scholarly journals Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care natriuretic peptide testing for chronic heart failure in ambulatory care: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. k1450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn S Taylor ◽  
Jan Y Verbakel ◽  
Benjamin G Feakins ◽  
Christopher P Price ◽  
Rafael Perera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Heart Failure ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Ambulatory Care ◽  
Natriuretic Peptide ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of TCMI in Patients With Combined Coronary Heart Disease and Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penglu Wei ◽  
Kuo Yang ◽  
Dehuai Long ◽  
Yupei Tan ◽  
Wenlong Xing ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Brain Natriuretic Peptide ◽  
Natriuretic Peptide ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Effectiveness Rate

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of conventional treatments (CTs) to those that included traditional Chinese medicine injections (TCMIs) in patients with combined coronary heart disease and heart failure (CHD-HF).Methods: Eight electronic literature databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, Wanfang Database, Chinese Biomedical Database) were searched from their inceptions to May 18, 2021, to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes analyzed included the total effectiveness rate and adverse events (ADRs). The secondary outcomes analyzed included the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), and 6-min walk test (6MWT). Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess quality of the analyzed RCTs. Stata and OpenBUGS software were used to prior to the systematic review and network meta-analysis.Results: Sixty-one eligible trials involved 5,567 patients and one of the following 15 TCMIs: Shuxuetong, Shenmai, Shenfu, Shengmai, Danshenduofenyansuan, Danhong, Dazhuhongjingtian, Xinmailong, Dengzhanxixin, Gualoupi, Shuxuening, Xuesaitong, Yiqi Fumai, Shenqi Fuzheng, Huangqi. Network meta-analysis revealed that Shuxuetong injection + CT group was superior to CT only in improving the total effectiveness rate [odds ratio (OR): 7.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17–27.41]. Shenmai injection + CT was superior to CT only for LVEF (OR: 8.97, CI: 4.67–13.18), Xinmailong injection + CT was superior to CT only for NT-proBNP (OR: −317.70, CI: −331.10–303.10), Shenqi Fuzheng injection + CT was superior to CT only for BNP (OR: −257.30, CI: −308.40–242.80); and Danhong injection + CT was superior to CT only for 6MWT (OR: 84.40, CI: 62.62−106.20). Different TCMIs had different toxicity spectrums.Conclusion: TCMIs combined with CT are better than CT alone in treating CHD-HF. Different TCMIs improve different outcomes. Additional properly designed RCTs are needed to conduce a more refined comparison of various TCMIs.Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], identifier [CRD42021258263].

scholarly journals The diagnostic accuracy of isothermal nucleic acid point-of-care tests for human coronaviruses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pakpoom Subsoontorn ◽  
Manupat Lohitnavy ◽  
Chuenjid Kongkaew
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Isothermal Amplification ◽  
Diagnostic Test Accuracy ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Index Test ◽  
Point Of Care Tests

AbstractMany recent studies reported coronavirus point-of-care tests (POCTs) based on isothermal amplification. However, the performances of these tests have not been systematically evaluated. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy was used as a guideline for conducting this systematic review. We searched peer-reviewed and preprint articles in PubMed, BioRxiv and MedRxiv up to 28 September 2020 to identify studies that provide data to calculate sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) was applied for assessing quality of included studies and Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) was followed for reporting. We included 81 studies from 65 research articles on POCTs of SARS, MERS and COVID-19. Most studies had high risk of patient selection and index test bias but low risk in other domains. Diagnostic specificities were high (> 0.95) for included studies while sensitivities varied depending on type of assays and sample used. Most studies (n = 51) used reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) to diagnose coronaviruses. RT-LAMP of RNA purified from COVID-19 patient samples had pooled sensitivity at 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.96). RT-LAMP of crude samples had substantially lower sensitivity at 0.78 (95% CI: 0.65–0.87). Abbott ID Now performance was similar to RT-LAMP of crude samples. Diagnostic performances by CRISPR and RT-LAMP on purified RNA were similar. Other diagnostic platforms including RT- recombinase assisted amplification (RT-RAA) and SAMBA-II also offered high sensitivity (> 0.95). Future studies should focus on the use of un-bias patient cohorts, double-blinded index test and detection assays that do not require RNA extraction.

scholarly journals Natriuretic peptide-guided treatment for heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie McLellan ◽  
Clare R Bankhead ◽  
Jason L Oke ◽  
F D Richard Hobbs ◽  
Clare J Taylor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Natriuretic Peptide ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Individual Outcomes ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

BackgroundGUIDE-IT, the largest trial to date, published in August 2017, evaluating the effectiveness of natriuretic peptide (NP)-guided treatment of heart failure (HF), was stopped early for futility on a composite outcome. However, the reported effect sizes on individual outcomes of all-cause mortality and HF admissions are potentially clinically relevant.ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aims to combine all available trial level evidence to determine if NP-guided treatment of HF reduces all-cause mortality and HF admissions in patients with HF.Study selectionEight databases, no language restrictions, up to November 2017 were searched for all randomised controlled trials comparing NP-guided treatment versus clinical assessment alone in adult patients with HF. No language restrictions were applied. Publications were independently double screened and extracted. Fixed-effect meta-analyses were conducted.Findings89 papers were included, reporting 19 trials (4554 participants), average ages 62–80 years. Pooled risk ratio estimates for all-cause mortality (16 trials, 4063 participants) were 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.99 and 0.80, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.89 for HF admissions (11 trials, 2822 participants). Sensitivity analyses, restricted to low risk of bias, produced similar estimates, but were no longer statistically significant.ConclusionsConsidering all the evidence to date, the pooled effects suggest that NP-guided treatment is beneficial in reducing HF admissions and all-cause mortality. However, there is still insufficient high-quality evidence to make definitive recommendations on the use of NP-guided treatment in clinical practice.Trial registration numberSystematic Review Cochrane Database Number: CD008966.

Quality of life of chronic heart failure patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 993-1006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mandana Moradi ◽  
Fereshteh Daneshi ◽  
Razieh Behzadmehr ◽  
Hosien Rafiemanesh ◽  
Salehoddin Bouya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Heart Failure ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Heart Failure Patients
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document