderate to high]. The remainder of the interventions had low to very-low evidence quality. Loperamide was the only intervention with more side effects than STND [Quality: moderate].Discussion/ConclusionMost interventions analyzed (except vitamin A, micronutrients, prebiotics, and kaolin-pectin) showed evidence of superiority to placebo in reducing the diarrhea. With moderate-to high-quality of evidence, SB+ZN and SM+ZN, demonstrated the best combination of evidence quality and magnitude of effect while symbiotics, loperamide and zinc proved being the best single interventions, and loperamide was the most unsafe. Nonetheless, the effect of zinc, SB+ZN and SM+ZN might only be applied to children in LMIC. Results suggest no further role for studies comparing interventions against no treatment or placebo, or studies testing loperamide, MN, kaolin-pectin, vitamin A, prebiotics and diluted milk.PROSPERO registrationCRD42015023778.

Erratum to pre-operative use of aspirin in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2018.05.187.].

Oral isotretinoin for acne.

Oral isotretinoin for acne.