GRADE Guidance 36: Updates to GRADE's approach to addressing inconsistency

Closed-loop oxygen control for critically ill patients--A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The impact of closed-loop control systems to titrate oxygen flow in critically ill patients, including their effectiveness, efficacy, workload and safety, remains unclear. This systematic review investigated the utilization of closed-loop oxygen systems for critically ill patients in comparison to manual oxygen titration systems focusing on these topics.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A search was conducted across several databases including MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL, LOVE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization on March 3, 2022, with subsequent updates made on June 27, 2023. Evidence databases were searched for randomized clinical parallel or crossover studies investigating closed-loop oxygen control systems for critically ill patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines. The analysis was conducted using Review Manager software, adopting the mean difference or standardized mean difference with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for continuous variables or risk ratio with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes. The main outcome of interest was the percentage of time spent in the peripheral arterial oxygen saturation target. Secondary outcomes included time for supplemental oxygen weaning, length of stay, mortality, costs, adverse events, and workload of healthcare professional. A total of 37 records from 21 studies were included in this review with a total of 1,577 participants. Compared with manual oxygen titration, closed-loop oxygen control systems increased the percentage of time in the prescribed SpO2 target, mean difference (MD) 25.47; 95% CI 19.7, 30.0], with moderate certainty of evidence. Current evidence also shows that closed-loop oxygen control systems have the potential to reduce the percentage of time with hypoxemia (MD -0.98; 95% CI -1.68, -0.27) and healthcare workload (MD -4.94; 95% CI -7.28, -2.61) with low certainty of evidence.

CONCLUSION

Closed-loop oxygen control systems increase the percentage of time in the preferred SpO2 targets and may reduce healthcare workload.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42022306033.

The effects of empiric antibiotic regimens in adults with non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The optimal empiric antibiotic regimen for non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To compare alternative empiric antibiotic regimens in HAP using a network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

Data sources: Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and CINAHL from database inception to July 06, 2023.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCT).

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with clinical suspicion of HAP.

INTERVENTION

Any empiric antibiotic regimen versus another, placebo, or no treatment.

ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS

Paired reviewers independently assessed risk of bias using a modified Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials.

METHODS OF DATA ANALYSIS

Paired reviewers independently extracted data on trial and patient characteristics, antibiotic regimens, and outcomes of interest. We conducted frequentist random-effects NMAs for treatment failure and all-cause mortality and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

39 trials proved eligible. 30 RCTs involving 4,807 participants found low certainty evidence that piperacillin-tazobactam (RR compared to all cephalosporins: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.42, 1.01) and carbapenems (RR compared to all cephalosporins: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.53, 1.11) might be among the most effective in reducing treatment failure. The findings were robust to the secondary analysis comparing piperacillin-tazobactam vs antipseudomonal cephalosporins or antipseudomonal carbapenems vs antipseudomonal cephalosporins. 11 RCTs involving 2,531 participants found low certainty evidence that ceftazidime and linezolid combination may not be convincingly different from cephalosporin alone in reducing all-cause mortality. Evidence on other antibiotic regimens is very uncertain. Data on other patient-important outcomes including adverse events was sparse, and we did not perform network or pairwise meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

For empiric antibiotic therapy of adults with HAP, piperacillin-tazobactam might be among the most effective in reducing treatment failure in HAP. Empiric MRSA coverage may not exert additional benefit in reducing mortality in HAP.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD 42022297224).

Comparative Effectiveness of Intravascular Ultrasound Versus Angiography in Abdominal and Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The effectiveness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) with angiography compared with angiography guidance alone in treating aortic conditions, such as dissections, aneurysms, and blunt traumatic injuries, remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the current literature for IVUS use during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and abdominal endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases was conducted in March 2024 adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies comparing outcomes of TEVAR/EVAR with and without IVUS were identified. The outcomes of interest included contrast volume, fluoroscopy and procedural time, perioperative endoleak, and reinterventions and all-cause mortality during follow-up. Data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted. Pooled analysis was performed using a random-effect model. Subgroup analysis was performed stratified by the condition being treated. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. A total of 4,219 patients (n = 2,655 IVUS and n = 1,564 non-IVUS) from 9 observational studies were included. The IVUS group exhibited a reduction in contrast agent volume (weighted mean difference -34.65 mL, 95% CI -54.73 to -14.57) and fluoroscopy time (weighted mean difference -6.13 minutes, 95% CI -11.10 to -1.15), with no difference in procedural time. The perioperative type I and III endoleak occurrences were similar (risk ratio 2.36, 95% CI 0.55 to 10.11; risk ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.09 to 5.77, respectively). Reintervention and mortality during follow-up were comparable (hazard ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.97; hazard ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.18, respectively). All the included studies had small risks of bias. In conclusion, this meta-analysis provides evidence that IVUS enables the safe deployment of TEVAR/EVAR with reduced contrast agent and radiation exposure.

Methods used to conceptualize dimensions of health equity impacts of public health interventions in systematic reviews

OBJECTIVES

Our aims were to, first, identify and summarize the use of methods, frameworks, and tools as a conceptual basis for investigating dimensions of equity impacts of public health interventions in systematic reviews including an equity focus. These include PROGRESS-Plus, which identifies key sociodemographic characteristics that determine health outcomes. Second, we aimed to document challenges and opportunities encountered in the application of such methods, as reported in systematic reviews.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a methodological study, comprising an overview of systematic reviews with a focus on, or that aimed to assess, the equity impacts of public health interventions. We used electronic searches of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Promoting Health Effectiveness Reviews (DoPHER), and the Finding Accessible Inequalities Research in Public Health Database, supplemented with automated searches of the OpenAlex dataset. An active learning algorithm was used to prioritize title-abstract records for manual screening against eligibility criteria. We extracted and analyzed a core dataset from a purposively selected sample of reviews, to summarize key characteristics and approaches to conceptualizing investigations of equity.

RESULTS

We assessed 322 full-text reports for eligibility, from which we included 120 reports of systematic reviews. PROGRESS-Plus was the only formalized framework used to conceptualize dimensions of equity impacts. Most reviews were able to apply their intended methods to at least some degree. Where intended methods were unable to be applied fully, this was usually because primary research studies did not report the necessary information. A general rationale for focusing on equity impacts was often included, but few reviews explicitly justified their focus on (or exclusion of) specific dimensions. In addition to practical challenges such as data not being available, authors highlighted significant measurement and conceptual issues with applying these methods which may impair the ability to investigate and interpret differential impacts within and between studies. These issues included investigating constructs that lack standardized operationalization and measurement, and the complex nature of differential impacts, with dimensions that may interact with one another, as well as with particular temporal, personal, social or geographic contexts.

CONCLUSION

PROGRESS-Plus is the predominant framework used in systematic reviews to conceptualize differential impacts of public health interventions by dimensions of equity. It appears sufficiently broad to encompass dimensions of equity examined in most investigations of this kind. However, PROGRESS-Plus does not necessarily ensure or guide critical thinking about more complex pathways, including interactions between dimensions of equity, and with wider contextual factors, and important practical, measurement and conceptual challenges remain. The findings from investigations of equity impacts in systematic reviews could be made more useful through more explicitly rationalized and considered approaches to the design, conduct and reporting of both primary research and the reviews themselves.

Umeclidinium plus vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials

PURPOSE

Umeclidinium plus vilanterol (UMEC/VI) is an inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting beta2-agonist (LAMA/LABA), recently approved as once-daily maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of UMEC/VI compared with fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol (FP/SAL).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted by a trained medical research librarian across MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) for randomized controlled trials comparing UMEC/VI with FP/SAL in COPD patients. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. The primary outcome was 0-24 h weighted mean (wm) forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1), trough FEV1. The secondary outcomes were other lung functions, symptoms, quality of life, and safety.

RESULTS

Three studies with 2119 patients were included in the meta-analysis. UMEC/VI showed improvement in 0-24 h wm FEV1 (mean difference (MD) 0.08 L, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.10, P < 0.01, moderate quality) and trough FEV1 (MD 0.09 L, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.11, P < 0.01, moderate quality) in comparison with FP/SAL. UMEC/VI statistically significantly improved all other lung functions compared with FP/SAL. However, there were no significant differences between UMEC/VI and FP/SAL in rescue-medication use, symptomatic endpoints, and health outcomes. UMEC/VI also demonstrated fewer drug-related adverse effects (risk ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.82, P = 0.01, low quality).

CONCLUSIONS

UMEC/VI, when compared with FP/SAL, demonstrated significant improvements in lung functions with fewer drug-related adverse effects. However, the conclusion was limited by the scarcity of studies and long-term trials.

Efficacy and safety of Shen Gui capsules for chronic heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although Shen Gui capsules (SGCP) are widely used as an adjuvant treatment for chronic heart failure (CHF), their clinical efficacy and safety remain controversial.

Purpose

To assess the efficacy and safety of SGCP in the treatment of CHF through a systematic review and meta-analysis, to provide high-quality evidence for evidence-based medicine.

Methods

Seven databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing SGCP for CHF, from inception to 9 January 2023. RCT quality of evidence was evaluated using the Cochrane Handbook for the Evaluation of Intervention Systems to assess risk of bias and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. A meta-analysis with subgroup and sensitivity analyses was performed using Review Manager 5.4 and Stata 12.

Results

Nine RCTs representing 888 patients with CHF were included in the review. Meta-analysis revealed that SGCP combined with conventional heart failure therapy is more advantageous for improving left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF; mean difference (MD) = 5.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) (3.78, 6.74), p < 0.0000] and increasing effective rate [relative risk (RR) = 1.21, 95%CI (1.14, 1.29), p < 0.001] compared with conventional therapy alone. The experimental treatment also reduced brain natriuretic peptide [MD = -100.15, 95%CI (-157.83, -42.47), p = 0.0007], left ventricular end-diastolic diameter [MD = -1.93, 95%CI (-3.22, -0.64), p = 0.003], and hypersensitive C-reactive protein [MD = -2.70, 95%CI (-3.12,-2.28), p < 0.001] compared with the control group. However, there was not a statistically significant difference in tumor necrosis factor-α [MD = -14.16, 95%CI (-34.04, 5.73), p = 0.16] or left ventricular end-systolic diameter [MD = -1.56, 95%CI (-3.13, 0.01), p = 0.05]. Nor was there a statistically significant between-groups difference in incidence of adverse events (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

SGCP combined with conventional heart failure therapy can improve LVEF and increase the effective rate to safely treat patients with CHF. However, further high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings, due to the overall low quality of evidence in this literature.

Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/logout.php, PROSPERO [CRD42023390409].

Pharmacological prevention and treatment of opioid-induced constipation in cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related pain often requires opioid treatment with opioid-induced constipation (OIC) as its most frequent gastrointestinal side-effect. Both for prevention and treatment of OIC osmotic (e.g. polyethylene glycol) and stimulant (e.g. bisacodyl) laxatives are widely used. Newer drugs such as the peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) and naloxone in a fixed combination with oxycodone have become available for the management of OIC. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to give an overview of the scientific evidence on pharmacological strategies for the prevention and treatment of OIC in cancer patients.

METHODS

A systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library was completed from inception up to 22 October 2022. Randomized and non-randomized studies were systematically selected. Bowel function and adverse drug events were assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty trials (prevention: five RCTs and three cohort studies; treatment: ten RCTs and two comparative cohort studies) were included in the review. Regarding the prevention of OIC, three RCTs compared laxatives with other laxatives, finding no clear differences in effectivity of the laxatives used. One cohort study showed a significant benefit of magnesium oxide compared with no laxative. One RCT found a significant benefit for the PAMORA naldemedine compared with magnesium oxide. Preventive use of oxycodone/naloxone did not show a significant difference in two out of three other studies compared to oxycodone or fentanyl. A meta-analysis was not possible. Regarding the treatment of OIC, two RCTs compared laxatives, of which one RCT found that polyethylene glycol was significantly more effective than sennosides. Seven studies compared an opioid antagonist (naloxone, methylnaltrexone or naldemedine) with placebo and three studies compared different dosages of opioid antagonists. These studies with opioid antagonists were used for the meta-analysis. Oxycodone/naloxone showed a significant improvement in Bowel Function Index compared to oxycodone with laxatives (MD -13.68; 95 % CI -18.38 to -8.98; I2 = 58 %). Adverse drug event rates were similar amongst both groups, except for nausea in favour of oxycodone/naloxone (RR 0.51; 95 % CI 0.31-0.83; I2 = 0 %). Naldemedine (NAL) and methylnaltrexone (MNTX) demonstrated significantly higher response rates compared to placebo (NAL: RR 2.07, 95 % CI 1.64-2.61, I2 = 0 %; MNTX: RR 3.83, 95 % CI 2.81-5.22, I2 = 0 %). With regard to adverse events, abdominal pain was more present in treatment with methylnaltrexone and diarrhea was significantly more present in treatment with naldemedine. Different dosages of methylnaltrexone were not significantly different with regard to both efficacy and adverse drug event rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Magnesium oxide and naldemedine are most likely effective for prevention of OIC in cancer patients. Naloxone in a fixed combination with oxycodone, naldemedine and methylnaltrexone effectively treat OIC in cancer patients with acceptable adverse events. However, their effect has not been compared to standard (osmotic and stimulant) laxatives. More studies comparing standard laxatives with each other and with opioid antagonists are necessary before recommendations for clinical practice can be made.

Hypoalgesia after aerobic exercise in healthy subjects: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Exercise-Induced Hypoalgesia (EIH) refers to an acute reduced pain perception after exercise. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the effect of a single aerobic exercise session on local and remote EIH in healthy individuals, examining the role of exercise duration, intensity, and modality. Pressure pain thresholds (PPT) are used as the main measure, applying the Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE approach for certainty of evidence assessment. Mean differences (MD; Newton/cm²) for EIH effects were analysed. Thirteen studies with 23 exercises and 14 control interventions are included (498 participants). Most studies used bicycling, with only two including running/walking and one including rowing. EIH occurred both locally (MD = 3.1) and remotely (MD = 1.8), with high-intensity exercise having the largest effect (local: MD = 7.5; remote: MD = 3.0) followed by moderate intensity (local: MD = 3.1; remote: MD = 3.0). Low-intensity exercise had minimal impact. Neither long nor short exercise duration induced EIH. Bicycling was found to be effective in eliciting EIH, in contrast to the limited research observed in other modalities. The overall evidence quality was moderate with many studies showing unclear risk biases.

Pulse oximetry test for screening congenital heart diseases: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To determine the accuracy of the Pulse Oximetry Test (POT) in screening for Congenital Heart Diseases (CHD) in newborns in the first 48 hours of life.

METHOD

Systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy with meta-analysis. The selection of studies was carried out in June 2021. Studies were selected with newborns, in a hospital or home environment, without a previous diagnosis of CHD, regardless of gestational age at birth, who underwent POT within the first 48 hours after birth. Registration on the PROSPERO platform - CRD42021256286.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included, totaling a population of 388,491 newborns. POT demonstrated sensitivity of 47% (95% CI: 43% to 50%) and specificity of 98% (95% CI: 98% to 98%). Subgroup analyses were carried out according to the different testing period, inclusion of retests in protocols and population of premature newborns.

CONCLUSION

POT is a test with moderate sensitivity and high specificity. It is more effective when carried out within 24h - 48h of birth; in protocols that present retests, within two hours after the first measurement. It does not show satisfactory effectiveness for premature newborns.

Efficacy of antimicrobial and nutraceutical treatment for canine acute diarrhoea: A systematic review and meta-analysis for European Network for Optimization of Antimicrobial Therapy (ENOVAT) guidelines

Systemic antimicrobial treatments are commonly prescribed to dogs with acute diarrhoea, while nutraceuticals (prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics) are frequently administered as an alternative treatment. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effectiveness of antimicrobials and nutraceutical preparations for treatment of canine acute diarrhoea (CAD). The results of this study will be used to create evidence-based treatment guidelines. PICOs (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) were generated by a multidisciplinary expert panel taking into account opinions from stakeholders (general practitioners and dog owners). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. The systematic search yielded six randomised controlled trials (RCT) for antimicrobial treatment and six RCTs for nutraceutical treatment meeting the eligibility criteria. Categories of disease severity (mild, moderate, and severe) were created based on the presence of systemic signs and response to fluid therapy. Outcomes included duration of diarrhoea, duration of hospitalization, progression of disease, mortality, and adverse effects. High certainty evidence showed that antimicrobial treatment did not have a clinically relevant effect on any outcome in dogs with mild or moderate disease. Certainty of evidence was low for dogs with severe disease. Nutraceutical products did not show a clinically significant effect in shortening the duration of diarrhoea (based on very low to moderate certainty evidence). No adverse effects were reported in any of the studies.

A Methodological Framework for Meta-analysis and Clinical Interpretation of Subgroup Data: The Case of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events With GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and SGLT2 Inhibitors in Type 2 Diabetes

We present a methodological framework for conducting and interpreting subgroup meta-analyses. Methodological steps comprised evaluation of clinical heterogeneity regarding the definition of subpopulations, credibility assessment of subgroup meta-analysis, and translation of relative into absolute treatment effects. We used subgroup data from type 2 diabetes cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs) with glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for patients with established cardiovascular disease and those at high cardiovascular risk without manifest cardiovascular disease. First, we evaluated the variability in definitions of the subpopulations across CVOTs using major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) incidence in the placebo arm as a proxy for baseline cardiovascular risk. As baseline risk did not differ considerably across CVOTs, we conducted subgroup meta-analyses of hazard ratios (HRs) for MACE and assessed the credibility of a potential effect modification. Results suggested using the same overall relative effect for each of the two subpopulations (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.90, for GLP-1 receptor agonists and HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97, for SGLT2 inhibitors). Finally, we calculated 5-year absolute treatment effects (number of fewer patients with event per 1,000 patients). Treatment with GLP-1 receptor agonists resulted in 30 fewer patients with event in the subpopulation with established cardiovascular disease and 14 fewer patients with event in patients without manifest cardiovascular disease. For SGLT2 inhibitors, the respective absolute effects were 18 and 8 fewer patients with event per 1,000 patients. This framework can be applied to subgroup meta-analyses regardless of outcomes or modification variables.

Efficacy and tolerability of zuranolone in patients with depression: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background: As a novel antidepressant drug, zuranolone has been initially applied in treating depression. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of its administration in patients with depression. Methods: The Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane library databases were searched for available studies up to 1 Nov 2023. The primary outcome was the change on day 15 depression severity scores compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes included remission and response rates on day 15. Safety outcomes included incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and individual AEs. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to evaluate the ideal samplesize. Results: Six studies with 1884 patients were included. Zuranolone offered significantly greater changes in day 15 depression severity scores (mean difference = 2.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.36 to 3.49, p < 0.00001) compared to placebo; this was also observed at other time points. Differences in response (relative risk [RR] = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.54, p < 0.0001) and remission (RR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.85, p = 0.002) rates were also statistically significant. For safety outcomes, zuranolone group showed more incidence of TEAE than the placebo group (RR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.25, p = 0.0005, I 2 = 0%). As for individual AEs, significant differences were observed in dizziness (RR = 2.17, 95% CI: 1.22 to 3.86, p = 0.008) and somnolence (RR = 2.43, 95% CI: 1.35 to 4.37, p = 0.003. No significant difference was observed in other AEs. The result of TSA indicated that the cumulative curve crossed the conventional (Z = 1.96) boundary but not reach TSA boundary (RIS = 1910). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that zuranolone has a rapid short-term antidepressant effect during administration. Although more TEAEs were observed in zuranolone, most of them were slight and temporary. However, studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are needed. Systematic Review Registration: https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2023-5-0104/, identifier INPLASY202350104.

Sacubitril/Valsartan in the Treatment of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction Focusing on the Impact on the Quality of Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

There exists a paucity of research data reported by analyses performed on randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that encompass quality of life (QOL) and the aftermath for patients suffering from heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have been done to evaluate the drug sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with a clear focus on the effect it bestows on measures of physical exercise tolerance and quality of life. A thorough systematic search was done in databases including Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, and PubMed from 1 January 2010 to 1 January 2023. The search only included published RCTs on adult patients aged 18 and above, with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Data analysis was performed by using the software RevMan 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom). The included studies' bias risk was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool. The quality of evidence for the primary outcome was done using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. This systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs yielded 458 studies, of which eight randomized clinical trials were included and analyzed. The meta-analysis of the included trials shows that the I2 value is 61% (i.e., I2 > 50%), demonstrating a substantial heterogeneity within the studies. The left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) expressed in percentage was reported in the five studies, and thereby, a subgroup analysis that yielded a confidence interval (CI) of 95% had the standard mean difference of 0.02 (-0.02, 0.07). The trials had disparity between the reporting of effect on peak oxygen consumption (VO2), measured through cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) methods, six-minute walking test (6MWT), overall physical activity, and exercise capacity. Sacubitril/valsartan did not exponentially improve peak VO2 or 6MWT in these trials; however, the patient-reported data suggested that the quality of life was modestly influenced by the drug. A subgroup analysis was performed using the pooled effect value by the random effects model. The findings showed that the sacubitril/valsartan group significantly was better than the control group in improving HFrEF-associated health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that evaluated the drug sacubitril/valsartan in treating heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and focused on its tangible effect on the measures of physical exercise tolerance and quality of life. It depicts that the statistical scrutiny due to the lack of significant data and parity across studies did not impart significant improvement of either LVEF, peak VO2, or 6MWT with the use of sacubitril/valsartan; however, the reported exercise tolerance, including daytime physical activity, had a modest impact with the said drug. The pooled values demonstrated that the sacubitril/valsartan group significantly outperformed the control group in improving HFrEF HRQoL.

Acute Kidney Injury from Intravitreal Anti-vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Drugs: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Several observational studies have reported acute kidney injury from intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) drugs for retinal diseases. However, systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials on this critical topic are scant.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate acute kidney injury risk associated with intravitreal anti-VEGF drugs in patients with retinal diseases.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials on 12 July, 2023, and included randomized controlled trials reporting acute kidney injury between anti-VEGF drugs (e.g., aflibercept, bevacizumab, brolucizumab, and ranibizumab) and controls for retinal diseases (e.g., age-related macular degeneration, polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy, diabetic retinopathy/diabetic macular edema, retinal vein occlusion, and myopic choroidal neovascularization). Data were synthesized by a fixed-effects model for pooling odds ratios (ORs) using the Peto method.

RESULTS

We included 13 randomized controlled trials (four and nine trials for aflibercept and ranibizumab, respectively) with a total of 4282 participants. The meta-analysis indicated intravitreal anti-VEGF drugs did not increase the acute kidney injury risk, compared with controls (odds ratio [OR]: 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-2.04, I2: 0%), and no differences in the acute kidney injury risk were observed between different anti-VEGF drugs (OR: 1.10, 95% CI 0.27-4.43, I2: 0% for aflibercept; OR: 0.97, 95% CI 0.42-2.22, I2: 0% for ranibizumab) and between different retinal diseases (OR: 4.61, 95% CI 0.07-284.13, I2: not applicable for age-related macular degeneration; OR: 0.90, 95% CI 0.42-1.93, I2: 0% for diabetic retinopathy/diabetic macular edema; OR: 1.57, 95% CI 0.16-15.88, I2: 0% for retinal vein occlusion).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravitreal anti-VEGF drugs were not associated with an acute kidney injury risk, regardless of which anti-VEGF drugs (aflibercept or ranibizumab) or retinal diseases (age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy/diabetic macular edema, or retinal vein occlusion) were involved.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021267854.

Statistical heterogeneity in meta-analysis of hypertension and exercise training: A meta-review

We aim to evaluate the prevalence of reporting and the extent of statistical heterogeneity of systematic reviews with meta-analyses (SRMAs) of exercise training for hypertension and to provide practical recommendations for dealing with statistical heterogeneity. We systematically searched on four databases (from 2002 to September of 2023) for SRMAs comparing exercise interventions vs. a non-exercise control on blood pressure (BP) control in adults with hypertension. Fifty-nine SRMAs, with a median of 14 studies, were analysed. Cochran's Q (41%), I2 (24%), forest plots (44%), and particularly τ2 (54%) and prediction intervals (96.6%) frequently were not reported for the hypertension subgroup. The recalculated prediction intervals were discrepant (i.e., crossed the null effect) of significant 95% confidence intervals of most meta-analyses (systolic BP: 65%; diastolic BP: 92%). This suggests substantial heterogeneity across studies, which was often not acknowledged by authors' conclusions (78%). Consequently, downgrading the certainty of the available evidence may be justified alone due to heterogeneity across studies. Finally, we illustrate areas for improving I2 interpretation and provide practical recommendations on how to address statistical heterogeneity across all stages of a SRMA.

A Primer on Systematic Review and Meta-analysis in Diabetes Research

A systematic review is a rigorous process that involves identifying, selecting, and synthesizing available evidence pertaining to an a priori-defined research question. The resulting evidence base may be summarized qualitatively or through a quantitative analytic approach known as meta-analysis. Systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMAs) have risen in popularity across the scientific realm including diabetes research. Although well-conducted SRMAs are an indispensable tool in informing evidence-based medicine, the proliferation of SRMAs has led to many reviews of questionable quality and misleading conclusions. The objective of this article is to provide up-to-date knowledge and a comprehensive understanding of strengths and limitations of SRMAs. We first provide an overview of the SRMA process and offer ways to identify common pitfalls at key steps. We then describe best practices as well as evolving approaches to mitigate biases, improve transparency, and enhance rigor. We discuss several recent developments in SRMAs including individual-level meta-analyses, network meta-analyses, umbrella reviews, and prospective meta-analyses. Additionally, we outline several strategies that can be used to enhance quality of SRMAs and present key questions that authors, editors, and readers should consider in preparing or critically reviewing SRMAs.

Certainty of evidence, why?

Optimal clinical decision-making requires understanding of evidence regarding benefits, harms, and burdens of alternative management options. Rigorously conducted systematic reviews and meta-analyses offer accurate summaries of the evidence. However, such summaries may review only low-certainty evidence, in the process highlighting that no single decision is likely to be best for all patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach offers a systematic and transparent method for rating certainty of evidence in systematic reviews. In this paper, we will address the importance of assessing the certainty associated with bodies of evidence; explain how the GRADE system rates the certainty of evidence from systematic reviews; and present the GRADE evidence to decision framework for moving from evidence to strong or weak recommendations in clinical practice guidelines.

Grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation concept article 5: addressing intransitivity in a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This article describes considerations for addressing intransitivity when assessing the certainty of the evidence from network meta-analysis (NMA) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Intransitivity is induced by effect modification, that is, when the magnitude of the effect between an intervention and outcome differs depending on the level of another factor.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

To develop this GRADE concept paper, the lead authors conducted iterative discussions, computer simulations, and presentations to the GRADE project group and at GRADE working group meetings. The GRADE Working Group formally approved the article in July 2022.

RESULTS

NMA authors can have a higher or a lower threshold to rate down the certainty of the evidence due to intransitivity, which depends on the extent of their concerns regarding the trustworthiness of indirect comparisons, and their view of the relative problems with rating down excessively or insufficiently. NMA authors should consider three main factors when addressing intransitivity: the credibility of effect modification, the strength of the effect modification, and the distribution of effect modifiers across the direct comparisons. To avoid double counting limitations of the evidence, authors should consider the relationship between intransitivity and other GRADE domains.

CONCLUSION

NMA authors face theoretic and pragmatic challenges and in most situations need to assess intransitivity without the availability of empirical data. Thus, explicitness regarding perspective is crucial.