Anticoagulant vs. antiplatelet therapy in patients with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

AIMS The preferred antithrombotic strategy for secondary prevention in patients with cryptogenic stroke (CS) and patent foramen ovale (PFO) is unknown. We pooled multiple observational studies and used propensity score-based methods to estimate the comparative effectiveness of oral anticoagulation (OAC) compared with antiplatelet therapy (APT). METHODS AND RESULTS Individual participant data from 12 databases of medically treated patients with CS and PFO were analysed with Cox regression models, to estimate database-specific hazard ratios (HRs) comparing OAC with APT, for both the primary composite outcome [recurrent stroke, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), or death] and stroke alone. Propensity scores were applied via inverse probability of treatment weighting to control for confounding. We synthesized database-specific HRs using random-effects meta-analysis models. This analysis included 2385 (OAC = 804 and APT = 1581) patients with 227 composite endpoints (stroke/TIA/death). The difference between OAC and APT was not statistically significant for the primary composite outcome [adjusted HR = 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-1.12] or for the secondary outcome of stroke alone (adjusted HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.44-1.27). Results were consistent in analyses applying alternative weighting schemes, with the exception that OAC had a statistically significant beneficial effect on the composite outcome in analyses standardized to the patient population who actually received APT (adjusted HR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.99). Subgroup analyses did not detect statistically significant heterogeneity of treatment effects across clinically important patient groups. CONCLUSION We did not find a statistically significant difference comparing OAC with APT; our results justify randomized trials comparing different antithrombotic approaches in these patients.

Association of nutritional risk and adverse medical outcomes across different medical inpatient populations

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to examine the prevalence of nutritional risk and its association with multiple adverse clinical outcomes in a large cohort of acutely ill medical inpatients from a Swiss tertiary care hospital. METHODS We prospectively followed consecutive adult medical inpatients for 30 d. Multivariate regression models were used to investigate the association of the initial Nutritional Risk Score (NRS 2002) with mortality, impairment in activities of daily living (Barthel Index <95 points), hospital length of stay, hospital readmission rates, and quality of life (QoL; adapted from EQ5 D); all parameters were measured at 30 d. RESULTS Of 3186 patients (mean age 71 y, 44.7% women), 887 (27.8%) were at risk for malnutrition with an NRS ≥3 points. We found strong associations (odds ratio/hazard ratio [OR/HR], 95% confidence interval [CI]) between nutritional risk and mortality (OR/HR, 7.82; 95% CI, 6.04-10.12), impaired Barthel Index (OR/HR, 2.56; 95% CI, 2.12-3.09), time to hospital discharge (OR/HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.43-0.52), hospital readmission (OR/HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.08-1.97), and all five dimensions of QoL measures. Associations remained significant after adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, and medical diagnoses. Results were robust in subgroup analysis with evidence of effect modification (P for interaction < 0.05) based on age and main diagnosis groups. CONCLUSION Nutritional risk is significant in acutely ill medical inpatients and is associated with increased medical resource use, adverse clinical outcomes, and impairments in functional ability and QoL. Randomized trials are needed to evaluate evidence-based preventive and treatment strategies focusing on nutritional factors to improve outcomes in these high-risk patients.

Safety and Efficacy of New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Women at High Risk for Atherothrombosis: From the Women in Innovation and Drug-Eluting Stents Collaborative Patient-Level Pooled Analysis

BACKGROUND The safety and efficacy of new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) in women with multiple atherothrombotic risk (ATR) factors is unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS We pooled patient-level data for women enrolled in 26 randomized trials. Study population was categorized based on the presence or absence of high ATR, which was defined as having history of diabetes mellitus, prior percutaneous or surgical coronary revascularization, or prior myocardial infarction. The primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular events defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization at 3 years of follow-up. Out of 10 449 women included in the pooled database, 5333 (51%) were at high ATR. Compared with women not at high ATR, those at high ATR had significantly higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (15.8% versus 10.6%; adjusted hazard ratio: 1.53; 95% confidence interval: 1.34-1.75; P=0.006) and all-cause mortality. In high-ATR risk women, the use of new-generation DES was associated with significantly lower risk of 3-year major adverse cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.69; 95% confidence interval: 0.52-0.92) compared with early-generation DES. The benefit of new-generation DES on major adverse cardiovascular events was uniform between high-ATR and non-high-ATR women, without evidence of interaction (Pinteraction=0.14). At landmark analysis, in high-ATR women, stent thrombosis rates were comparable between DES generations in the first year, whereas between 1 and 3 years, stent thrombosis risk was lower with new-generation devices. CONCLUSIONS Use of new-generation DES even in women at high ATR is associated with a benefit consistent over 3 years of follow-up and a substantial improvement in very-late thrombotic safety.

Ophthalmic epidemiology in Europe: the "European Eye Epidemiology" (E3) consortium.

The European Eye Epidemiology (E3) consortium is a recently formed consortium of 29 groups from 12 European countries. It already comprises 21 population-based studies and 20 other studies (case-control, cases only, randomized trials), providing ophthalmological data on approximately 170,000 European participants. The aim of the consortium is to promote and sustain collaboration and sharing of data and knowledge in the field of ophthalmic epidemiology in Europe, with particular focus on the harmonization of methods for future research, estimation and projection of frequency and impact of visual outcomes in European populations (including temporal trends and European subregions), identification of risk factors and pathways for eye diseases (lifestyle, vascular and metabolic factors, genetics, epigenetics and biomarkers) and development and validation of prediction models for eye diseases. Coordinating these existing data will allow a detailed study of the risk factors and consequences of eye diseases and visual impairment, including study of international geographical variation which is not possible in individual studies. It is expected that collaborative work on these existing data will provide additional knowledge, despite the fact that the risk factors and the methods for collecting them differ somewhat among the participating studies. Most studies also include biobanks of various biological samples, which will enable identification of biomarkers to detect and predict occurrence and progression of eye diseases. This article outlines the rationale of the consortium, its design and presents a summary of the methodology.

Mean arterial pressure and vasopressor load after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Associations with one-year neurologic outcome

THE AIM OF THE STUDY There are limited data on blood pressure targets and vasopressor use following cardiac arrest. We hypothesized that hypotension and high vasopressor load are associated with poor neurological outcome following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). METHODS We included 412 patients with OHCA included in FINNRESUSCI study conducted between 2010 and 2011. Hemodynamic data and vasopressor doses were collected electronically in one, two or five minute intervals. We evaluated thresholds for time-weighted (TW) mean arterial pressure (MAP) and outcome by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, and used multivariable analysis adjusting for co-morbidities, factors at resuscitation, an illness severity score, TW MAP and total vasopressor load (VL) to test associations with one-year neurologic outcome, dichotomized into either good (1-2) or poor (3-5) according to the cerebral performance category scale. RESULTS Of 412 patients, 169 patients had good and 243 patients had poor one-year outcomes. The lowest MAP during the first six hours was 58 (inter-quartile range [IQR] 56-61) mmHg in those with a poor outcome and 61 (59-63) mmHg in those with a good outcome (p<0.01), and lowest MAP was independently associated with poor outcome (OR 1.02 per mmHg, 95% CI 1.00-1.04, p=0.03). During the first 48h the median (IQR) of the TW mean MAP was 80 (78-82) mmHg in patients with poor, and 82 (81-83) mmHg in those with good outcomes (p=0.03) but in multivariable analysis TWA MAP was not associated with outcome. Vasopressor load did not predict one-year neurologic outcome. CONCLUSIONS Hypotension occurring during the first six hours after cardiac arrest is an independent predictor of poor one-year neurologic outcome. High vasopressor load was not associated with poor outcome and further randomized trials are needed to define optimal MAP targets in OHCA patients.

Efficacy of experimental treatments compared with standard treatments in non-inferiority trials: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background There is concern that non-inferiority trials might be deliberately designed to conceal that a new treatment is less effective than a standard treatment. In order to test this hypothesis we performed a meta-analysis of non-inferiority trials to assess the average effect of experimental treatments compared with standard treatments. Methods One hundred and seventy non-inferiority treatment trials published in 121 core clinical journals were included. The trials were identified through a search of PubMed (1991 to 20 February 2009). Combined relative risk (RR) from meta-analysis comparing experimental with standard treatments was the main outcome measure. Results The 170 trials contributed a total of 175 independent comparisons of experimental with standard treatments. The combined RR for all 175 comparisons was 0.994 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.978–1.010] using a random-effects model and 1.002 (95% CI 0.996–1.008) using a fixed-effects model. Of the 175 comparisons, experimental treatment was considered to be non-inferior in 130 (74%). The combined RR for these 130 comparisons was 0.995 (95% CI 0.983–1.006) and the point estimate favoured the experimental treatment in 58% (n = 76) and standard treatment in 42% (n = 54). The median non-inferiority margin (RR) pre-specified by trialists was 1.31 [inter-quartile range (IQR) 1.18–1.59]. Conclusion In this meta-analysis of non-inferiority trials the average RR comparing experimental with standard treatments was close to 1. The experimental treatments that gain a verdict of non-inferiority in published trials do not appear to be systematically less effective than the standard treatments. Importantly, publication bias and bias in the design and reporting of the studies cannot be ruled out and may have skewed the study results in favour of the experimental treatments. Further studies are required to examine the importance of such bias.

Does land-based exercise reduce pain and disability associated with hip osteoarthritis? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective To determine if clinical guidelines recommending therapeutic exercise for people with hip osteoarthritis (OA) are supported by rigorous scientific evidence. Methods A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting people with hip OA and comparing some form of land-based exercise program (as opposed to exercises conducted in the water) with a non-exercise group in terms of hip pain and/or self-reported physical function. Results Thirty-two RCTs were identified, but only five met the inclusion criteria. Only one of the five included RCTs restricted recruitment to people with hip OA, the other four RCTs also recruiting participants with knee OA. The five included studies provided data on 204 and 187 hip OA participants for pain and physical function, respectively. Combining the results of the five included RCTs using a fixed-effects model demonstrated a small treatment effect for pain (standardized mean difference (SMD) −0.38; 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.67 to −0.09). No significant benefit in terms of improved self-reported physical function was detected (SMD −0.02; 95% CI −0.31 to 0.28). Conclusion Currently there is only silver level evidence (one small RCT) supporting the benefit of land-based therapeutic exercise for people with symptomatic hip OA in terms of reduced pain and improved physical function. The limited number and small sample size of the included RCTs restricts the confidence that can be attributed to these results.

Dexmedetomidine vs midazolam or propofol for sedation during prolonged mechanical ventilation: two randomized controlled trials

Long-term sedation with midazolam or propofol in intensive care units (ICUs) has serious adverse effects. Dexmedetomidine, an α(2)-agonist available for ICU sedation, may reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation and enhance patient comfort.

Reporting of consistency of blood pressure control in randomized controlled trials of antihypertensive drugs: a systematic review of 1372 trial reports

Hypertension is a powerful treatable risk factor for stroke. Reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antihypertensive drugs rightly concentrate on clinical outcomes, but control of blood pressure (BP) during follow-up is also important, particularly given that inconsistent control is associated with a high risk of stroke and that antihypertensive drug classes differ in this regard.

Mislabeling controlled clinical trials (CCTs) as "randomized clinical trials (RCTs)" in dental specialty journals

This study aimed to investigate whether studies published in dental journals with the highest impact factor, representing the 5 major dental specialties and titled as randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are truly RCTs. A second objective was to explore the association of journal type and other publication characteristics on correct classification.