scholarly journals Diagnosis Value of the Serum Amyloid A Test in Neonatal Sepsis: A Meta-Analysis

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haining Yuan ◽  
Jie Huang ◽  
Bokun Lv ◽  
Wenying Yan ◽  
Guang Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neonatal Sepsis ◽  
Serum Amyloid A ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Serum Amyloid ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Global Public Health ◽  
Amyloid A ◽  
Public Health Challenge ◽  
The Cochrane Library

Neonatal sepsis (NS), a common disorder for humans, is recognized as a leading global public health challenge. This meta-analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of the serum amyloid A (SAA) test for diagnosing NS. The studies that evaluated the SAA test as a diagnotic marker were searched in Pubmed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Google Network between January 1996 and June 2013. A total of nine studies including 823 neonates were included in our meta-analysis. Quality of each study was evaluated by the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies tool (QUADAS). The SAA test showed moderate accuracy in the diagnosis of NS both at the first suspicion of sepsis and 8–96 h after the sepsis onset, both withQ*=0.91, which is similar to the PCT and CRP tests for the diagnosis of NS in the same period. Heterogeneity between studies was also explained by cut-off point, SAA assay, and age of included neonates. On the basis of our meta-analysis, therefore, SAA could be promising and meaningful in the diagnosis of NS.

Association between serum amyloid A levels and cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 94 (1115) ◽  
pp. 499-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jielin Zhou ◽  
Jie Sheng ◽  
Yong Fan ◽  
Xingmeng Zhu ◽  
Qi Tao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Serum Amyloid A ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Serum Amyloid ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Amyloid A ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
And Control

ObjectiveIncreased serum amyloid A (SAA) levels have been investigated in various human malignancies, but a consistent perspective has not been established to date. This study systematically reviewed the association between SAA levels and cancers.MethodsCochrane Library, PubMed and Embase were carefully searched for available studies. The following keywords were used in database searches: ‘serum amyloid A’, ‘SAA’, ‘cancer’, ‘tumour’, ‘carcinoma’, ‘nubble’, ‘knurl’ and ‘lump’. Pooled standard mean differences (SMDs) with corresponding 95% CIs were calculated using random-effects model analysis.ResultsTwenty studies, which contained 3682 cancer cases and 2424 healthy controls, were identified in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Our study suggested that the average SAA concentrations in the case groups were significantly higher than those in control groups (SMD 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.00, p<0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed that continent, age and cancer location were associated with SAA level differences between case groups and control groups. Sensitivity analyses showed the robustness and credibility of our results. In addition, we further stratified analyses for cancer stages and found that the concentrations of SAA increased gradually with the aggravation of cancer stages.ConclusionHigh circulating SAA levels were markedly associated with the developing risks of cancer, especially for participants from Asia, Oceania and Europe, or subject age more than 50, or locations in oesophageal squamous cell, ovarian, breast, lung, renal and gastric cancers. In addition, our study found that the concentrations of SAA increased with the severity of cancer stages.

scholarly journals Laboratory findings in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Karimian ◽  
Amirreza Jamshidbeigi ◽  
Gholamreza Badfar ◽  
Milad Azami
Keyword(s):  
Interleukin 6 ◽  
Laboratory Tests ◽  
Serum Amyloid A ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Elevated Serum ◽  
Serum Amyloid ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Laboratory Findings ◽  
Amyloid A ◽  
D Dimer

AbstractBackgroundIn early December 2019, the first patient with COVID-19 pneumonia was found in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. Recent studies have suggested the role of primary laboratory tests in addition to clinical symptoms for suspected patients, which play a significant role in the diagnosis of COVID-19. Therefore, the present study was conducted to evaluate laboratory findings in COVID-19 patients.Data SourcesPubMed/Medline, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science (ISI), Cochrane Library, Ovid, Science Direct, CINAHL and EBSCO.Study SelectionCross-sectional of adverse outcomes stratified by the status of ICLs were selected.Data ExtractionThe prevalence of available variables for laboratory tests were extracted.ResultsFinally, 52 studies involving 5490 patients with COVID-19 entered the meta-analysis process. The prevalence of leukopenia, lymphopenia, elevated c-reactive protein (CRP), elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), elevated serum amyloid A, elevated ferritin was estimated to be 20.9% (95%CI: 17.9-24.3), 51.6% (95%CI: 44.0-59.1), 63.6% (95%CI: 57.0-69.8), 62.5% (95%CI: 50.1-73.5), 63.6% (95%CI: 57.0-69.8), 62.5% (95%CI: 50.1-73.5), 74.7% (95%CI: 50.0-89.7), and 72.6% (95%CI: 58.1-83.5), respectively. The prevalence of elevated interleukin-6 was 59.9% (95%CI: 48.2-70.5), CD3 was 68.3% (95%CI: 50.1-82.2), reduced CD4 was 62.0% (95%CI: 51.1-71.6), reduced CD8 was 42.7% (95%CI: 32.2-53.9). The prevalence of elevated troponin-I was 20.6% (95%CI: 9.0-40.5), elevated creatine kinase-MB (CKMB) was 14.7% (95%CI: 7.1-28.0), elevated brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) was 48.9% (95%CI: 30.4-67.7), elevated blood urea nitrogen was 13.1% (95%CI: 6.6-24.4),, elevated creatinine was 7.2% (95%CI: 4.4-11.8), elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) was 53.1% (95%CI: 43.6-62.4), hyperglycemia was 41.1% (95% CI: 28.2-55.5), elevated total bilirubin was 48.9% (95%CI: 30.4-67.7), reduced albumin was 54.7% (95%CI: 38.1-70.2), reduced pre-albumin was 49.0% (95%CI: 26.6-71.8), and reduced PT was 53.1% (95% CI: 43.6-62.4), and D-dimer was 44.9% (95%CI: 31.0-59.6).ConclusionThis study provides a comprehensive description of laboratory characteristics in patients with COVID-19. The results show that lymphopenia, elevated CRP, elevated ESR, elevated ferritin, elevated serum amyloid A, elevated BNP, reduced albumin, reduced pre-albumin, reduced CD3, reduced CD4, reduced CD8, elevated D-dimer, reduced PT, elevated interleukin-2, elevated interleukin-6, elevated LDH and hyperglycemia are the common findings at the time of admission.

scholarly journals Lumbar Roll Usage While Sitting Reduces the Forward Head Posture in Healthy Individuals: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (10) ◽  
pp. 5171
Author(s):  
Yusuke Handa ◽  
Kenya Okada ◽  
Hiroshi Takasaki
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grade System ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Forward Head Posture ◽  
Quality Of Evidence ◽  
Head Posture ◽  
Head Extension ◽  
The Cochrane Library

This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated whether the use of a lumbar roll reduced forward head posture (FHP) while sitting among individuals with or without musculoskeletal disorders. EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched from their inception to August 2020. The quality of evidence for variables used in the meta-analysis was determined using the GRADE system. Five studies satisfied the criteria for data analysis. All studies included individuals without any spinal symptoms. Data from five studies on neck angle showed a statistically significant (p = 0.02) overall effect (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.77), indicating a lesser neck flexion angle while sitting with a lumbar roll than without it. Data from two studies on head angle showed a statistically significant (p = 0.04) overall effect (SMD = 0.47), indicating a lesser head extension angle while sitting with a lumbar roll than without it. In each meta-analysis, the quality of evidence was very low in the GRADE system. The use of a lumbar roll while sitting reduced FHP among individuals without spinal symptoms.

scholarly journals Traditional Chinese Herb Combined with Surgery versus Surgery for Varicocele Infertility: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rong-liang Dun ◽  
Min Yao ◽  
Long Yang ◽  
Xue-jun Cui ◽  
Jian-min Mao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chinese Herb ◽  
Chinese Herbs ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Dichotomous Data ◽  
Surgery Group ◽  
Traditional Chinese Herb ◽  
The Cochrane Library

Objective. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review to assess the effectiveness and safety of traditional Chinese herb combined with surgery for male varicocele infertility compared to surgery.Methods. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) data of traditional Chinese herbs combined with surgery for male varicocele fertility versus surgery were collected by searching the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Chinese databases. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Handbook. Study outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data.Results. Seventeen of 72 potentially relevant trials met the inclusion criteria. The methodological qualities of the RCTs were low. Compared with the surgery group, the traditional Chinese herb combined with surgery group had superiority in pregnancy rate at 3-month (RR=1.76, andP=0.008), 6-month (RR=1.58, andP=0.0005), and 2-year (RR=1.58, andP=0.0005) follow-ups. No RCT was found to describe the side effects.Conclusion. On considering the low methodological quality of RCTs, there was no enough evidence on traditional Chinese herb with surgery for male varicocele infertility, and more high-quality RCTs of large sample sizes are required.

Outcomes of digital biomarker-based interventions: protocol for a systematic review of systematic reviews (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hossein Motahari-Nezhad ◽  
Márta Péntek ◽  
László Gulácsi ◽  
Zsombor Zrubka
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Clinical Benefits ◽  
The Cochrane Library ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Digital Biomarkers

BACKGROUND Digital biomarkers are defined as objective, quantifiable physiological and behavioral data that are collected and measured by means of digital devices such as portables, wearables, implantables or digestibles. For their widespread adoption in publicly financed healthcare systems, it is important to understand how their benefits translate into improved patient outcomes, which is essential for demonstrating their value. OBJECTIVE To assess the quality and strength of evidence of the impact of digital biomarkers on clinical outcomes compared to interventions without digital biomarkers, reported in systematic reviews. METHODS A comprehensive search for 2019-2020 will be conducted in the PubMed and the Cochrane Library using keywords related to digital biomarkers and a filter for systematic reviews. Original full-text English publications of systematic reviews comparing clinical outcomes of interventions with and without digital biomarkers via meta-analysis will be included. The AMSTAR-2 tool will be used to assess the methodological quality of reviews. To assess the quality of evidence, we will evaluate systematic reviews using the GRADE tool. To detect the possible presence of reporting bias, we will record whether the protocol of the systematic reviews was published before the start of the study. A qualitative summary of results by digital biomarker technology and outcome will be provided. RESULTS This protocol was submitted before data collection. The next steps in this review will be initiated after the protocol is accepted for publication. CONCLUSIONS Our study will provide a comprehensive summary of the highest level of evidence available on digital biomarker interventions. Our results will help identify clinical areas where the use of digital biomarkers leads to favorable clinical outcomes. In addition, our findings will highlight areas of evidence gaps where the clinical benefits of digital biomarkers have not yet been demonstrated.

Evaluation of serum amyloid A protein as a marker in neonatal sepsis

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 1094
Author(s):  
OsamaM Omran ◽  
GhadaM Elmashad ◽  
HananM Elsayed ◽  
ZeinA Omar ◽  
EmanA Badr
Keyword(s):  
Neonatal Sepsis ◽  
Serum Amyloid A ◽  
Serum Amyloid ◽  
Amyloid A ◽  
Serum Amyloid A Protein
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document