Project description:IntroductionA substantial proportion of patients with adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) suffer from worsening valvular dysfunction in adulthood. Transcatheter valve interventions can offer a therapeutic alternative to surgery for those at high surgical risk. There is emerging but limited data on transcatheter interventions for atrioventricular (AV) valve dysfunction in patients with ACHD.MethodsWe compiled an international collaborative multi-center registry focusing on adult patients with congenital heart disease undergoing transcatheter AV valve interventions (repair or replacement). Included were patients from three international centers who underwent procedures between 2016 and 2022. Demographic, clinical, and procedural data were compiled.ResultsNine patients with ACHD underwent AV valve interventions. The median age was 48 years (IQR (37; 56), 55% women). At baseline, seven patients (78%) were in NYHA functional class III and two (22%) were in NYHA functional class II. The diagnosis of ACHD varied. Three valve interventions were performed on the subpulmonary AV valve and six on the systemic AV valve. The primary valvular pathology was regurgitation (six patients, 78%). Five procedures were valve-in-valve interventions, and four procedures were transcatheter edge-to-edge repair procedures. There were no major complications or peri-procedural complications or peri-procedural mortality. One patient developed a suspected non-obstructive thrombus on the valve that was medically treated. One patient did not improve clinically following the procedure and underwent a heart transplant, one patient died 6 months following the procedure due to a cardiovascular implantable electronic device infection. At one year, six patients were in NYHA functional class I, and one patient was in NYHA functional class III. In conclusion, transcatheter AV heart valve interventions are feasible and safe procedures in carefully selected ACHD patients. These procedures can offer an effective treatment option in these younger patients with high surgical risk.

Project description:The impact of pharmacologic prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing neurosurgical intervention remains uncertain. We reviewed the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic compared with nonpharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in neurosurgical patients. Three databases were searched through April 2018, including those for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and for nonrandomized controlled studies (NRSs). Independent reviewers assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Seven RCTs and 3 NRSs proved eligible. No studies reported on symptomatic proximal and distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Two RCTs reported on screening-detected proximal and distal DVTs. We used the findings of these 2 RCTs as the closest surrogate outcomes to inform the proximal and distal DVT outcomes. These 2 RCTs suggest that pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis may decrease the risk of developing asymptomatic proximal DVT (relative risk [RR], 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30-0.84; low certainty). Findings were uncertain for mortality (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.57-2.86; low certainty), symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.03-27.42; very low certainty), asymptomatic distal DVT (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.27-1.08; very low certainty), and reoperation (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.06-2.84; very low certainty) outcomes. NRSs also reported uncertain findings for whether pharmacologic prophylaxis affects mortality (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.46-1.13; low certainty) and PE (RR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.01-3.76). For risk of bleeding, findings were uncertain in both RCTs (RR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.70-3.50; low certainty) and NRSs (RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.30-7.12; very low certainty). In patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures, low certainty of evidence suggests that pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis confers benefit for preventing asymptomatic (screening-detected) proximal DVT with very low certainty regarding its impact on patient-important outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundNeurocognitive impairments are common in patients with current or previously treated brain tumours, and such impairments can negatively affect patient outcomes including quality of life and survival. This systematic review aimed to identify and describe interventions used to ameliorate (improve) or prevent cognitive impairments in adults with brain tumours.MethodsWe performed a literature search of the Ovid MEDLINE, PsychINFO and PsycTESTS databases from commencement until September 2021.ResultsIn total, 9998 articles were identified by the search strategy; an additional 14 articles were identified through other sources. Of these, 35 randomised and nonrandomised studies were deemed to meet the inclusion/exclusion criteria of our review and were subsequently included for evaluation. A range of interventions were associated with positive effects on cognition, including pharmacological agents such as memantine, donepezil, methylphenidate, modafinil, ginkgo biloba and shenqi fuzheng, and nonpharmacological interventions such as general and cognitive rehabilitation, working memory training, Goal Management Training, aerobic exercise, virtual reality training combined with computer-assisted cognitive rehabilitation, hyperbaric oxygen therapy and semantic strategy training. However, most identified studies had a number of methodological limitations and were judged to be at moderate-to-high risk of bias. In addition, it remains unclear whether and to what extent the identified interventions lead to durable cognitive benefits after cessation of the intervention.ConclusionThe 35 studies identified in this systematic review have indicated potential cognitive benefits for a number of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions in patients with brain tumours. Study limitations were identified and further studies should focus on improved study reporting, methods to reduce bias and minimise participant drop-out and withdrawal where possible, and consider standardisation of methods and interventions across studies. Greater collaboration between centres could result in larger studies with standardised methods and outcome measures, and should be a focus of future research in the field.

Project description:BackgroundImproving the design of family planning (FP) interventions is essential to advancing gender equality, maternal health outcomes, and reproductive autonomy for both men and women. While progress has been made towards applying a rights-based approach to FP interventions in sub-Saharan Africa, the ethical implications of FP interventions has been underreported and underexplored. Several ethical challenges persist related to measuring success, choice, and target population.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review to understand if and how FP interventions published between 2000 and 2020 within sub-Saharan Africa address the ethical challenges raised within the literature. We identified a total of 1,652 papers, of which 40 were included in the review.ResultsOur review demonstrated that the majority of family planning interventions in sub-Saharan Africa place a strong emphasis, on measuring success through quantitative indicators such as uptake of modern contraception methods among women, specifically those that are married and visiting healthcare centres. They also tend to bias the provision of family planning by promoting long-acting reversible contraception over other forms of contraception methods potentially undermining individuals' autonomy and choice. The interventions in our review also found most interventions exclusively target women, not recognising the importance of gender norms and social networks on women's choice in using contraception and the need for more equitable FP services.ConclusionThe results of this review highlight how FP interventions measured success through quantitative indicators that focus on uptake of modern contraception methods among women. Utilising these measures makes it difficult to break away from the legacy of FP as a tool for population control as they limit the ability to incorporate autonomy, choice, and rights. Our results are meant to encourage members of the global family planning community to think critically about the ethical implications of their existing interventions and how they may be improved. More public health and policy research is required to assess the effect of applying the new indicators with the FP community as well as explicitly outlining monitoring and evaluation strategies for new interventions to allow for programme improvement and the dissemination of lessons learned.

Project description:BackgroundSepsis is a global health priority. Interventions to reduce the burden of sepsis need to be both effective and cost-effective. We performed a systematic review of the literature on health economic evaluations of sepsis treatments in critically ill adult patients and summarised the evidence for cost-effectiveness.MethodsWe systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library using thesaurus (e.g. MeSH) and free-text terms related to sepsis and economic evaluations. We included all articles that reported, in any language, an economic evaluation of an intervention for the management of sepsis in critically ill adult patients. Data extracted included study details, intervention details, economic evaluation methodology, and outcomes. Included studies were appraised for reporting quality using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.ResultsWe identified 50 records representing 46 economic evaluations for a variety of interventions including antibiotics (n = 5), fluid therapy (n = 2), early goal-directed therapy and other resuscitation protocols (n = 8), immunoglobulins (n = 2), and interventions no longer in clinical use such as monoclonal antibodies (n = 7) and drotrecogin alfa (n = 13). Twelve (26%) evaluations were of excellent reporting quality. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from dominant (lower costs and higher effectiveness) for early goal-directed therapy, albumin, and a multifaceted sepsis education program to dominated (higher costs and lower effectiveness) for polymerase chain reaction assays (LightCycler SeptiFast testing MGRADE®, SepsiTest™, and IRIDICA BAC BSI assay). ICERs varied widely across evaluations, particularly in subgroup analyses.ConclusionsThere is wide variation in the cost-effectiveness of sepsis interventions. There remain important gaps in the literature, with no economic evaluations identified for several interventions routinely used in sepsis. Given the high economic and social burden of sepsis, high-quality economic evaluations are needed to increase our understanding of the cost-effectiveness of these interventions in routine clinical practice and to inform decision makers.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42018095980.

Dataset Information

Ethical case interventions for adult patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets