Dataset Information

A Network Meta-Analysis of Efficacy of Different Interventions in the Prevention of Postoperative Intrauterine Adhesions.

ABSTRACT: This network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy of six interventions, including anti-blocking agents, intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs), estrogens, intrauterine balloon, Foley catheter, and amnion graft for the prevention of intrauterine adhesions (IUAs). We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to December 2016. Cohort studies meeting these six interventions in the prevention of IUAs were included. The combination of direct and indirect evidence was conducted to assess the odds ratio (OR) or weighted mean differences and surface under the cumulative ranking curves of the six interventions in the prevention of postoperative IUAs. Finally, 12 eligible cohort studies were included in this network meta-analysis. The results of this network meta-analysis demonstrated that during 1 to 2 months after operation, compared with the surgical group, anti-blocking agent, and estrogens presented with relatively low ratios of postoperative IUAs (OR = 0.30 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.10-0.67; OR = 0.12, 95% CI = 0.01-0.78, respectively). Compared with IUDs, estrogens exerted comparatively low ratio of postoperative IUAs (OR = 0.10, 95% CI = 0.01-0.90), which indicated that anti-blocking agent and estrogens had relatively better prevention efficacy. The cluster analysis showed that estrogens had relatively better efficacy in the prevention postoperative IUAs. Overall, our findings support that estrogens had relatively better efficacy in the prevention of postoperative IUAs.

SUBMITTER: Xiong Q

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7070815 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Network Meta-Analysis of Efficacy of Different Interventions in the Prevention of Postoperative Intrauterine Adhesions.

Xiong Qian Q Zhang Tiansong T Su Shujun S

Clinical and translational science 20200125 2

This network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy of six interventions, including anti-blocking agents, intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDs), estrogens, intrauterine balloon, Foley catheter, and amnion graft for the prevention of intrauterine adhesions (IUAs). We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to December 2016. Cohort studies meeting these six interventions in the prevention of IUAs were included. The combination of direct and indirect evidence w ...[more]

PMID: 31692267

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To identify, appraise, and synthesise the best available evidence on the efficacy of perioperative interventions to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in adult patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. DESIGN:Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES:Medline, Embase, CINHAL, and CENTRAL from January 1990 to December 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:Randomised controlled trials investigating short term, protocolised medical interventions conducted before, during, or after non-cardiac surgery were included. Trials with clinical diagnostic criteria for PPC outcomes were included. Studies of surgical technique or physiological or biochemical outcomes were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of evidence. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Quality of evidence was summarised in accordance with GRADE methods. The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs. Secondary outcomes were respiratory infection, atelectasis, length of hospital stay, and mortality. Trial sequential analysis was used to investigate the reliability and conclusiveness of available evidence. Adverse effects of interventions were not measured or compared. RESULTS:117 trials enrolled 21?940 participants, investigating 11 categories of intervention. 95 randomised controlled trials enrolling 18?062 participants were included in meta-analysis; 22 trials were excluded from meta-analysis because the interventions were not sufficiently similar to be pooled. No high quality evidence was found for interventions to reduce the primary outcome (incidence of PPCs). Seven interventions had low or moderate quality evidence with confidence intervals indicating a probable reduction in PPCs: enhanced recovery pathways (risk ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.21 to 0.58), prophylactic mucolytics (0.40, 0.23 to 0.67), postoperative continuous positive airway pressure ventilation (0.49, 0.24 to 0.99), lung protective intraoperative ventilation (0.52, 0.30 to 0.88), prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy (0.55, 0.32 to 0.93), epidural analgesia (0.77, 0.65 to 0.92), and goal directed haemodynamic therapy (0.87, 0.77 to 0.98). Moderate quality evidence showed no benefit for incentive spirometry in preventing PPCs. Trial sequential analysis adjustment confidently supported a relative risk reduction of 25% in PPCs for prophylactic respiratory physiotherapy, epidural analgesia, enhanced recovery pathways, and goal directed haemodynamic therapies. Insufficient data were available to support or refute equivalent relative risk reductions for other interventions. CONCLUSIONS:Predominantly low quality evidence favours multiple perioperative PPC reduction strategies. Clinicians may choose to reassess their perioperative care pathways, but the results indicate that new trials with a low risk of bias are needed to obtain conclusive evidence of efficacy for many of these interventions. STUDY REGISTRATION:Prospero CRD42016035662.

Project description:BackgroundThere is evidence from 2 previous meta-analyses that interventions to promote poison prevention behaviours are effective in increasing a range of poison prevention practices in households with children. The published meta-analyses compared any intervention against a "usual care or no intervention" which potentially limits the usefulness of the analysis to decision makers. We aim to use network meta-analysis to simultaneously evaluate the effectiveness of different interventions to increase prevalence of safe storage of i) Medicines only, ii) Other household products only, iii) Poisons (both medicines and non-medicines), iv) Poisonous plants; and v) Possession of poison control centre (PCC) telephone number in households with children.MethodsData on the effectiveness of poison prevention interventions was extracted from primary studies identified in 2 newly-undertaken systematic reviews. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using a random effects network meta-analysis model.Results28 of the 47 primary studies identified were included in the analysis. Compared to usual care intervention, the intervention with education and low cost/free equipment elements was most effective in promoting safe storage of medicines (odds ratio 2.51, 95% credible interval 1.01 to 6.00) while interventions with education, low cost/free equipment, home safety inspection and fitting components were most effective in promoting safe storage of other household products (2.52, 1.12 to 7.13), safe storage of poisons (11.10, 1.60 to 141.50) and possession of PCC number (38.82, 2.19 to 687.10). No one intervention package was more effective than the others in promoting safe storage of poisonous plants.ConclusionThe most effective interventions varied by poison prevention practice, but education alone was not the most effective intervention for any poison prevention practice. Commissioners and providers of poison prevention interventions should tailor the interventions they commission or provide to the poison prevention practices they wish to promote.HighlightsNetwork meta-analysis is useful for comparing multiple injury-prevention interventions. More intensive poison prevention interventions were more effective than education alone. Education and low cost/free equipment was most effective in promoting safe storage of medicines. Education, low cost/free equipment, home safety inspection and fitting was most effective in promoting safe storage of household products and poisons. Education, low cost/free equipment and home inspection were most effective in promoting possession of a poison control centre number. None of the intervention packages was more effective than the others in promoting safe storage of poisonous plants.

Project description:The efficacy of pregabalin in acute postsurgical pain has been demonstrated in numerous studies; however, the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of using pregabalin in various surgical procedures remain uncertain. We aim to assess the postsurgical analgesic efficacy and adverse events after pregabalin administration under different surgical categories using a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.A search of the literature was performed between August 2014 to April 2015, using PubMed, Ovid via EMBASE, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov with no limitation on publication year or language. Studies considered for inclusion were randomized controlled trials, reporting on relevant outcomes (2-, 24-hour pain scores, or 24 hour morphine-equivalent consumption) with treatment with perioperative pregabalin.Seventy-four studies were included. Pregabalin reduced pain scores at 2 hours in all categories: cardiothoracic (Hedge's g and 95%CI, -0.442 [-0.752 to -0.132], P?=?0.005), ENT (Hedge g and 95%CI, -0.684 [-1.051 to -0.316], P?<?0.0001), gynecologic (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.792 [-1.235 to -0.350], P?<?0.0001), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.600 [-0.989 to -0.210], P?=?0.003), orthopedic (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.507 [-0.812 to -0.202], P?=?0.001), spine (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.972 [-1.537 to -0.407], P?=?0.001), and miscellaneous procedures (Hedge g, 95%CI, -1.976 [-2.654 to -1.297], P?<?0.0001). Pregabalin reduced 24-hour morphine consumption in gynecologic (Hedge g, 95%CI, -1.085 [-1.582 to -0.441], P?=?0.001), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.886 [-1.652 to -0.120], P?=?0.023), orthopedic (Hedge g, 95%CI, -0.720 [-1.118 to -0.323], P?<?0.0001), spine (Hedge g, 95%CI, -1.016 [-1.732 to -0.300], P?=?0.005), and miscellaneous procedures (Hedge g, 95%CI, -1.329 [-2.286 to -0.372], P?=?0.006). Pregabalin resulted in significant sedation in all surgical categories except ENT, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and gynecologic procedures. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was only significant after pregabalin in miscellaneous procedures.Analgesic effects and incidence of adverse effects of using pregabalin are not equal in different surgical categories.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Many treatments are currently available for amblyopic patients; although, the comparative efficacy of these therapies is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to establish the relative efficacy of these treatments for amblyopia. METHODS:Electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) were systematically searched from inception to Sep. 2019. Only Randomized clinical trials comparing any two or three of the following treatments were included: refractive correction (spectacles alone), patching of 2?h per day (patch 2H), patch 6H, patch 12H, patch 2H?+?near activities (N), patch 2H?+?distant activities (D), atropine (Atr) daily, Atr weekly, Atr weekly + plano lens over the sound eye (Plano), optical penalization and binocular therapy. The reviewers independently extracted the data according to the PRISMA guidelines; assessed study quality by Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. The primary outcome measure was the change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) expressed as log MAR lines. Direct comparisons and a Bayesian meta-analysis were performed to synthesize data. RESULTS:Twenty-three studies with 3279 patients were included. In the network meta-analysis, optical penalization was the least effective of all the treatments for the change of visual acuity, spectacles (mean difference [MD], 2.9 Log MAR lines; 95% credibility interval [CrI], 1.8-4.0), patch 2H (MD, 3.3; 95% CrI, 2.3-4.3), patch 6H (MD, 3.6; 95% CrI, 2.6-4.6), patch 12H (MD, 3.4; 95% CrI, 2.3-4.5), patch 2H?+?N (MD, 3.7; 95% CrI, 2.5-5.0), patch 2H?+?D (MD, 3.5; 95% CrI, 2.1-5.0), Atr daily (MD, 3.2; 95% CrI, 2.2-4.3), Atr weekly (MD, 3.2; 95% CrI, 2.2-4.3), Atr weekly + Plano (MD, 3.7; 95% CrI, 2.7-4.7), binocular therapy (MD, 3.1; 95% CrI, 2.0-4.2). The patch 6H and patch 2H?+?N were better than spectacles ([MD, 0.73; 95% Crl, 0.10-1.40]; [MD, 0.84; 95% CrI, 0.19-1.50]). CONCLUSIONS:The NMA indicated that the efficacy of the most of the examined treatment modalities for amblyopia were comparable, with no significant difference. Further high quality randomized controlled trials are required to determine their efficacy and acceptability. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:CRD42019119843.

Project description:IntroductionPressure ulcers (PUs) are associated with substantial health burden. Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at high risk for developing PU. In the absence of large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compare commonly known interventions for preventing PU in ICUs, uncertainty remains around the best practice strategy for PU management in adult ICUs. This study, therefore, aims to identify the most effective interventions and combinations of interventions that prevent PU in adult ICU using systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).Methods and analysisWe will search for all published and unpublished RCTs evaluating interventions to prevent PU compared with other PU prevention measures or with usual care in adult ICU. The primary outcomes are the incidence of PUs and PU severity in critically ill patients in ICU. The secondary outcomes include number of PUs per patient and intervention-related harms caused by the prevention intervention or intervention-related harms. All data extraction will be performed by at least two independent reviewers on the basis of a priori developed extraction form. We will evaluate the risk of bias of the included RCTs in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool, and assess the quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. A standard pairwise meta-analysis and a Bayesian NMA will be conducted to compare the efficacy of different PU prevention interventions. A surface under the cumulative ranking curve will be used to rank the probabilities of each prevention intervention for various outcomes.Ethics and disseminationThis study will not require the ethics approval as it is a review based on published studies. The findings of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. We anticipate that the results of the study will provide the evidence to inform clinicians and guideline developers on determining the best interventions for the prevention of PU in ICU patients.Prospero registration numberCRD42018085562.

Dataset Information

A Network Meta-Analysis of Efficacy of Different Interventions in the Prevention of Postoperative Intrauterine Adhesions.

Publications

A Network Meta-Analysis of Efficacy of Different Interventions in the Prevention of Postoperative Intrauterine Adhesions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets