Effectiveness of negative pressure wound therapy in patients with challenging wounds: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Controversy exists regarding the use of NPWT for wound healing.

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the effectiveness of NPWT compared with conventional treatment in the management of different wound types, including acute and chronic wounds.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, EMBASE, EBSCO, Ovid, and Web of Science were searched, from database inception up to October 2021, for relevant studies comparing NPWT with conventional treatment for wound healing. Primary outcomes included time to healing, wound healing rate, and duration of treatment. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality rate. Pooled analysis of the outcomes data is presented as SMD (95% CI) for continuous data and OR (95% CI) for dichotomous data.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies (3064 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. NPWT was associated with shorter time to healing (SMD, -0.79; 95% CI, -1.22 to -0.37), shorter duration of treatment (SMD, -1.24; 95% CI, -1.92 to -0.56), and higher rate of wound healing (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.49-2.83) compared with control. NPWT was also associated with a lower incidence of adverse events (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.77) and a lower 30-day mortality rate (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.12-0.56). There were no significant differences between NPWT and control regarding hospital stay (SMD, -0.52; 95% CI, -1.06 to 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

NPWT is seemingly associated with better wound healing outcomes compared with conventional therapy. However, the data should be interpreted with substantial caution given limitations such as high heterogeneity between studies and the small sample size of the included studies.

Predictors of severity and development of critical illness of Egyptian COVID-19 patients: A multicenter study

Objectives

We conducted the present multicenter, retrospective study to assess the epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics associated with critical illness among patients with COVID-19 from Egypt.

Methods

The present study was a multicenter, retrospective study that retrieved the data of all Egyptian cases with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to hospitals affiliated to the General Organization for Teaching Hospitals and Institutes (GOTHI) through the period from March to July 2020. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was based on a positive reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) laboratory test.

Results

This retrospective study included 2724 COVID-19 patients, of whom 423 (15.52%) were critically ill. Approximately 45.86% of the critical group aged above 60 years, compared to 39.59% in the non-critical group (p = 0.016). Multivariate analysis showed that many factors were predictors of critically illness, including age >60 years (OR = 1.30, 95% CI [1.05, 1.61], p = 0.014), low oxygen saturation (OR = 0.93, 95% CI [0.91, 0.95], p<0.001), low Glasgow coma scale (OR = 0.75, 95% CI [0.67, 0.84], p<0.001), diabetes (OR = 1.62, 95% CI [1.26, 2.08], p<0.001), cancer (OR = 2.47, 95% CI [1.41, 4.35], p = 0.002), and serum ferritin (OR = 1.004, 95% CI [1.0003, 1.008], p = 0.031).

Conclusion

In the present report, we demonstrated that many factors are associated with COVID-19 critical illness, including older age groups, fatigue, elevated temperature, increased pulse, lower oxygen saturation, the preexistence of diabetes, malignancies, cardiovascular disease, renal diseases, and pulmonary disease. Moreover, elevated serum levels of ALT, AST, and ferritin are associated with worse outcomes. Further studies are required to identify independent predictors of mortality for patients with COVID-19.

Treatment of Helicobacter pylori in the Arab world: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.. [DOI: 10.22541/au.162184164.44494990/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

Purpose: We aimed to conduct an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to estimate the efficacy of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) treatment strategies in Arab countries. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), EBSCO, and EMBASE from inception to July 18, 2020, using boolean operators. Retrieved articles were screened, and relevant data were extracted. We used R programming software to analyze extracted data. Results: Fifty-four articles (n= 7829 patients) were included in the NMA. Pooled overall analysis demonstrated that adjuvant therapy (standard triple or sequential therapy plus another adjuvant drug) was the best treatment with higher odds of eradication rate [OR= 6.42, 95% CI (1.37: 30.05), P-score= 0.21]. Moreover, Seqential therapy (SQT) and Quinolone based therapy (QBT) were associated with higher eradication rate compared to other regimens [OR= 4.83, 95% CI (1.49: 15.64), P-score= 0.30] and [OR= 4.32, 95% CI (1.15: 16.16), P-score= 0.36], respectively. In adults, the efficacy of QBT was higher than other stratigies in terms of H. pylori eradication [OR= 2.00, 95% CI (1.09, 3.69), P score= 0.19]. In naïve population, QBT and SQT were associated with substantial eradication rate [OR= 1.94, 95% CI (1.19: 3.16), P score=0.19] and [OR= 1.66, 95% CI (1.10: 2.50), P score=0.33], respectively. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that standard triple or sequential therapy plus another adjuvant drug, QBT and SQT therapies were the most effective regimens for eradicating H.pylori in Arab countries.

An Updated Review on COVID-19

Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic has affected more than seven million individuals in 213 countries worldwide with a basic reproduction number ranging from 1.5 to 3.5 and an estimated case fatality rate ranging from 2% to 7%. A substantial proportion of COVID-19 patients are asymptomatic; however, symptomatic cases might present with fever, cough, and dyspnoea or severe symptoms up to acute respiratory distress syndrome. Currently, RNA RT-PCR is the screening tool, while bilateral chest CT is the confirmatory clinical diagnostic test. Several drugs have been repurposed to treat COVID-19, including chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin, lopinavir/ritonavir combination, remdesivir, favipiravir, tocilizumab, and EIDD-1931. Recently, Remdesivir gained FDA emergency approval based on promising early findings from the interim analysis of 1063 patients. The recently developed serology testing for SARSCoV-2 antibodies opened the door to evaluate the actual burden of the disease and to determine the rate of the population who have been previously infected (or developed immunity). This review article summarizes current data on the COVID-19 pandemic starting from the early outbreak, viral structure and origin, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, discharge criteria, and future research.