scholarly journals Usefulness of surgical treatment for asymptomatic patients with extra-peritoneal desmoid-type fibromatosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (5) ◽  
pp. 574-580
Author(s):  
Munehisa Kito ◽  
Akira Ogose ◽  
Masahiro Yoshida ◽  
Yoshihiro Nishida
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Treatment Group ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Exacerbation Rate ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Non Surgical Treatment

Abstract Objective The purpose of this systematic review is to assess and compare the efficacy of surgical treatment for patients with asymptomatic extra-peritoneal desmoid-type fibromatosis to the wait-and-see policy by evaluating (1) the exacerbation rate (exacerbation; recurrence after surgery or progressive disease following non-surgical treatment) and (2) treatment-associated complications in extra-peritoneal desmoid-type fibromatosis. Methods We evaluated documents published between 1 January 1990 and 31 August 2017. The risk of bias in the selected literature was analyzed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. Quality of evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Results One prospective cohort study, four case–control studies and five case series studies were identified. Meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the exacerbation rate after treatment on one prospective cohort study and four case–control studies. In comparing surgical and non-surgical treatments, the exacerbation rate was significantly higher in the surgical treatment group (odds ratio: 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.01–1.73, P = 0.05). However, in the case series study, the recurrence rate was 23.4% for the surgical treatment group, while the progressive disease rate was 28.1% for the non-surgical treatment group. The postoperative complication rates associated with surgical treatment in the two studies were 20.8 and 17.2%, respectively. Conclusions When considering the exacerbation rate, non-surgical treatment might be appropriate for asymptomatic patients with extra-peritoneal desmoid-type fibromatosis. However, if patients with tumor-related symptoms opt for surgery, including those who face difficulties due to the presence of tumors, it is important to fully explain to them the possibility that the recurrence rate and treatment-associated functional failures may increase depending on the site of occurrence.

scholarly journals Is the Simplicity of the Evidence Pyramid Actually Detrimental for Understanding Evidence?

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette O'Connor
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Real World ◽  
Disease Risk ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Information Source ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Case Control Studies

The evidence pyramid for assessing the efficacy of interventions under real world conditions has been used in various forms for many years, and to a lesser extent the pyramid has been used for assessing evidence for disease risk factors. While acknowledging minor differences, many pyramids list the following information sources for interventions in decreasing order of “validity”: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials, randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case control studies, case series and case reports. The evidence pyramid is often used as a teaching aid to help clinicians and students visualise the concept that all studies might not have equal evidentiary value when evaluating real world efficacy.The rationale for the hierarchy of the pyramid is partially based on the potential for bias in some designs and partially based on the external validity of the information source. Designs with greater potential for bias “on average” are placed lower on the pyramid. The greater risk of bias means a greater risk that effect size estimates from studies lower on the pyramid may be systematically incorrect (overestimated or underestimated). As such, the evidence pyramid makes very broad statements about the design “on average”. Of course, for any particular study or topic, the pyramid may not be correct. Regardless, the generalisations described in the evidence pyramid have over the years been considered useful and use of the tool continues likely because of its simplicity. However, the validity of most pyramids that we have seen (and used ourselves, and published ourselves) is predicated on two potentially false concepts. The first potentially false concept conveyed by most evidence pyramids, is that there is only one case-control design and it is of lesser evidentiary value than cohort studies. The second potentially false concept conveyed by evidence pyramids is that the terms cohort, case control, and case series can be used to “filter” out studies of lower evidentiary value.In this presentation Annette discusses the validity of the evidence pyramid on the interpretation of evidence from primary research. She proposes a new way to think about evidence from primary studies using the framework for classifying epidemiologic studies proposed by Pearce (2012) based on incident and prevalent cases. This would also result in a rethinking of the current evidence pyramid.

Types of trials

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Harrison
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Randomized Controlled

This chapter describes types of trials as applied to Emergency Medicine, and in particular the Primary FRCEM examination. The chapter outlines the key details and advantages and disadvantages of case reports, case series, cohort studies, case–control studies, randomized controlled trials, crossover trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis. This chapter is laid out exactly following the RCEM syllabus, to allow easy reference and consolidation of learning.

scholarly journals Neurology and neuropsychiatry of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the early literature reveals frequent CNS manifestations and key emerging narratives

2021 ◽  
pp. jnnp-2021-326405
Author(s):  
Jonathan P Rogers ◽  
Cameron J Watson ◽  
James Badenoch ◽  
Benjamin Cross ◽  
Matthew Butler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neuropsychiatric Symptoms ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Early Literature ◽  
Cross Sectional Studies

There is accumulating evidence of the neurological and neuropsychiatric features of infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to describe the characteristics of the early literature and estimate point prevalences for neurological and neuropsychiatric manifestations. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL up to 18 July 2020 for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies and case series. Studies reporting prevalences of neurological or neuropsychiatric symptoms were synthesised into meta-analyses to estimate pooled prevalence. 13 292 records were screened by at least two authors to identify 215 included studies, of which there were 37 cohort studies, 15 case-control studies, 80 cross-sectional studies and 83 case series from 30 countries. 147 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The symptoms with the highest prevalence were anosmia (43.1% (95% CI 35.2% to 51.3%), n=15 975, 63 studies), weakness (40.0% (95% CI 27.9% to 53.5%), n=221, 3 studies), fatigue (37.8% (95% CI 31.6% to 44.4%), n=21 101, 67 studies), dysgeusia (37.2% (95% CI 29.8% to 45.3%), n=13 686, 52 studies), myalgia (25.1% (95% CI 19.8% to 31.3%), n=66 268, 76 studies), depression (23.0% (95% CI 11.8% to 40.2%), n=43 128, 10 studies), headache (20.7% (95% CI 16.1% to 26.1%), n=64 613, 84 studies), anxiety (15.9% (5.6% to 37.7%), n=42 566, 9 studies) and altered mental status (8.2% (95% CI 4.4% to 14.8%), n=49 326, 19 studies). Heterogeneity for most clinical manifestations was high. Neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms of COVID-19 in the pandemic’s early phase are varied and common. The neurological and psychiatric academic communities should develop systems to facilitate high-quality methodologies, including more rapid examination of the longitudinal course of neuropsychiatric complications of newly emerging diseases and their relationship to neuroimaging and inflammatory biomarkers.

scholarly journals The neurology and neuropsychiatry of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the early literature reveals frequent CNS manifestations and key emerging narratives

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan P Rogers ◽  
Cameron Watson ◽  
James Badenoch ◽  
Benjamin Cross ◽  
Matthew Butler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neuropsychiatric Symptoms ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Early Literature ◽  
Cross Sectional Studies

Objectives There is accumulating evidence of the neurological and neuropsychiatric features of infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to describe the characteristics of the early literature and estimate point prevalences for neurological and neuropsychiatric manifestations. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL up to 18 July 2020 for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies and case series. Studies reporting prevalences of neurological or neuropsychiatric symptoms were synthesised into meta-analyses to estimate pooled prevalence. Results 13,292 records were screened by at least two authors to identify 215 included studies, of which there were 37 cohort studies, 15 case-control studies, 80 cross-sectional studies and 83 case series from 30 countries. 147 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The symptoms with the highest prevalence were anosmia (43.1% [35.2-51.3], n=15,975, 63 studies), weakness (40.0% [27.9-53.5], n=221, 3 studies), fatigue (37.8% [31.6-44.4], n=21,101, 67 studies), dysgeusia (37.2% [30.0-45.3], n=13,686, 52 studies), myalgia (25.1% [19.8-31.3], n=66.268, 76 studies), depression (23.0 % [11.8-40.2], n=43,128, 10 studies), headache (20.7% [95% CI 16.1-26.1], n=64,613, 84 studies), anxiety (15.9% [5.6-37.7], n=42,566, 9 studies) and altered mental status (8.2% [4.4-14.8], n=49,326, 19 studies). Heterogeneity for most clinical manifestations was high. Conclusions Neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms of COVID-19 in the pandemic's early phase are varied and common. The neurological and psychiatric academic communities should develop systems to facilitate high-quality methodologies, including more rapid examination of the longitudinal course of neuropsychiatric complications of newly emerging diseases and their relationship to neuroimaging and inflammatory biomarkers.

scholarly journals Secondary injury and inflammation after intracerebral haemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis of molecular markers in patient brain tissue

2021 ◽  
pp. jnnp-2021-327098
Author(s):  
James JM Loan ◽  
Caoimhe Kirby ◽  
Katherine Emelianova ◽  
Owen R Dando ◽  
Michael TC Poon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Markers ◽  
Brain Tissue ◽  
Intracerebral Haemorrhage ◽  
Inflammatory Responses ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Interleukin 1Β ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Markers Of Inflammation

BackgroundInflammatory responses to intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) are potential therapeutic targets. We aimed to quantify molecular markers of inflammation in human brain tissue after ICH compared with controls using meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched OVID MEDLINE (1946–) and Embase (1974–) in June 2020 for studies that reported any measure of a molecular marker of inflammation in brain tissue from five or more adults after ICH. We assessed risk of bias using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (mNOS; mNOS score 0–9; 9 indicates low bias), extracted aggregate data, and used random effects meta-analysis to pool associations of molecules where more than two independent case–control studies reported the same outcome and Gene Ontology enrichment analysis to identify over-represented biological processes in pooled sets of differentially expressed molecules (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews ID: CRD42018110204).ResultsOf 7501 studies identified, 44 were included: 6 were case series and 38 were case–control studies (median mNOS score 4, IQR 3–5). We extracted data from 21 491 analyses of 20 951 molecules reported by 38 case–control studies. Only one molecule (interleukin-1β protein) was quantified in three case–control studies (127 ICH cases vs 41 ICH-free controls), which found increased abundance of interleukin-1β protein after ICH (corrected standardised mean difference 1.74, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.21, p=0.036, I2=46%). Processes associated with interleukin-1β signalling were enriched in sets of molecules that were more abundant after ICH.ConclusionInterleukin-1β abundance is increased after ICH, but analyses of other inflammatory molecules after ICH lack replication. Interleukin-1β pathway modulators may optimise inflammatory responses to ICH and merit testing in clinical trials.

Association between ALDH2 Gene Polymorphism and Late-onset Alzheimer Disease: An Up-to-date Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-111
Author(s):  
Haitao Liu ◽  
Wei Ge ◽  
Wei Chen ◽  
Xue Kong ◽  
Weiming Jian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Polymorphism ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Late Onset ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Positive Trend ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
Aldh2 Gene

Objectives: Previous case-control studies have focused on the relationship between ALDH2 gene polymorphism and late-onset Alzheimer's Disease (LOAD), but no definite unified conclusion has been reached. Therefore, the correlation between ALDH2 Glu504Lys polymorphism and LOAD remains controversial. To analyze the correlation between ALDH2 polymorphism and the risk of LOAD, we implemented this up-to-date meta-analysis to assess the probable association. Methods: Studies were searched through China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, China Biology Medicine, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Clinical- Trials.gov, Embase, and MEDLINE from January 1, 1994 to December 31, 2018, without any restrictions on language and ethnicity. Results: Five studies of 1057 LOAD patients and 1136 healthy controls met our criteria for the analysis. Statistically, the ALDH2 GA/AA genotype was not linked with raising LOAD risk (odds ratio (OR) = 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.96-2.28, p = 0.07). In subgroup analysis, the phenomenon that men with ALDH2*2 had higher risk for LOAD (OR = 1.72, 95%CI = 1.10-2.67, p = 0.02) was observed. Conclusions: This study comprehends only five existing case-control studies and the result is negative. The positive trend might appear when the sample size is enlarged. In the future, more large-scale casecontrol or cohort studies should be done to enhance the association between ALDH2 polymorphism and AD or other neurodegenerative diseases.

Respiratory disturbances in fibromyalgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case control studies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Araceli Ortiz-Rubio ◽  
Irene Torres-Sánchez ◽  
Irene Cabrera-Martos ◽  
Laura López-López ◽  
Janet Rodríguez-Torres ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Case Control Studies
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document