Plos One
-
Meta Analysis
Terlipressin versus norepinephrine in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a severe and progressive functional renal failure occurring in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. Terlipressin is recognized as an effective treatment of HRS, but it is expensive and not widely available. Norepinephrine could be an effective alternative. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of norepinephrine compared to terlipressin in the management of HRS. ⋯ Norepinephrine seems to be an attractive alternative to terlipressin in the treatment of HRS and is associated with less adverse events. However, these findings are based on data extracted from only four small studies.
-
This systematic review evaluated the clinical utility of single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) in traumatic brain injury (TBI). ⋯ This review demonstrates Level IIA evidence (at least one non-randomized controlled trial) for the value of SPECT in TBI. Given its advantages over CT and MRI in the detection of mild TBI in numerous studies of adequate quality, and given its excellent negative predictive value, it may be an important second test in settings where CT or MRI are negative after a closed head injury with post-injury neurological or psychiatric symptoms.
-
Multicenter Study Clinical Trial
Importance of cough and M. tuberculosis strain type as risks for increased transmission within households.
The degree to which tuberculosis (TB) is transmitted between persons is variable. Identifying the factors that contribute to transmission could provide new opportunities for TB control. Transmission is influenced by host, bacterial and environmental factors. However, distinguishing their individual effects is problematic because measures of disease severity are tightly correlated, and assessing the virulence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates is complicated by epidemiological and clinical confounders. ⋯ We found differential transmission among otherwise clinically similar patients with advanced TB disease. We propose that distinct strains may cause differing patterns of cough strength and cavitation in the host leading to diverging infectiousness. Larger studies are needed to verify this hypothesis.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Comparison of combined general-epidural anesthesia with general anesthesia effects on survival and cancer recurrence: a meta-analysis of retrospective and prospective studies.
Animals underwent combined general-epidural anesthesia (EGA) is reported to have better long-time outcome than general anesthesia (GA). This study aimed to make overall evaluation of the association between these two anesthetic techniques and prognosis of cancer patients undergoing surgery. ⋯ This meta-analysis showed that EGA might be associated with improvement in prognosis of patients with operable prostate cancer and the cancer patients with follow-up less than or equal to two years. However, no obvious relationship between the improvement in prognosis of colorectal cancer and EGA were detected, comparing to GA. Furthermore, all the results should be interpreted cautiously, as heterogeneous data were used for analyzing.
-
Choice of outcomes is critical for clinical trialists and systematic reviewers. It is currently unclear how systematic reviewers choose and pre-specify outcomes for systematic reviews. Our objective was to assess the completeness of pre-specification and comparability of outcomes in all Cochrane reviews addressing four common eye conditions. ⋯ Outcome pre-specification was largely incomplete; we encourage systematic reviewers to consider all five elements. This will indicate the importance of complete specification to clinical trialists, on whose work systematic reviewers depend, and will indirectly encourage comparable outcome choice to reviewers undertaking related research questions. Complete pre-specification could improve efficiency and reduce bias in data abstraction and analysis during a systematic review. Ultimately, more completely specified and comparable outcomes could make systematic reviews more useful to decision-makers.