Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is usually recommended for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) but this treatment requires burdensome daily injections. We did a systematic review ...to compare the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC), vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and LMWH in patients with CAT.
We searched Pubmed, Embase and CENTRAL for randomised controlled trials comparing DOAC, VKA and LMWH in patients with CAT. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were computed for venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence and bleeding complications.
We identified 14 studies, including 4,661 patients. In pairwise comparison, DOAC were superior to LMWH to prevent VTE recurrence (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.42-0.96) and LMWH was superior to VKA (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.40-0.70). The rate of major bleeding was higher with DOAC compared to LMWH (HR 1.78; 95% CI 1.11-2.87). In the network meta-analysis, DOAC had a lower, but non-significant, rate of VTE recurrence compared to LMWH (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.54-1.01). Both DOAC (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.29-0.61) and LMWH (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.44-0.75) were associated with lower rates of recurrence compared to VKA. No significant difference in major bleeding rate was observed in the network meta-analysis. Inconsistency was observed between pairwise and network meta-analysis comparisons for major bleeding.
DOAC are effective to prevent VTE recurrence in patients with CAT but are associated with an increased risk of bleeding compared to LMWH. The choice of anticoagulant should be personalised, taking into account the patient's bleeding risk, including cancer site, and patient's values and preferences.
What you need to know: The recommendations apply to patients under 60 years old with patent foramen ovale (PFO) who have had a cryptogenic ischaemic stroke, when extensive workup for other ...aetiologies of stroke is negative; For patients who are open to all options, we make a weak recommendation for PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy rather than anticoagulant therapy; For patients in whom anticoagulation is contraindicated or declined, we make a strong recommendation for PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy versus antiplatelet therapy alone; For patients in whom closure is contraindicated or declined, we make a weak recommendation for anticoagulant therapy rather than antiplatelet therapy; Further research may alter the recommendations that involve anticoagulant therapy. Options for the secondary prevention of stroke in patients younger than 60 years who have had a cryptogenic ischaemic stroke thought to be secondary to patent foramen ovale (PFO) include PFO closure (with antiplatelet therapy), antiplatelet therapy alone, or anticoagulants. International guidance and practice differ on which option is preferable. The BMJ Rapid Recommendations panel used a linked systematic review1 triggered by three large randomised trials published in September 2017 that suggested PFO closure might reduce the risk of ischaemic stroke more than alternatives.234 The panel felt that the studies, when considered in the context of the full body of evidence, might change current clinical practice.5 The linked systematic review finds that PFO closure prevents recurrent stroke relative to antiplatelet therapy, but possibly not relative to anticoagulants, and is associated with procedural complications and persistent atrial fibrillation.1 The review also presents evidence regarding the role of anticoagulants or antiplatelet therapy when PFO closure is not acceptable or is contraindicated.
Hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir have been used as experimental therapies to treat COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. Randomised controlled trials have recently shown that ...there are no meaningful benefits of these two therapies in hospitalised patients. Uncertainty remains regarding the potential harmful impact of these therapies as very early treatments and their burden to the health care system. The present study investigated the length of hospital stay (LOS), mortality, and costs of hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir or their combination in comparison with standard of care among patients hospitalised for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
This retrospective observational cohort study took place in the Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland (n = 840) between 26 February and 31 May 2020. Demographics, treatment regimens, comorbidities, the modified National Early Warning Score (mNEWS) on admission, and contraindications to COVID-19 treatment options were assessed. Outcomes included LOS, in-hospital mortality, and drug and LOS costs.
After successful propensity score matching, patients treated with (1) hydroxychloroquine, (2) lopinavir/ritonavir or (3) their combination had on average 3.75 additional hospitalisation days (95% confidence interval CI 1.37-6.12, p = 0.002), 1.23 additional hospitalisation days (95% CI −1.24 - 3.51, p = 0.319), and 4.19 additional hospitalisation days (95% CI 1.52-5.31, p <0.001), respectively, compared with patients treated with the standard of care. Neither experimental therapy was significantly associated with mortality. These additional hospital days amounted to 1010.77 additional days for hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine combined with lopinavir/ritonavir, resulting in an additional cost of US$ 2,492,214 (95%CI US$ 916,839-3,450,619).
Prescribing experimental therapies for COVID-19 was not associated with a reduced LOS and might have increased the pressure put on healthcare systems.
To determine the efficacy of low intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) for healing of fracture or osteotomy.
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register ...of Controlled Trials, and trial registries up to November 2016.
Randomized controlled trials of LIPUS compared with sham device or no device in patients with any kind of fracture or osteotomy.
Two independent reviewers identified studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A parallel guideline committee (
Rapid Recommendation) provided input on the design and interpretation of the systematic review, including selection of outcomes important to patients. The GRADE system was used to assess the quality of evidence.
26 randomized controlled trials with a median sample size of 30 (range 8-501) were included. The most trustworthy evidence came from four trials at low risk of bias that included patients with tibia or clavicle fractures. Compared with control, LIPUS did not reduce time to return to work (percentage difference: 2.7% later with LIPUS, 95% confidence interval 7.7% earlier to 14.3% later; moderate certainty) or the number of subsequent operations (risk ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 1.16; moderate certainty). For pain, days to weight bearing, and radiographic healing, effects varied substantially among studies. For all three outcomes, trials at low risk of bias failed to show a benefit with LIPUS, while trials at high risk of bias suggested a benefit (interaction P<0.001). When only trials at low risk of bias trials were considered, LIPUS did not reduce days to weight bearing (4.8% later, 4.0% earlier to 14.4% later; high certainty), pain at four to six weeks (mean difference on 0-100 visual analogue scale: 0.93 lower, 2.51 lower to 0.64 higher; high certainty), and days to radiographic healing (1.7% earlier, 11.2% earlier to 8.8% later; moderate certainty).
Based on moderate to high quality evidence from studies in patients with fresh fracture, LIPUS does not improve outcomes important to patients and probably has no effect on radiographic bone healing. The applicability to other types of fracture or osteotomy is open to debate.
PROSPERO CRD42016050965.
Does low intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) accelerate recovery in adults and children who have experienced bone fractures or osteotomy (cutting of a bone)? An expert panel rapidly produced these ...recommendations based on a linked systematic review triggered by a large multicentre randomised trial in adults with tibial fracture.
A common weakness of patient satisfaction surveys is a suboptimal participation rate. Some patients may be unable to participate, because of language barriers, physical limitations, or mental ...problems. As the role of these barriers is poorly understood, we aimed to identify patient characteristics that are associated with non-participation in a patient satisfaction survey.
At the University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland, a patient satisfaction survey is regularly conducted among all adult patients hospitalized for >24 hours on a one-month period in the departments of internal medicine, geriatrics, surgery, neurosciences, psychiatry, and gynaecology-obstetrics. In order to assess the factors associated with non-participation to the patient satisfaction survey, a case-control study was conducted among patients selected for the 2005 survey. Cases (non respondents, n = 195) and controls (respondents, n = 205) were randomly selected from the satisfaction survey, and information about potential barriers to participation was abstracted in a blinded fashion from the patients' medical and nursing charts.
Non-participation in the satisfaction survey was independently associated with the presence of a language barrier (odds ratio OR 4.53, 95% confidence interval CI95%: 2.14-9.59), substance abuse (OR 3.75, CI95%: 1.97-7.14), cognitive limitations (OR 3.72, CI95%: 1.64-8.42), a psychiatric diagnosis (OR 1.99, CI95%: 1.23-3.23) and a sight deficiency (OR 2.07, CI95%: 0.98-4.36). The odds ratio for non-participation increased gradually with the number of predictors.
Five barriers to non-participation in a mail survey were identified. Gathering patient feedback through mailed surveys may lead to an under-representation of some patient subgroups.
Arthroplasty registries are rarely used to inform encounters between clinician and patient. This study is part of a larger one which aimed to develop an information tool allowing both to benefit from ...previous patients' experience after total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study focuses on generating the information tool specifically for pain outcomes.
Data from the Geneva Arthroplasty Registry (GAR) about patients receiving a primary elective THA between 1996 and 2019 was used. Selected outcomes were identified from patient and surgeon surveys: pain walking, climbing stairs, night pain, pain interference, and pain medication. Clusters of patients with homogeneous outcomes at 1, 5, and 10 years postoperatively were generated based on selected predictors evaluated preoperatively using conditional inference trees (CITs).
Data from 6,836 THAs were analysed and 14 CITs generated with 17 predictors found significant (p < 0.05). Baseline WOMAC pain score, SF-12 self-rated health (SRH), number of comorbidities, SF-12 mental component score, and body mass index (BMI) were the most common predictors. Outcome levels varied markedly by clusters whilst predictors changed at different time points for the same outcome. For example, 79% of patients with good to excellent SRH and less than moderate preoperative night pain reported absence of night pain at 1 year after THA; in contrast, for those with fair/poor SHR this figure was 50%. Also, clusters of patients with homogeneous levels of night pain at 1 year were generated based on SRH, Charnley, WOMAC night and pain scores, whilst those at 10 years were based on BMI alone.
The information tool generated under this study can provide prospective patients and clinicians with valuable and understandable information about the experiences of "patients like them" regarding their pain outcomes.
Clinicians perform searches in PubMed daily, but retrieving relevant studies is challenging due to the rapid expansion of medical knowledge. Little is known about the performance of search strategies ...when they are applied to answer specific clinical questions.
To compare the performance of 15 PubMed search strategies in retrieving relevant clinical trials on therapeutic interventions.
We used Cochrane systematic reviews to identify relevant trials for 30 clinical questions. Search terms were extracted from the abstract using a predefined procedure based on the population, interventions, comparison, outcomes (PICO) framework and combined into queries. We tested 15 search strategies that varied in their query (PIC or PICO), use of PubMed's Clinical Queries therapeutic filters (broad or narrow), search limits, and PubMed links to related articles. We assessed sensitivity (recall) and positive predictive value (precision) of each strategy on the first 2 PubMed pages (40 articles) and on the complete search output.
The performance of the search strategies varied widely according to the clinical question. Unfiltered searches and those using the broad filter of Clinical Queries produced large outputs and retrieved few relevant articles within the first 2 pages, resulting in a median sensitivity of only 10%-25%. In contrast, all searches using the narrow filter performed significantly better, with a median sensitivity of about 50% (all P < .001 compared with unfiltered queries) and positive predictive values of 20%-30% (P < .001 compared with unfiltered queries). This benefit was consistent for most clinical questions. Searches based on related articles retrieved about a third of the relevant studies.
The Clinical Queries narrow filter, along with well-formulated queries based on the PICO framework, provided the greatest aid in retrieving relevant clinical trials within the 2 first PubMed pages. These results can help clinicians apply effective strategies to answer their questions at the point of care.
PDF
