Adjunctive corticosteroids for Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia in patients with HIV infection.

BACKGROUND Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PCP) remains the most common opportunistic infection in patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Among patients with HIV infection and PCP the mortality rate is 10% to 20% during the initial infection and this increases substantially with the need for mechanical ventilation. It has been suggested that corticosteroids adjunctive to standard treatment for PCP could prevent the need for mechanical ventilation and decrease mortality in these patients. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of adjunctive corticosteroids on overall mortality and the need for mechanical ventilation in HIV-infected patients with PCP and substantial hypoxaemia (arterial oxygen partial pressure < 70 mmHg or alveolar-arterial gradient > 35 mmHg on room air). SEARCH METHODS For the original review we searched The Cochrane Library (2004, Issue 4), MEDLINE (January 1980 to December 2004) and EMBASE (January 1985 to December 2004) without language restrictions. We further reviewed the reference lists from previously published overviews, searched UptoDate version 2005 and Clinical Evidence Concise (Issue 12, 2004), contacted experts in the field and searched the reference lists of identified publications for citations of additional relevant articles.In this update of our review, we searched the above-mentioned databases in September 2010 and April 2014 for trials published since our original review. We also searched for ongoing trials in ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP). We searched for conference abstracts via AEGIS. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials that compared corticosteroids to placebo or usual care in HIV-infected patients with PCP in addition to baseline treatment with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, pentamidine or dapsone-trimethoprim, and reported mortality data. We excluded trials in patients with no or mild hypoxaemia (arterial oxygen partial pressure > 70 mmHg or an alveolar-arterial gradient < 35 mmHg on room air) and trials with a follow-up of less than 30 days. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two teams of review authors independently evaluated the methodology and extracted data from each primary study. We pooled treatment effects across studies and calculated a weighted average risk ratio of overall mortality in the treatment and control groups using a random-effects model.In this update of our review, we used the GRADE methodology to assess evidence quality. MAIN RESULTS Of 2029 screened records, we included seven studies in the review and six in the meta-analysis. Risk of bias varied: the randomisation and allocation process was often not clearly described, five of seven studies were double-blind and there was almost no missing data. The quality of the evidence for mortality was high. Risk ratios for overall mortality for adjunctive corticosteroids were 0.56 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32 to 0.98) at one month and 0.59 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.85) at three to four months of follow-up. In adults, to prevent one death, numbers needed to treat are nine patients in a setting without highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) available, and 23 patients with HAART available. The three largest trials provided moderate quality data on the need for mechanical ventilation, with a risk ratio of 0.38 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.73) in favour of adjunctive corticosteroids. One study was conducted in infants, suggesting a risk ratio for death in hospital of 0.81 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.29; moderate quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The number and size of trials investigating adjunctive corticosteroids for HIV-infected patients with PCP is small, but the evidence from this review suggests a beneficial effect for adult patients with substantial hypoxaemia. There is insufficient evidence on the effect of adjunctive corticosteroids on survival in infants.

Metamizole-associated adverse events: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Metamizole is used to treat pain in many parts of the world. Information on the safety profile of metamizole is scarce; no conclusive summary of the literature exists. OBJECTIVE To determine whether metamizole is clinically safe compared to placebo and other analgesics. METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and several clinical trial registries. We screened the reference lists of included trials and previous systematic reviews. We included randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of metamizole, administered to adults in any form and for any indication, to other analgesics or to placebo. Two authors extracted data regarding trial design and size, indications for pain medication, patient characteristics, treatment regimens, and methodological characteristics. Adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and dropouts were assessed. We conducted separate meta-analyses for each metamizole comparator, using standard inverse-variance random effects meta-analysis to pool the estimates across trials, reported as risk ratios (RRs). We calculated the DerSimonian and Laird variance estimate T2 to measure heterogeneity between trials. The pre-specified primary end point was any AE during the trial period. RESULTS Of the 696 potentially eligible trials, 79 trials including almost 4000 patients with short-term metamizole use of less than two weeks met our inclusion criteria. Fewer AEs were reported for metamizole compared to opioids, RR = 0.79 (confidence interval 0.79 to 0.96). We found no differences between metamizole and placebo, paracetamol and NSAIDs. Only a few SAEs were reported, with no difference between metamizole and other analgesics. No agranulocytosis or deaths were reported. Our results were limited by the mediocre overall quality of the reports. CONCLUSION For short-term use in the hospital setting, metamizole seems to be a safe choice when compared to other widely used analgesics. High-quality, adequately sized trials assessing the intermediate- and long-term safety of metamizole are needed.

Safety and efficacy of resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents compared with everolimus-eluting stents: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Although new-generation drug-eluting stents represent the standard of care among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, there remains debate about differences in efficacy and the risk of stent thrombosis between the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) and the everolimus-eluting stent (EES). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the R-ZES compared with EES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS A systematic literature search of electronic resources was performed using specific search terms until September 2014. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed comparing clinical outcomes between patients treated with R-ZES and EES up to maximum available follow-up. The primary efficacy end point was target-vessel revascularization. The primary safety end point was definite or probable stent thrombosis. Secondary safety end points were cardiac death and target-vessel myocardial infarction. Five trials were identified, including a total of 9899 patients. Compared with EES, R-ZES had similar risks of target-vessel revascularization (risk ratio [RR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-1.24; P=0.50), definite or probable stent thrombosis (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.86-1.85; P=0.24), cardiac death (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79-1.30; P=0.91), and target-vessel myocardial infarction (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.89-1.36; P=0.39). Moreover, R-ZES and EES had similar risks of late definite or probable very late stent thrombosis (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.53-2.11; P=0.87). No evidence of significant heterogeneity was observed across trials. CONCLUSIONS R-ZES and EES provide similar safety and efficacy among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Pre-therapy inflammation and coagulation activation and long-term CD4 count responses to the initiation of antiretroviral therapy

OBJECTIVES Pre-antiretroviral therapy (ART) inflammation and coagulation activation predict clinical outcomes in HIV-positive individuals. We assessed whether pre-ART inflammatory marker levels predicted the CD4 count response to ART. METHODS Analyses were based on data from the Strategic Management of Antiretroviral Therapy (SMART) trial, an international trial evaluating continuous vs. interrupted ART, and the Flexible Initial Retrovirus Suppressive Therapies (FIRST) trial, evaluating three first-line ART regimens with at least two drug classes. For this analysis, participants had to be ART-naïve or off ART at randomization and (re)starting ART and have C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and D-dimer measured pre-ART. Using random effects linear models, we assessed the association between each of the biomarker levels, categorized as quartiles, and change in CD4 count from ART initiation to 24 months post-ART. Analyses adjusted for CD4 count at ART initiation (baseline), study arm, follow-up time and other known confounders. RESULTS Overall, 1084 individuals [659 from SMART (26% ART naïve) and 425 from FIRST] met the eligibility criteria, providing 8264 CD4 count measurements. Seventy-five per cent of individuals were male with the mean age of 42 years. The median (interquartile range) baseline CD4 counts were 416 (350-530) and 100 (22-300) cells/μL in SMART and FIRST, respectively. All of the biomarkers were inversely associated with baseline CD4 count in FIRST but not in SMART. In adjusted models, there was no clear relationship between changing biomarker levels and mean change in CD4 count post-ART (P for trend: CRP, P = 0.97; IL-6, P = 0.25; and D-dimer, P = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS Pre-ART inflammation and coagulation activation do not predict CD4 count response to ART and appear to influence the risk of clinical outcomes through other mechanisms than blunting long-term CD4 count gain.

HIV and human herpesvirus 8 co-infection across the globe: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

HIV-infection is an important risk factor for developing Kaposi sarcoma (KS), but it is unclear whether HIV-positive persons are also at increased risk of co-infection with human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8), the infectious cause of KS. We systematically searched literature up to December 2012 and included studies reporting HHV-8 seroprevalence for HIV-positive and HIV-negative persons. We used random-effects meta-analysis to combine odds ratios (ORs) of the association between HIV and HHV-8 seropositivity and conducted random-effects meta-regression to identify sources of heterogeneity. We included 93 studies with 58,357 participants from 32 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, North and South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Overall, HIV-positive persons were more likely to be HHV-8 seropositive than HIV-negative persons (OR 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.70-2.34) with considerable heterogeneity among studies (I(2) 84%). The association was strongest in men who have sex with men (MSM, OR 3.95, 95% CI 2.92-5.35), patients with hemophilia (OR 3.11, 95% CI 1.19-8.11), and children (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.58-3.81), but weaker in heterosexuals who engage in low-risk (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.16-1.74) or high-risk sexual behavior (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.27-2.17), persons who inject drugs (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.28-2.14), and pregnant women (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.15-2.47), p value for interaction <0.001. In conclusion, HIV-infection was associated with an increased HHV-8 seroprevalence in all population groups examined. A better understanding of HHV-8 transmission in different age and behavioral groups is needed to develop strategies to prevent HHV-8 transmission.

PEDro or Cochrane to Assess the Quality of Clinical Trials? A Meta-Epidemiological Study.

OBJECTIVE There is debate on how the methodological quality of clinical trials should be assessed. We compared trials of physical therapy (PT) judged to be of adequate quality based on summary scores from the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale with trials judged to be of adequate quality by Cochrane Risk of Bias criteria. DESIGN Meta-epidemiological study within Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. METHODS Meta-analyses of PT trials were identified in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. For each trial PeDro and Cochrane assessments were extracted from the PeDro and Cochrane databases. Adequate quality was defined as adequate generation of random sequence, concealment of allocation, and blinding of outcome assessors (Cochrane criteria) or as trials with a PEDro summary score ≥5 or ≥6 points. We combined trials of adequate quality using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS Forty-one Cochrane reviews and 353 PT trials were included. All meta-analyses included trials with PEDro scores ≥5, 37 (90.2%) included trials with PEDro scores ≥6 and only 22 (53.7%) meta-analyses included trials of adequate quality according to the Cochrane criteria. Agreement between PeDro and Cochrane was poor for PeDro scores of ≥5 points (kappa = 0.12; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.16) and slight for ≥6 points (kappa 0.24; 95% CI 0.16-0.32). When combining effect sizes of trials deemed to be of adequate quality according to PEDro or Cochrane criteria, we found that a substantial difference in the combined effect size (≥0.15) was evident in 9 (22%) out of the 41 meta-analyses for PEDro cutoff ≥5 and 10 (24%) for cutoff ≥6. CONCLUSIONS The PeDro and Cochrane approaches lead to different sets of trials of adequate quality, and different combined treatment estimates from meta-analyses of these trials. A consistent approach to assessing RoB in trials of physical therapy should be adopted.

Effectiveness of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus decolonization in long-term haemodialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Chronic haemodialysis patients are a high-risk population for meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization, which is a precursor of infection. AIM To summarize the effect of nasal (± whole-body wash) MRSA decolonization in haemodialysis patients by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS We identified eligible studies using Medline, Embase, the Cochrane database, clinicaltrials.org, and conference abstracts investigating the success of MRSA decolonization in haemodialysis patients. For the statistical analysis, we used Stata 13 to express study-specific proportions with 95% confidence intervals. A likelihood ratio test was used to assess inter-study heterogeneity. FINDINGS Six published prospective cohort studies and one study described in a conference abstract met our inclusion criteria. From 1150 haemodialysis patients enrolled in these studies, MRSA was isolated from nasal swabs of 147 (12.8%) patients. Six of the trials used mupirocin nasal ointment and combined it with chlorhexidine body washes for decolonization. The most widely used protocol was a five-day course of mupirocin nasal ointment application three times a day, and chlorhexidine body wash once daily. The pooled success rate of decolonization was 0.88 (95% confidence interval: 0.75-0.95). A likelihood ratio test of the fixed versus the random-effects model showed significant inter-study heterogeneity (P = 0.047). Four of seven studies determined subsequent MRSA infections in 94 carriers overall, two (2%) of which experienced infection. CONCLUSION The use of mupirocin together with whole-body decolonization is highly effective in eradicating MRSA carriage in haemodialysis patients. The current literature, however, is characterized by a lack of comparative effectiveness studies for this intervention.

Intra-articular corticosteroid for knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND Knee osteoarthritis is a leading cause of chronic pain, disability, and decreased quality of life. Despite the long-standing use of intra-articular corticosteroids, there is an ongoing debate about their benefits and safety. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2005. OBJECTIVES To determine the benefits and harms of intra-articular corticosteroids compared with sham or no intervention in people with knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain, physical function, quality of life, and safety. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE (from inception to 3 February 2015), checked trial registers, conference proceedings, reference lists, and contacted authors. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared intra-articular corticosteroids with sham injection or no treatment in people with knee osteoarthritis. We applied no language restrictions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for pain, function, quality of life, joint space narrowing, and risk ratios (RRs) for safety outcomes. We combined trials using an inverse-variance random-effects meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS We identified 27 trials (13 new studies) with 1767 participants in this update. We graded the quality of the evidence as 'low' for all outcomes because treatment effect estimates were inconsistent with great variation across trials, pooled estimates were imprecise and did not rule out relevant or irrelevant clinical effects, and because most trials had a high or unclear risk of bias. Intra-articular corticosteroids appeared to be more beneficial in pain reduction than control interventions (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.22), which corresponds to a difference in pain scores of 1.0 cm on a 10-cm visual analogue scale between corticosteroids and sham injection and translates into a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 8 (95% CI 6 to 13). An I(2) statistic of 68% indicated considerable between-trial heterogeneity. A visual inspection of the funnel plot suggested some asymmetry (asymmetry coefficient -1.21, 95%CI -3.58 to 1.17). When stratifying results according to length of follow-up, benefits were moderate at 1 to 2 weeks after end of treatment (SMD -0.48, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.27), small to moderate at 4 to 6 weeks (SMD -0.41, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.21), small at 13 weeks (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.00), and no evidence of an effect at 26 weeks (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.11). An I(2) statistic of ≥ 63% indicated a moderate to large degree of between-trial heterogeneity up to 13 weeks after end of treatment (P for heterogeneity≤0.001), and an I(2) of 0% indicated low heterogeneity at 26 weeks (P=0.43). There was evidence of lower treatment effects in trials that randomised on average at least 50 participants per group (P=0.05) or at least 100 participants per group (P=0.013), in trials that used concomittant viscosupplementation (P=0.08), and in trials that used concomitant joint lavage (P≤0.001).Corticosteroids appeared to be more effective in function improvement than control interventions (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.56 to -0.09), which corresponds to a difference in functions scores of -0.7 units on standardised Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) disability scale ranging from 0 to 10 and translates into a NNTB of 10 (95% CI 7 to 33). An I(2) statistic of 69% indicated a moderate to large degree of between-trial heterogeneity. A visual inspection of the funnel plot suggested asymmetry (asymmetry coefficient -4.07, 95% CI -8.08 to -0.05). When stratifying results according to length of follow-up, benefits were small to moderate at 1 to 2 weeks after end of treatment (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.72 to -0.14), small to moderate at 4 to 6 weeks (SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.09), and no evidence of an effect at 13 weeks (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.10) or at 26 weeks (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.28). An I(2) statistic of ≥ 62% indicated a moderate to large degree of between-trial heterogeneity up to 13 weeks after end of treatment (P for heterogeneity≤0.004), and an I(2) of 0% indicated low heterogeneity at 26 weeks (P=0.52). We found evidence of lower treatment effects in trials that randomised on average at least 50 participants per group (P=0.023), in unpublished trials (P=0.023), in trials that used non-intervention controls (P=0.031), and in trials that used concomitant viscosupplementation (P=0.06).Participants on corticosteroids were 11% less likely to experience adverse events, but confidence intervals included the null effect (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.23, I(2)=0%). Participants on corticosteroids were 67% less likely to withdraw because of adverse events, but confidence intervals were wide and included the null effect (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.07, I(2)=0%). Participants on corticosteroids were 27% less likely to experience any serious adverse event, but confidence intervals were wide and included the null effect (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.67, I(2)=0%).We found no evidence of an effect of corticosteroids on quality of life compared to control (SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.28, I(2)=0%). There was also no evidence of an effect of corticosteroids on joint space narrowing compared to control interventions (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.46). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Whether there are clinically important benefits of intra-articular corticosteroids after one to six weeks remains unclear in view of the overall quality of the evidence, considerable heterogeneity between trials, and evidence of small-study effects. A single trial included in this review described adequate measures to minimise biases and did not find any benefit of intra-articular corticosteroids.In this update of the systematic review and meta-analysis, we found most of the identified trials that compared intra-articular corticosteroids with sham or non-intervention control small and hampered by low methodological quality. An analysis of multiple time points suggested that effects decrease over time, and our analysis provided no evidence that an effect remains six months after a corticosteroid injection.

Clinical relevance of DPYD variants c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A as predictors of severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data

BACKGROUND The best-known cause of intolerance to fluoropyrimidines is dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency, which can result from deleterious polymorphisms in the gene encoding DPD (DPYD), including DPYD*2A and c.2846A>T. Three other variants-DPYD c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A-have been associated with DPD deficiency, but no definitive evidence for the clinical validity of these variants is available. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the clinical validity of c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A as predictors of severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. METHODS We did a systematic review of the literature published before Dec 17, 2014, to identify cohort studies investigating associations between DPYD c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A and severe (grade ≥3) fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity in patients treated with fluoropyrimidines (fluorouracil, capecitabine, or tegafur-uracil as single agents, in combination with other anticancer drugs, or with radiotherapy). Individual patient data were retrieved and analysed in a multivariable analysis to obtain an adjusted relative risk (RR). Effect estimates were pooled by use of a random-effects meta-analysis. The threshold for significance was set at a p value of less than 0·0167 (Bonferroni correction). FINDINGS 7365 patients from eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. DPYD c.1679T>G was significantly associated with fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity (adjusted RR 4·40, 95% CI 2·08-9·30, p<0·0001), as was c.1236G>A/HapB3 (1·59, 1·29-1·97, p<0·0001). The association between c.1601G>A and fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity was not significant (adjusted RR 1·52, 95% CI 0·86-2·70, p=0·15). Analysis of individual types of toxicity showed consistent associations of c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A/HapB3 with gastrointestinal toxicity (adjusted RR 5·72, 95% CI 1·40-23·33, p=0·015; and 2·04, 1·49-2·78, p<0·0001, respectively) and haematological toxicity (adjusted RR 9·76, 95% CI 3·03-31·48, p=0·00014; and 2·07, 1·17-3·68, p=0·013, respectively), but not with hand-foot syndrome. DPYD*2A and c.2846A>T were also significantly associated with severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity (adjusted RR 2·85, 95% CI 1·75-4·62, p<0·0001; and 3·02, 2·22-4·10, p<0·0001, respectively). INTERPRETATION DPYD variants c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A/HapB3 are clinically relevant predictors of fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. Upfront screening for these variants, in addition to the established variants DPYD*2A and c.2846A>T, is recommended to improve the safety of patients with cancer treated with fluoropyrimidines. FUNDING None.

Endoscopic and Open Release Similarly Safe for the Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND The Endoscopic Release of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (ECTR) is a minimal invasive approach for the treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. There is scepticism regarding the safety of this technique, based on the assumption that this is a rather "blind" procedure and on the high number of severe complications that have been reported in the literature. PURPOSE To evaluate whether there is evidence supporting a higher risk after ECTR in comparison to the conventional open release. METHODS We searched MEDLINE (January 1966 to November 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to November 2013), the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (November 2013) and CENTRAL (2013, issue 11 in The Cochrane Library). We hand-searched reference lists of included studies. We included all randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials (e.g. study using alternation, date of birth, or case record number) that compare any ECTR with any OCTR technique. Safety was assessed by the incidence of major, minor and total number of complications, recurrences, and re-operations.The total time needed before return to work or to return to daily activities was also assessed. We synthesized data using a random-effects meta-analysis in STATA. We conducted a sensitivity analysis for rare events using binomial likelihood. We judged the conclusiveness of meta-analysis calculating the conditional power of meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS ECTR is associated with less time off work or with daily activities. The assessment of major complications, reoperations and recurrence of symptoms does not favor either of the interventions. There is an uncertain advantage of ECTR with respect to total minor complications (more transient paresthesia but fewer skin-related complications). Future studies are unlikely to alter these findings because of the rarity of the outcome. The effect of a learning curve might be responsible for reduced recurrences and reoperations with ECTR in studies that are more recent, although formal statistical analysis failed to provide evidence for such an association. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I.

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.

The influence of students' prior clinical skills and context characteristics on mini-CEX scores in clerkships - a multilevel analysis.

BACKGROUND In contrast to objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs), mini-clinical evaluation exercises (mini-CEXs) take place at the clinical workplace. As both mini-CEXs and OSCEs assess clinical skills, but within different contexts, this study aims at analyzing to which degree students' mini-CEX scores can be predicted by their recent OSCE scores and/or context characteristics. METHODS Medical students participated in an end of Year 3 OSCE and in 11 mini-CEXs during 5 different clerkships of Year 4. The students' mean scores of 9 clinical skills OSCE stations and mean 'overall' and 'domain' mini-CEX scores, averaged over all mini-CEXs of each student were computed. Linear regression analyses including random effects were used to predict mini-CEX scores by OSCE performance and characteristics of clinics, trainers, students and assessments. RESULTS A total of 512 trainers in 45 clinics provided 1783 mini-CEX ratings for 165 students; OSCE results were available for 144 students (87 %). Most influential for the prediction of 'overall' mini-CEX scores was the trainers' clinical position with a regression coefficient of 0.55 (95 %-CI: 0.26-0.84; p < .001) for residents compared to heads of department. Highly complex tasks and assessments taking place in large clinics significantly enhanced 'overall' mini-CEX scores, too. In contrast, high OSCE performance did not significantly increase 'overall' mini-CEX scores. CONCLUSION In our study, Mini-CEX scores depended rather on context characteristics than on students' clinical skills as demonstrated in an OSCE. Ways are discussed which focus on either to enhance the scores' validity or to use narrative comments only.

Influence of unilateral maxillary first molar extraction treatment on second and third molar inclination in Class II subdivision patients.

OBJECTIVE To assess the maxillary second molar (M2) and third molar (M3) inclination following orthodontic treatment of Class II subdivision malocclusion with unilateral maxillary first molar (M1) extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS Panoramic radiographs of 21 Class II subdivision adolescents (eight boys, 13 girls; mean age, 12.8 years; standard deviation, 1.7 years) before treatment, after treatment with extraction of one maxillary first molar and Begg appliances and after at least 1.8 years in retention were retrospectively collected from a private practice. M2 and M3 inclination angles (M2/ITP, M2/IOP, M3/ITP, M3/IOP), constructed by intertuberosity (ITP) and interorbital planes (IOP), were calculated for the extracted and nonextracted segments. Random effects regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect on the molar angulation of extraction, time, and gender after adjusting for baseline measurements. RESULTS Time and extraction status were significant predictors for M2 angulation. M2/ITP and M2/IOP decreased by 4.04 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.93, 1.16; P  =  .001) and 3.67 (95% CI: -6.76, -0.58; P  =  .020) in the extraction group compared to the nonextraction group after adjusting for time and gender. The adjusted analysis showed that extraction was the only predictor for M3 angulation that reached statistical significance. M3 mesial inclination increased by 7.38° (95% CI: -11.2, -3.54; P < .001) and 7.33° (95% CI: -11.48, -3.19; P  =  .001). CONCLUSIONS M2 and M3 uprighting significantly improved in the extraction side after orthodontic treatment with unilateral maxillary M1 extraction. There was a significant increase in mesial tipping of maxillary second molar crowns over time.

Efficacy, Acceptability, and Tolerability of Antipsychotics in Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia: A Network Meta-analysis.

Importance In treatment-resistant schizophrenia, clozapine is considered the standard treatment. However, clozapine use has restrictions owing to its many adverse effects. Moreover, an increasing number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of other antipsychotics have been published. Objective To integrate all the randomized evidence from the available antipsychotics used for treatment-resistant schizophrenia by performing a network meta-analysis. Data Sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biosis, PsycINFO, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, World Health Organization International Trial Registry, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched up to June 30, 2014. Study Selection At least 2 independent reviewers selected published and unpublished single- and double-blind RCTs in treatment-resistant schizophrenia (any study-defined criterion) that compared any antipsychotic (at any dose and in any form of administration) with another antipsychotic or placebo. Data Extraction and Synthesis At least 2 independent reviewers extracted all data into standard forms and assessed the quality of all included trials with the Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool. Data were pooled using a random-effects model in a Bayesian setting. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was efficacy as measured by overall change in symptoms of schizophrenia. Secondary outcomes included change in positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, categorical response to treatment, dropouts for any reason and for inefficacy of treatment, and important adverse events. Results Forty blinded RCTs with 5172 unique participants (71.5% men; mean [SD] age, 38.8 [3.7] years) were included in the analysis. Few significant differences were found in all outcomes. In the primary outcome (reported as standardized mean difference; 95% credible interval), olanzapine was more effective than quetiapine (-0.29; -0.56 to -0.02), haloperidol (-0. 29; -0.44 to -0.13), and sertindole (-0.46; -0.80 to -0.06); clozapine was more effective than haloperidol (-0.22; -0.38 to -0.07) and sertindole (-0.40; -0.74 to -0.04); and risperidone was more effective than sertindole (-0.32; -0.63 to -0.01). A pattern of superiority for olanzapine, clozapine, and risperidone was seen in other efficacy outcomes, but results were not consistent and effect sizes were usually small. In addition, relatively few RCTs were available for antipsychotics other than clozapine, haloperidol, olanzapine, and risperidone. The most surprising finding was that clozapine was not significantly better than most other drugs. Conclusions and Relevance Insufficient evidence exists on which antipsychotic is more efficacious for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, and blinded RCTs-in contrast to unblinded, randomized effectiveness studies-provide little evidence of the superiority of clozapine compared with other second-generation antipsychotics. Future clozapine studies with high doses and patients with extremely treatment-refractory schizophrenia might be most promising to change the current evidence.

Publication of statistically significant research findings in prosthodontics & implant dentistry in the context of other dental specialties

OBJECTIVES To assess the hypothesis that there is excessive reporting of statistically significant studies published in prosthodontic and implantology journals, which could indicate selective publication. METHODS The last 30 issues of 9 journals in prosthodontics and implant dentistry were hand-searched for articles with statistical analyses. The percentages of significant and non-significant results were tabulated by parameter of interest. Univariable/multivariable logistic regression analyses were applied to identify possible predictors of reporting statistically significance findings. The results of this study were compared with similar studies in dentistry with random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS From the 2323 included studies 71% of them reported statistically significant results, with the significant results ranging from 47% to 86%. Multivariable modeling identified that geographical area and involvement of statistician were predictors of statistically significant results. Compared to interventional studies, the odds that in vitro and observational studies would report statistically significant results was increased by 1.20 times (OR: 2.20, 95% CI: 1.66-2.92) and 0.35 times (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.05-1.73), respectively. The probability of statistically significant results from randomized controlled trials was significantly lower compared to various study designs (difference: 30%, 95% CI: 11-49%). Likewise the probability of statistically significant results in prosthodontics and implant dentistry was lower compared to other dental specialties, but this result did not reach statistical significant (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS The majority of studies identified in the fields of prosthodontics and implant dentistry presented statistically significant results. The same trend existed in publications of other specialties in dentistry.