Effect of metformin on maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnant obese non-diabetic women: A meta-analysis

Background: Metformin reduces maternal and neonatal weight gain in gestational diabetes mellitus; however, this effect is poorly investigated in non-diabetic women. Objective: We performed this meta-analysis to investigate the effect of metformin intake during pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes in obese non-diabetic women. Materials and Methods: We searched Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL for eligible randomized controlled trials addressing the efficacy of metformin in pregnant obese non-diabetic women. Data were extracted and analyzed using RevMan software (Version 5.3). Neonatal birth weight was the key outcome. Secondary outcomes included maternal weight gain, the incidence of preeclampsia, and neonatal adverse effects (miscarriage, stillbirth and congenital anomalies). Results: Pooled data from two RCTs (n=843) showed that metformin caused a significant reduction in maternal gestational weight gain (MD-1.35, 95% CI: [2.08, -0.630]), compared to placebo. The summary effect-estimate did not favor either of the two groups in terms of reduction of neonatal birth weight Z score (MD-0.09, 95% CI: [0.23, 0.06]). Metformin was associated with 41% reduction in the risk of preeclampsia; however, this reduction was not statistically significant [RR 0.59, 95% CI: [0.03, 11.46]). None of the neonatal adverse events including stillbirth [RR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.42, 3.10]) and congenital anomalies (RR= 1.36, 95% CI: [0.58, 3.21]) differed significantly between the two groups. Conclusion: For obese pregnant women, metformin could decrease gestational weight gain with no significant reduction in neonatal birth weight. In light of the current evidence, metformin should not be used to prevent poor pregnancy outcomes in obese non-diabetic women

Efficacy and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in aortic stenosis patients at low to moderate surgical risk: a comprehensive meta-analysis

Abstract Background Recently, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the procedure of choice in high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (AS). However, its value is still debated in operable AS cases. We performed this meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of TAVR to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-to-moderate surgical risk patients with AS. Methods A systematic search of five authentic databases retrieved 11 eligible studies (20,056 patients). Relevant Data were pooled as risk ratios (RRs) or standardized mean differences (SMD), with their 95% confidence interval, using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis and RevMan software for windows. Results At one-year of follow-up, the pooled effect-estimates showed no significant difference between TAVR and SAVR groups in terms of all-cause mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI [0.83, 1.26], stroke (RR 0.83, 95%CI [0.56, 1.21]), myocardial infarction (RR 0.82, 95% CI [0.57, 1.19]), and length of hospital stay (SMD -0.04, 95% CI [−0.34, 0.26]). The incidence of major bleeding (RR 0.45, 95% CI [0.24, 0.86]) and acute kidney injury (RR 0.52, 95% CI [0.30, 0.88]) was significantly lower in the TAVR group, compared to the SAVR group. However, TAVR was associated with a higher risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (RR 2.57, 95% CI [1.36, 4.86]), vascular-access complications at 1 year (RR 1.99, 95%CI [1.04, 3.80]), and paravalvular aortic regurgitation at 30 days (RR 3.90, 95% CI [1.25, 12.12]), compared to SAVR. Conclusions Due to the comparable mortality rates in SAVR and TAVR groups and the lower risk of life-threatening complications in the TAVR group, TAVR can be an acceptable alternative to SAVR in low-to-moderate risk patients with AS. However, larger trials with longer follow-up periods are required to compare the long-term outcomes of both techniques

Impact of hospitalists on the efficiency of inpatient care and patient satisfaction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Over the past 20 years, hospitalists have assumed a greater portion of healthcare service for hospitalized patients. This was mainly due to reducing the length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs shown by many studies. In contrast, other studies suggested increased cost and resources utilization associated with hospitalist-run care models. Aim: We aimed to provide class 1 evidence regarding the effect of hospitalist-run care models on the efficiency of care and patient satisfaction. Design: Meta-analysis. Methods: Four electronic medical databases were searched to retrieve all relevant studies. Two authors screened titles and abstracts of search results for eligibility according to predefined criteria. Initially eligible studies were screened for full text inclusion. Included studies were reviewed for data on LOS, hospital cost, readmission, mortality, and patient satisfaction. Available data were abstracted and analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Results: Sixty-one studies were included for analysis. The overall effect size favored hospitalist-run care models in terms of LOS (MD = −0.67 day, 95% CI [−0.78, −0.56], p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in terms of hospital cost (MD = $92.1, 95% CI [−910.4, 1094.6], p = 0.86) whereas patient satisfaction was similar or even better in hospitalist compared to non-hospitalist (NH) service. Conclusion: Our analysis showed that hospitalist care is associated with decreased LOS and increased patient satisfaction compared to NH. This indicates an increase in the efficiency of care that does not come at the expense of care quality

Additional file 1: of Efficacy and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in aortic stenosis patients at low to moderate surgical risk: a comprehensive meta-analysis

shows risk of bias (ROB) assessment results for included randomized trials and observational studies, according to Cochrane ROB tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. (DOCX 21 kb

Bapineuzumab for mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract Background Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a globally prevalent neurodegenerative condition, clinically characterized by progressive memory loss and gradual impairment of cognitive functions. Bapineuzumab is a fully humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to neurotoxic amyloid proteins in the brain, enhancing their clearance. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of bapineuzumab in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease. Methods We performed a web-based literature search of PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and web of science using the relevant keywords. Data were extracted from eligible records and pooled as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) values with their 95% confidence interval (CI), using Review Manager software (version 5.3 for windows). Heterogeneity was measured by Chi-square and I-square tests. Result The pooled effect estimate from six randomized clinical trials (n = 2380) showed that bapineuzumab significantly reduced the cerebrospinal fluid concentration of phosphorylated tau proteins (Standardized MD = −5.53, 95% CI [−8.29, −2.76]). However, the bapineuzumab group was not superior to the placebo group in terms of change from baseline in Alzheimer’s disease assessment scale (ADAS)-Cog11 (MD = 0.14, 95% CI [−0.72, 0.99]), disability assessment for dementia (DAD) scale (MD = 1.35, 95% CI [−1.74, 4.43]), and mini-mental state examination (MMSE) scores (MD = 0.08, 95% CI [−0.31, 0.47]). Regarding safety, bapineuzumab increased the risk of serious treatment-emergent adverse events (RR = 1.18, 95% CI [1.02, 1.37]) and cerebral vasogenic edema (RR = 40.88, 95% CI [11.94, 135.95]). All bapineuzumab doses (0.15, 0.5, 1, and 2 mg/kg) were similar to placebo in terms of change from baseline in ADAS-cog11, DAD, and MMSE scores, except for the 0.15 mg/kg dose, which caused a significant worsening on the ADAS-cog11 scale (MD = 5.6, 95% CI [0.22, 10.98]). Conclusions Considering the lack of clinical efficacy, combined with the significant association with serious adverse events, bapineuzumab should not be used to treat patients with mild to moderate AD. Future studies should investigate the effect of combining bapineuzumab with other therapeutic strategies and reevaluate the efficacy of targeting amyloid β proteins in AD therapy

Additional file 1: of Therapeutic efficacy and safety of Botulinum Toxin A Therapy in Trigeminal Neuralgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Table S1. The PRISMA checklist. (DOCX 28 kb

Additional file 2: of Bapineuzumab for mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Shows the authors’ judgements for risk of bias assessment domains with supporting reasons. (DOCX 20 kb