Carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty versus primary closure in patients with symptomatic and significant stenosis:a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background: Patch angioplasty in conventional carotid endarterectomy is suggested to reduce the risk of restenosis and recurrent ipsilateral stroke compared with primary closure. A systematic review of randomized clinical trials is needed to compare outcomes (benefits and harms) of both techniques. Methods: Searches (CENTRAL, PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and other databases) were last updated 3rd of January 2021. We included randomized clinical trials comparing carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty versus primary closure of the arterial wall in patients with a symptomatic and significant (> 50%) carotid stenosis. Primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. Results: We included 12 randomized clinical trials including 2187 participants who underwent 2335 operations for carotid stenosis comparing carotid endarterectomy with patch closure (1280 operations) versus carotid endarterectomy with primary closure (1055 operations). Meta-analysis comparing carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty versus carotid endarterectomy with primary closure may potentially decrease the number of patients with all-cause mortality (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.26 to 1.08; p = 0.08, best-case scenario for patch), serious adverse events (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.96; p = 0.02, best-case scenario for patch), and the number of restenosis (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.71; p < 0.01). Trial sequential analysis demonstrated that the required information sizes were far from being reached for these patient-important outcomes. All the patient-relevant outcomes were at low certainty of evidence according to The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Conclusions: This systematic review showed no conclusive evidence of a difference between carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty versus primary closure of the arterial wall on all-cause mortality, < 30 days mortality, < 30 days stroke, or any other serious adverse events. These conclusions are based on data from 15 to 35 years ago, obtained in trials with very low certainty according to GRADE, and should be interpreted cautiously. Therefore, we suggest conducting new randomized clinical trials patch angioplasty versus primary closure in carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with an internal carotid artery stenosis of 50% or more. Such trials ought to be designed according to the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials statement (Chan et al., Ann Intern Med 1:200–7, 2013) and reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement (Schulz et al., 7, 2010). Until conclusive evidence is obtained, the standard of care according to guidelines should not be abandoned. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42014013416. Review protocol publication 2019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026419

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder in Children and Adolescents.

To assess benefits and harms of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) versus no intervention or versus other interventions for pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). We searched for randomized clinical trials of CBT for pediatric OCD. Primary outcomes were OCD severity, serious adverse events, and level of functioning. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and adverse events. Remission from OCD was included as an exploratory outcome. We assessed risk of bias and evaluated the certainty of the evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Nine trials (N = 645) were included comparing CBT with no intervention and 3 trials (N = 146) comparing CBT with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Compared with no intervention, CBT decreased OCD severity (mean difference [MD] = -8.51, 95% CI = -10.84 to -6.18, p &lt; .00001, low certainty), improved level of functioning (patient-rated: standardized MD [SMD] = -0.90, 95% CI = -1.19 to -0.62, p &lt; .00001, very low certainty; parent-rated: SMD = -0.68, 95% CI = -1.12 to -0.23, p = .003, very low certainty), had similar proportions of participants with adverse events (risk ratio = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.93-1.22, p = .39, GRADE: low certainty), and was associated with reduced risk of still having OCD (risk ratio = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.37-0.67, p &lt; .00001, very low certainty). We had insufficient data to assess the effect of CBT versus no intervention on serious adverse events and quality of life. Compared with SSRIs, CBT led to similar decreases in OCD severity (MD = -0.75, 95% CI = -3.79 to 2.29, p = .63, GRADE: very low certainty), and was associated with similar risk of still having OCD (risk ratio = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.66-1.09, p = .20, very low certainty). We had insufficient data to assess the effect of CBT versus SSRIs on serious adverse events, level of functioning, quality of life, and adverse events. CBT may be more effective than no intervention and comparable to SSRIs for pediatric OCD, but we are very uncertain about the effect estimates

Carotid endarterectomy with primary closure versus patch angioplasty in patients with symptomatic and significant stenosis:protocol for a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analysis of randomised clinical trials

Introduction Use of patch angioplasty in carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is suggested to reduce the risk of restenosis and recurrent ipsilateral stroke. The objective is to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis as well as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessments comparing the benefits and harms of CEA with primary closure of the arterial wall versus CEA with patch angioplasty in patients with a symptomatic and significant carotid stenosis.Methods and analysis The review shall be conducted according to this published protocol following the recommendations of the ` Cochrane' and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Randomised clinical trials comparing CEA with primary closure of the arterial wall versus CEA with patch angioplasty (regardless of used patch materials) in human adults with a symptomatic and significant carotid stenosis will be included. Primary outcomes are all-cause mortality at maximal follow-up, health-related quality of life and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes are symptomatic or asymptomatic arterial occlusion or restenosis, and non-serious adverse events. We will primarily base our conclusions on meta-analyses of trials with overall low risk of bias. However, if pooled point estimates of all trials are similar to pooled point estimates of trials with overall low risk of bias and there is lack of a statistical significant interaction between estimates from trials with overall high risk of bias and trials with overall low risk of bias we will consider the precision achieved in all trials as the result of our meta-analyses.Ethics and dissemination The proposed systematic review will collect and analyse secondary data from published studies therefor ethical approval is not required. The results of the systematic review will be disseminated by publication in a peer-review journal and submitted for presentation at relevant conferences.</p

Prolonged-release melatonin versus placebo for benzodiazepine discontinuation in patients with schizophrenia: a randomized clinical trial - the SMART trial protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Treatment of schizophrenia frequently includes prolonged benzodiazepine administration despite a lack of evidence of its use. It is often difficult to discontinue benzodiazepines because of the development of dependence. We aim to assess if melatonin can facilitate the withdrawal of prolonged benzodiazepine administration in patients with schizophrenia. Furthermore, we aim to investigate the association of benzodiazepine dose reduction with the following clinically important variables: sleep, psychophysiology, cognition, social function, and quality of life.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Randomized, blinded, two-armed, parallel superiority trial. We plan to include 80 consenting outpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, 18-55 years of age, treated with antipsychotic drug(s) and at least one benzodiazepine derivative for the last three months before inclusion. Exclusion criteria: currently under treatment for alcohol or drug abuse, aggressive or violent behavior, known mental retardation, pervasive developmental disorder, dementia, epilepsy, terminal illness, severe co morbidity, inability to understand Danish, allergy to melatonin, lactose, starch, gelatin, or talc, hepatic impairment, pregnancy or nursing, or lack of informed consent. After being randomized to prolonged-release melatonin (Circadin^®) 2 mg daily or matching placebo, participants are required to slowly taper off their benzodiazepine dose. The primary outcome measure is benzodiazepine dose at 6 months follow-up. Secondary outcome measures include sleep, psychophysiological, and neurocognitive measures. Data are collected at baseline and at 6 months follow-up regarding medical treatment, cognition, psychophysiology, sleep, laboratory tests, adverse events, psychopathology, social function, and quality of life. Data on medical treatment, cognition, psychophysiology, adverse events, social function, and quality of life are also collected at 2 and 4 months follow-up.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The results from this trial will examine whether melatonin has a role in withdrawing long-term benzodiazepine administration in schizophrenia patients. This group of patients is difficult to treat and therefore often subject to polypharmacy which may play a role in the reduced life expectancy of patients compared to the background population. The results will also provide new information on the association of chronic benzodiazepine treatment with sleep, psychophysiology, cognition, social function, and quality of life. Knowledge of these important clinical aspects is lacking in this group of patients.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01431092">NCT01431092</a></p

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for adults after heart valve surgery:review

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation may benefit heart valve surgery patients. We conducted a systematic review to assess the evidence for the use of exercise-based intervention programmes following heart valve surgery.To assess the benefits and harms of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation compared with no exercise training intervention, or treatment as usual, in adults following heart valve surgery. We considered programmes including exercise training with or without another intervention (such as a psycho-educational component).We searched: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE); MEDLINE (Ovid); EMBASE (Ovid); CINAHL (EBSCO); PsycINFO (Ovid); LILACS (Bireme); and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-S (CPCI-S) on Web of Science (Thomson Reuters) on 23 March 2015. We handsearched Web of Science, bibliographies of systematic reviews and trial registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, Controlled-trials.com, and The World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform).We included randomised clinical trials that investigated exercise-based interventions compared with no exercise intervention control. The trial participants comprised adults aged 18 years or older who had undergone heart valve surgery for heart valve disease (from any cause) and received either heart valve replacement, or heart valve repair.Two authors independently extracted data. We assessed the risk of systematic errors ('bias') by evaluation of bias risk domains. Clinical and statistical heterogeneity were assessed. Meta-analyses were undertaken using both fixed-effect and random-effects models. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence. We sought to assess the risk of random errors with trial sequential analysis.We included two trials from 1987 and 2004 with a total 148 participants who have had heart valve surgery. Both trials had a high risk of bias.There was insufficient evidence at 3 to 6 months follow-up to judge the effect of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to no exercise on mortality (RR 4.46 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 90.78); participants = 104; studies = 1; quality of evidence: very low) and on serious adverse events (RR 1.15 (95% CI 0.37 to 3.62); participants = 148; studies = 2; quality of evidence: very low). Included trials did not report on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and the secondary outcomes of New York Heart Association class, left ventricular ejection fraction and cost. We did find that, compared with control (no exercise), exercise-based rehabilitation may increase exercise capacity (SMD -0.47, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.13; participants = 140; studies = 2, quality of evidence: moderate). There was insufficient evidence at 12 months follow-up for the return to work outcome (RR 0.55 (95% CI 0.19 to 1.56); participants = 44; studies = 1; quality of evidence: low). Due to limited information, trial sequential analysis could not be performed as planned.Our findings suggest that exercise-based rehabilitation for adults after heart valve surgery, compared with no exercise, may improve exercise capacity. Due to a lack of evidence, we cannot evaluate the impact on other outcomes. Further high-quality randomised clinical trials are needed in order to assess the impact of exercise-based rehabilitation on patient-relevant outcomes, including mortality and quality of life

Update to the study protocol, including statistical analysis plan for a randomized clinical trial comparing comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation after heart valve surgery with control: the CopenHeartVR trial

Comparative StudyRandomized Controlled TrialThis is the final version of the article. Available from BioMed Central via the DOI in this record.BACKGROUND: Heart valve diseases are common with an estimated prevalence of 2.5% in the Western world. The number is rising because of an ageing population. Once symptomatic, heart valve diseases are potentially lethal, and heavily influence daily living and quality of life. Surgical treatment, either valve replacement or repair, remains the treatment of choice. However, post-surgery, the transition to daily living may become a physical, mental and social challenge. We hypothesize that a comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation program can improve physical capacity and self-assessed mental health and reduce hospitalization and healthcare costs after heart valve surgery. METHODS: This randomized clinical trial, CopenHeartVR, aims to investigate whether cardiac rehabilitation in addition to usual care is superior to treatment as usual after heart valve surgery. The trial will randomly allocate 210 patients 1:1 to an intervention or a control group, using central randomization, and blinded outcome assessment and statistical analyses. The intervention consists of 12 weeks of physical exercise and a psycho-educational intervention comprising five consultations. The primary outcome is peak oxygen uptake (VO2 peak) measured by cardiopulmonary exercise testing with ventilatory gas analysis. The secondary outcome is self-assessed mental health measured by the standardized questionnaire Short Form-36. Long-term healthcare utilization and mortality as well as biochemistry, echocardiography and cost-benefit will be assessed. A mixed-method design will be used to evaluate qualitative and quantitative findings, encompassing a survey-based study before the trial and a qualitative pre- and post-intervention study. CONCLUSION: This randomized clinical trial will contribute with evidence of whether cardiac rehabilitation should be provided after heart valve surgery. The study is approved by the local regional Research Ethics Committee (H-1-2011-157), and the Danish Data Protection Agency (j.nr. 2007-58-0015). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registered 16 March 2012; ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01558765 ).This work is supported by the Strategic Research Council, The Heart Centre Research Foundation Rigshospitalet, Familien Hede Nielsens Fond, The Regional Research Council of Region Sealand (Denmark), The National Institute of Public Health, and the University of Southern Denmark

Constraint-induced movement therapy: trial sequential analysis applied to Cochrane collaboration systematic review results

Background: Trial sequential analysis (TSA) may establish when firm evidence about the efficacy of interventions is reached in a cumulative meta-analysis, combining a required information size with adjusted thresholds for conservative statistical significance. Our aim was to demonstrate TSA results on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in a Cochrane systematic review on the effectiveness of constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) for stroke patients. Methods: We extracted data on the functional independence measure (FIM) and the action research arm test (ARAT) from RCTs that compared CIMT versus other rehabilitative techniques. Mean differences (MD) were analyzed using a random-effects model. We calculated the information size and the cumulative Z-statistic, applying the O'Brien-Fleming monitoring boundaries. Results: We included data from 14 RCTs. In the conventional meta-analysis (seven trials, 233 patients), the effect of CIMT on FIM was reported as significant (MD 2.88, 95% CI 0.08 to 5.68; P = 0.04). The diversity-adjusted required information size was 142 patients, and the cumulative Z-score did not cross the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit (adjusted 95% CI -0.02 to 5.78). The effect of CIMT on ARAT (nine trials, 199 patients) was reported as significant (MD 7.78, 95% CI 1.19 to 14.37; P = 0.02). However, the diversity-adjusted required information size was 252 patients, and the Z-score did not cross the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit (adjusted 95% CI -0.06 to 15.62). Conclusions: Although conventional meta-analyses of CIMT reached statistical significance, their overall results remain inconclusive and might be spurious. Researchers should not be overconfident on CIMT efficacy based on the results of meta-analyses and derived recommendations

How to increase the potential policy impact of environmental science research

This article highlights eight common issues that limit the policy impact of environmental science research. The article also discusses what environmental scientists can do to resolve these issues, including (1) optimising the directness of their study so that it examines similar processes/populations/environments/ecosystems to that of policy interest; (2) using the most powerful study design possible, to increase confidence in the identified causal mechanisms; (3) selecting a sufficient sample size, to reduce the chance of false positives/negatives and increase policy-makers’ confidence in extrapolation of the findings; (4) minimizing the risk of bias through randomization of study units to treatment and control groups (reducing the risk of selection bias), blinding of study units and investigators (reducing the risk of performance and detection bias), following-up study units from enrolment to study completion (reducing the risk of attrition bias) and prospectively registering the study on a publically-available platform (reducing the risk of reporting and publication bias); (5) proving that statistical analyses meet test assumptions by reporting the results of statistical assumption checks, ideally publishing full datasets online in an open-access format; (6) publishing the research whether statistically significant or not, policy-makers are just as interested in the negative or insignificant results as they are in the positive results; (7) making the study easy to find and use, the title and abstract of an article are of high importance in determining whether articles are examined in detail or not and used to inform policy; (8) contributing towards systematic reviews on environmental topics, to provide policy-makers with comprehensive, reproducible and updateable syntheses of all the evidence on a given topic.</p

Glucocorticosteroids for people with alcoholic hepatitis (Cochrane review)

Alcoholic hepatitis (AH) is a form of alcoholic liver disease. Glucocorticosteroids (GCS) are used as anti - inflammatory drugs for people with alcoholic hepatitis. Aim. To assess the benefits and harms of GCS in people with AH. Material and methods. We identified trials through electronic searches in Cochrane Hepato-Biliary's (CHB) Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded. We considered for inclusion randomised clinical trials (RCTs) assessing GCS versus placebo/no intervention in adult participants with AH. We allowed co - interventions in the trial groups if they were similar. We followed Cochrane methodology, CHB Group methodology using Review Manager 5 and Trial Sequential Analysis(TSA) to perform meta - analysis (M-A), assessed bias risk of the trials, certainty of evidence using GRADE. Results and discussion. Sixteen trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Fifteen trials provided data for analysis (927 participants received GCS, 934 - placebo/no intervention). The GCS were administered to adult participants at different stages of AH orally or parenterally for a median of 28 days. There was no evidence of effect of GCCs on our primary outcomes all - cause mortality up to 3 months following randomisation (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.70-1.15; n=1861), on health - related quality of life (MD - 0.04 points; 95% CI -0.11-0.03; n=377; trial = 1) (EQ-5D-3L scale), on the occurrence of serious adverse events during treatment (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.85-1.29; n=1861). We found no evidence of a difference between the intervention groups. The risk of bias was high in all the trials except one. The certainty of evidence was very low or low. One of the trials seems to be not industry - funded. Conclusion. We found no evidence of a difference between GCS and placebo or no intervention on all - cause mortality, health - related quality of life, and serious adverse events during treatment. We cannot exclude increases in adverse events and cannot rule out significant benefits and harms of GCSs. Future trials ought to report depersonalised individual participant data

Cardiodynamic state is associated with systemic inflammation and fatal acute‐on‐chronic liver failure

Background & Aims: Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is characterized by high short-term mortality and systemic inflammation (SI). Recently, different cardiodynamic states were shown to independently predict outcomes in cirrhosis. The relationship between cardiodynamic states, SI, and portal hypertension and their impact on ACLF development remains unclear. The aim of this study was therefore to evaluate the interplay of cardiodynamic state and SI on fatal ACLF development in cirrhosis. Results: At inclusion, hemodynamic measures including cardiac index (CI) and hepatic venous pressure gradient of 208 patients were measured. Patients were followed prospectively for fatal ACLF development (primary endpoint). SI was assessed by proinflammatory markers such as interleukins (ILs) 6 and 8 and soluble IL-33 receptor (sIL-33R). Patients were divided according to CI (4.2 L/min/m2) in hypo- (n = 84), normo- (n = 69) and hyperdynamic group (n = 55). After a median follow-up of 3 years, the highest risk of fatal ACLF was seen in hyperdynamic (35%) and hypodynamic patients (25%) compared with normodynamic (14%) (P =.011). Hyperdynamic patients showed the highest rate of SI. The detectable level of IL-6 was an independent predictor of fatal ACLF development. Conclusions: Cirrhotic patients with hyperdynamic and hypodynamic circulation have a higher risk of fatal ACLF. Therefore, the cardiodynamic state is strongly associated with SI, which is an independent predictor of development of fatal ACLF