Intravenous Liposomal Amphotericin B Efficacy and Safety for Cutaneous and Mucosal Leishmaniasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Tegumentary leishmaniasis is often subject to limited funding, underpowered studies, and a paucity of high-quality interventional studies. Intravenous liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB) has been increasingly used to treat cutaneous and mucosal leishmaniasis (CL and ML, respectively) despite the lack of well-conducted interventional studies. We conducted a systematic review to consolidate the descriptive evidence on the efficacy and safety of L-AmB in treating CL and ML.

Methods

Several online databases and the reference lists of included studies were searched to extract data from 132 studies comprising both case reports and case series. The population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design strategy and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were used.

Results

Of 132 studies included, 92 were case reports and 40 were case series. Of the 92 cases, 65 (82.3%) were considered cured after receiving L-AmB as part of their treatment regimen. Twenty-one of the 92 (22.8%) cases reported adverse reactions to L-AmB. A pooled cure rate of 87.0% (95% CI, 79.0%-92.0%) was reported for the 38 case series that reported on treatment efficacy; 40.7% of the cases were associated with an adverse reaction.

Conclusions

Observational data on cure rates using L-AmB suggest efficacy between 80% and 90%, similar to rates reported for other antileishmanial drugs. The highest efficacy rates were observed when a single cycle of L-AmB was administered to patients with mild-moderate CL and ML. The limitations of this study include the heterogeneity observed among the included studies and the increased likelihood of publication bias associated with the inclusion of case reports and case series. This systematic review further illustrates the need for high-quality comparative trials of intravenous L-AmB for the treatment of tegumentary leishmaniasis.

Interventions to Improve Uptake of Direct-Acting Antivirals for Hepatitis C Virus in Priority Populations: A Systematic Review

Background & Objective

Access to Hepatitis C (HCV) care remains suboptimal. This systematic review sought to identify existing interventions designed to improve direct-acting antiviral (DAA) uptake among HCV infected women, people who inject drugs (PWID), men who have sex with men (MSM), and Indigenous peoples.

Methods

Studies published in high- and middle-income countries were retrieved from eight electronic databases and gray literature (e.g., articles, research reports, theses, abstracts) were screened by two independent reviewers. Identified interventions were summarized using textual narrative synthesis.

Results

After screening 3,139 records, 39 studies were included (11 controlled comparative studies; 36 from high-income countries). Three groups of interventions were identified: interventions involving patients; providers; or the healthcare system. Interventions directed to patients included care co-ordination, accelerated DAA initiation, and patient education. Interventions involving providers included provider education, telemedicine, multidisciplinary teams, and general practitioner-led care. System-based interventions comprised DAA universal access policies and offering HCV services in four settings (primary care, secondary care, tertiary care, and community settings). Most studies (30/39) described complex interventions, i.e., those with two or more strategies combined. Most interventions (37/39) were tailored to, or studied among, PWID. Only one study described an intervention that was aimed at women.

Conclusions

Combining multiple interventions is a common approach for supporting DAA initiation. Three main research gaps were identified, specifically, a lack of: (1) controlled trials estimating the individual or combined effects of interventions on DAA uptake; (2) studies in middle-income countries; and (3) interventions tailored to women, MSM, and Indigenous people.

A scoping review of malnutrition in patients undergoing interventions for peripheral arterial disease

BACKGROUND

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is associated with comorbid conditions and frailty. The role of pre-operative nutrition in these patients with PAD is not well characterized. This scoping review sought to describe the prevalence and prognostic implications of pre-operative malnutrition in patients undergoing vascular interventions for claudication or critical limb threatening ischemia (CLTI).

METHODS

Studies were systematically searched across 6 databases from inception to August 2021. Studies focusing on patients with claudication or CLTI undergoing open or endovascular procedures were included if pre-operative nutrition was measured and correlated with a clinical outcome.

RESULTS

Of 4186 records identified, 24 studies addressed the prevalence or prognostic impact of malnutrition in patients undergoing interventions for PAD. The proportion of women included in these studies ranged from 6% to 58%. The prevalence of pre-operative malnutrition ranged from 14.6% to 72%, and notably 7 different malnutrition assessments were used in these studies. Across all scales, pre-operative malnutrition was associated with at least one of the following outcomes: mortality, post-operative complications, length of stay, readmission rates, as well as delayed wound healing.

CONCLUSION

There are a variety of tools used to measure malnutrition in patients undergoing interventions for PAD. Our findings suggest that pre-operative malnutrition is associated with adverse clinical outcomes in patients undergoing open and endovascular procedures for claudication or CLTI, and there is lack of consensus on which tool to use. Clinicians and surgeons should be sensitized to the importance of assessing malnutrition preoperatively in adults undergoing interventions for PAD.

The role of renal resistive index as a prognostic tool in kidney transplantation: a systematic review

Background

In kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), observational data have reported conflicting findings about the utility of renal resistive index (RRI) in determining outcomes. We aimed to synthesize the current literature and determine the prognostic role of RRI in KTRs.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review to assess the role of RRI in predicting death, graft failure, graft function, and proteinuria. Of the 934 titles/abstracts reviewed, 26 studies were included. There was significant heterogeneity in RRI measurements and thresholds as well as in analytic methods and a meta-analysis could not be performed.

Results

All included studies were observational and included 7049 KTRs. Eight studies analyzed death, of which five reported a significant association with higher RRI. In the remaining three, small sample sizes and lower/multiple RRI thresholds may have limited detection of a statistically significant difference. Three studies investigated all-cause graft failure and an association with RRI was reported but varied by time of RRI measurement. Three out of five studies that analyzed a composite of patient and graft outcomes reported an association with RRI. Evidence analyzing death-censored graft failure, graft failure (unclear if death-censored or all-cause), measures of graft function, and proteinuria were conflicting. Most studies had a moderate to high risk of bias.

Conclusions

RRI likely has a prognostic role in predicting patient outcomes, reflecting patient systemic vascular disease burden rather than graft hemodynamics. Since cardiovascular diseases are a major cause of death and graft loss, RRI may be explored as a non-invasive tool to risk stratify KTRs.

Do postoperative telemedicine interventions with a communication feature reduce emergency department visits and readmissions?-a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Emergency department (ED) visits and readmissions after surgery are common and represent a significant cost-burden on the healthcare system. A notable portion of these unplanned visits are the result of expected complications or normal recovery after surgery, suggesting that improved coordination and communication in the outpatient setting could potentially prevent these. Telemedicine can improve patient-physician communication and as such may have a role in limiting unplanned emergency department visits and readmissions in postoperative patients.

METHODS

Major electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in surgical patients examining the effect of postoperative telemedicine interventions with a communication feature on 30-day readmissions and emergency department visits as compared to current standard postoperative follow-up. All surgical subspecialties were included. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility, extracted data, and evaluated risk of bias using standardized tools. Our primary outcomes of interest were 30-day ED visits and readmissions. Our secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction with the intervention.

RESULTS

29 studies were included in the final analysis. Fourteen studies were RCTs, and the remaining fifteen were cohort studies. Eighteen studies reported 30-day ED visit as an outcome. There was no overall reduction in 30-day ED visit in the telemedicine group (RR: 0.89, 95%CI: 0.70-1.12). Twenty-two studies reported 30-day readmission as an outcome. The overall pooled estimate did not show a difference in this outcome (RR: 0.90, 95%CI: 0.74-1.09). Fifteen studies reported a metric of patient satisfaction regarding utilization of the telemedicine intervention. All studies demonstrated high levels of satisfaction (> 80%) with the telemedicine intervention.

DISCUSSION

This review fails to demonstrate a clear reduction ED visits and readmissions to support use of a telemedicine intervention across the board. This may be in part explained by significant heterogeneity in the proportions of potentially preventable visits in each surgical specialty. As such, targeting interventions to specific surgical settings may prove most useful.

Intravenous liposomal amphotericin B efficacy and safety for cutaneous and mucosal leishmaniasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of cutaneous and mucosal leishmaniasis (CL and ML, respectively) must be individualised as there is no universal therapeutic approach. Intravenous liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB) is an accessible and relatively safe treatment that has been increasingly used for the treatment of CL and ML. While several descriptive studies have been published on the efficacy and safety of L-AmB, there are no interventional studies. Moreover, the findings from published studies have not yet been integrated and synthesised. Therefore, we aim to evaluate and consolidate the descriptive evidence on the efficacy and the safety of Intravenous L-AmB treatment for CL and ML in both the New and Old World.

METHODS AND ANALYSES

A systematic review of all relevant study types with no restriction on date or language of publication will be conducted. Online databases including MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, EBSCO, Scopus, Ovid and WHO databases were searched on 3 April 2020. The search included all study types that assess Intravenous L-AmB treatment for CL and ML in humans. The Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome and Study Design strategy and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines will be used to determine which studies will be selected for final inclusion. The quality of included case series and case reports will be assessed using modified quality assessment tools. A narrative synthesis of the findings will be provided and the primary outcome and secondary outcome of interest, response rate and adverse events rate, respectively, and the 95% CI will be ascertained. Estimates from individual studies will be pooled using random-effects model.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This systematic review does not require formal ethical approval since no primary data will be collected. Findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and relevant conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020173440.

Comparative effectiveness of amphotericin B, azoles and echinocandins in the treatment of candidemia and invasive candidiasis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND + OBJECTIVES: The echinocandins, amphotericin B preparations, voriconazole and fluconazole are approved for the treatment of invasive candidiasis, though it remains unclear which agent is most effective. In order to answer this question, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which evaluated these agents in comparison.

METHODS

Four electronic databases were searched from database inception to 8 October 2020. RCTs comparing triazoles, echinocandins or amphotericin B for the treatment of invasive candidiasis or candidemia were included. Random effect Bayesian network meta-analysis methods were used to compare treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs met inclusion criteria. Of the 3528 patients included from these trials, 1531 were randomised to receive an echinocandin, 944 to amphotericin B and 1053 to a triazole. For all forms of invasive candidiasis, echinocandins were associated with the highest rate of treatment success when compared to amphotericin B (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.04-1.92) and the triazoles (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.35-2.51). Rank probability analysis favoured echinocandins as the most effective choice 98% of the time. Overall survival did not significantly differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with invasive candidiasis, echinocandins had the best clinical outcomes and should remain the first-line agents in the treatment of invasive candidiasis.