Mavacamten Treatment for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is the most common heritable cardiomyopathy, yet pharmacological therapy has been unchanged for decades until the recent introduction of mavacamten, a first-in-class cardiac myosin inhibitor. We assessed the efficacy and safety of mavacamten in HCM. To date, only 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared the outcomes of mavacamten vs placebo for HCM. We used a fixed effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary composite endpoint (PCE) was defined as either ≥1.5 mL/kg/min increase in peak oxygen consumption (pVO2) with ≥1 New York Heart Association functional class (NYHA-FC) improvement or ≥3.0 mL/kg/min increase in pVO2 without worsening of NYHA-FC. Secondary outcomes included ≥1 NYHA-FC improvement, septal reduction therapy (SRT) or guideline eligible for SRT, ≥1 serious adverse event (SAE), ≥1 treatment emergency adverse event (TEAE), atrial fibrillation (AF), and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT). Three RCTs (n = 422, mean follow-up 24 weeks) were included. Compared to placebo, mavacamten achieved higher rates of PCE (RR 1.92; 95% CI 1.28-2.88; P = 0.002) and ≥1 NYHA-FC improvement (RR 2.10; 95% CI 1.66-2.67; P < 0.00001) and lower rates of SRT or guideline eligible for SRT (RR 0.29; 95% CI 0.22-0.39; P < 0.00001). There were no differences between both groups in ≥1 SAE, AF, and NSVT, however mavacamten had higher rates of ≥1 TEAE. In patients with HCM, mavacamten helps improve pVO2 and NYHA-FC and reduces SRT but may be associated with TEAE. Further research is warranted to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes of mavacamten.     

Intravenous Versus Oral Iron for the Treatment of Anemia in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Anemia is the most prevalent extraintestinal complication of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Our aim was to evaluate the comparative efficacy and harm of intravenous (IV) versus oral iron supplementation for correcting anemia in adult IBD patients.We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to integrate evidence from randomized controlled trials having enrolled adults with IBD, and comparing IV versus oral iron (head-to-head) for correcting iron-deficiency anemia. Medline, Embase, Scopus, and the Web of Science database were searched through July 2015. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the ClinicalTrials.gov, and international conference proceedings were also investigated. Two reviewers independently abstracted study data and outcomes, and rated each trial''s risk-of-bias. Pooled odds ratio (OR) estimates with their 95% CIs were calculated using fixed- and random-effects models.Five eligible studies, including 694 IBD patients, were identified. In meta-analysis, IV iron demonstrated a higher efficacy in achieving a hemoglobin rise of ≥2.0 g/dL as compared to oral iron (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.13, 2.18). Treatment discontinuation rates, due to adverse events or intolerance, were lower in the IV iron groups (OR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.59). Similarly, the occurrence of gastrointestinal adverse events was consistently lower in the IV iron groups. On the contrary, serious adverse events (SAEs) were more frequently reported among patients receiving IV iron preparations (OR: 4.57, 95% CI: 1.11, 18.8); however, the majority of the reported SAEs were judged as unrelated or unlikely to be related to the study medication. We found no evidence of publication bias, or between-study heterogeneity, across all analyses. Risk of bias was high across primary studies, because patients and personnel were not blinded to the intervention.IV iron appears to be more effective and better tolerated than oral iron for the treatment of IBD-associated anemia.     

Therapeutic Hypothermia and the Risk of Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Current guidelines recommend a period of moderate therapeutic hypothermia (TH) for comatose patients after cardiac arrest to improve clinical outcomes. However, in-vitro studies have reported platelet dysfunction, thrombocytopenia, and coagulopathy, results that might discourage clinicians from applying TH in clinical practice. We aimed to quantify the risks of hemorrhage observed in clinical studies.Medline and Embase were searched from inception to October 2015.Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing patients undergoing TH with controls were selected, irrespective of the indications for TH. There were no restrictions for language, population, or publication year.Data on study characteristics, which included patients, details of intervention, and outcome measures, were extracted.Forty-three trials that included 7528 patients were identified from 2692 potentially relevant references. Any hemorrhage was designated as the primary outcome and was reported in 28 studies. The pooled results showed no significant increase in hemorrhage risk associated with TH (risk difference [RD] 0.005; 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.001–0.011; I², 0%). Among secondary outcomes, patients undergoing TH were found to have increased risk of thrombocytopenia (RD 0.109; 95% CI 0.038–0.179; I² 57.3%) and transfusion requirements (RD 0.021; 95% CI 0.003–0.040; I² 0%). The meta-regression analysis indicated that prolonged duration of cooling may be associated with increased risk of hemorrhage.TH was not associated with increased risk of hemorrhage despite the increased risk of thrombocytopenia and transfusion requirements. Clinicians should cautiously assess each patient''s risk-benefit profile before applying TH.     

Selexipag in Patients With Pulmonary Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Despite the availability of treatments for all subgroups of pulmonary hypertension (PH), the prognosis for PH remains poor. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of selexipag in patients with PH. A systematic search was made of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov, without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on treatment of PH with selexipag, compared with placebo or blank, were reviewed. Studies were pooled to weighted mean differences (WMDs) and risk ratios (RRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Selexipag was safe and significantly improved hospitalization for worsening of PH, WHO FC, mPAP, NT-proBNP, and cardiac index in patients with PH. Selexipag should be considered in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension or chronic thromboembolic PH.     

SSRIs for Hot Flashes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Background

Hot flashes are the most commonly reported vasomotor symptom during the peri- and early post-menopausal period.

Objectives

To systematically review, appraise and summarize the evidence of the impact of different SSRIs on peri-menopausal hot flashes in healthy women in randomized, controlled trials.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted of MEDLINE?, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and Scopus through March 2013. Two independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Random effects meta-analysis was used to pool outcomes across studies, and Bayesian mixed treatment methods were used to rank SSRIs in terms of effectiveness.

Results

We included a total of 11 randomized controlled trials with good methodological quality enrolling 2,069 menopausal and post-menopausal women (follow-up 1–9 months, mean age 36–76 years, mean time since menopause 2.3–6.6 years). Compared with placebo, SSRIs were associated with a statistically significant decrease in hot flash frequency (difference in means ?0.93; 95 % CI ?1.46 to ?0.37; I² = 21 %) and severity assessed by various scales (standardized difference in means ?0.34; 95 % CI ?0.59 to ?0.10; I² = 47 %). Adverse events did not differ from placebo. Mixed treatment comparison analysis demonstrated the superiority of escitalopram compared to other SSRIs in terms of efficacy.

Conclusion

SSRI use is associated with modest improvement in the severity and frequency of hot flashes but can also be associated with the typical profile of SSRI adverse effects.     

Efficacy and Safety of E-Cigarette Use for Smoking Cessation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BackgroundPeople who smoke conventional cigarettes are increasingly turning to electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) as a pathway to quitting. However, the efficacy and safety of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation remains controversial.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), identified through a systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. Inclusion was restricted to RCTs with a follow-up duration ≥6 months. The primary endpoint was the most rigorous criterion of biochemically validated abstinence at maximum follow-up, and the primary comparison was nicotine e-cigarettes versus any conventional (ie, non-e-cigarette) smoking cessation therapy. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess bias. Count data were pooled across trials using random-effects models with inverse variance weighting to estimate relative risks (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We registered the study protocol with the Open Science Framework Registries (osf.io/26fkq).ResultsA total of 5 RCTs (n = 3253) were included. Compared with conventional smoking cessation therapies, the use of nicotine e-cigarettes was associated with an increase in abstinence, defined by the most rigorous criterion of abstinence reported (RR 1.77; 95% CI, 1.29-2.44). Nicotine e-cigarettes also increased abstinence (defined by the most rigorous criterion) compared with non-nicotine e-cigarettes (RR 1.56; 95% CI, 1.13-2.15). The incidence of death or serious adverse events was low across all trials at maximum follow-up.ConclusionsAmong individuals attempting to quit smoking, nicotine e-cigarettes are more efficacious than conventional nicotine replacement or behavioral smoking cessation therapies, and may prove beneficial in reducing smoking-related health risks.     

Probiotics for Preventing Late-Onset Sepsis in Preterm Neonates: A PRISMA-Compliant Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

The effect of probiotics on late-onset sepsis (LOS) in preterm neonates remains controversial. The authors systematically reviewed the literature to investigate whether enteral probiotic supplementation reduced the risk of LOS in preterm neonates in neonatal intensive care units.PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the effect of probiotics in preterm neonates. The primary outcome was culture-proven bacterial and/or fungal sepsis. The Mantel–Haenszel method with random-effects model was used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Twenty-seven trials were included in our review, and 25 trials involving 6104 preterm neonates were statistically analyzed. Pooled analysis indicated that enteral probiotic supplementation significantly reduced the risk of any sepsis (25 RCTs; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73–0.94; I² = 26%), bacterial sepsis (11 RCTs; RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71–0.95; I² = 0%), and fungal sepsis (6 RCTs; RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41–0.78; I² = 0%). This beneficial effect remains in very low birth weight infants (<1500 g) (19 RCTs; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75–0.97; I² = 18%), but not in extremely low birth weight infants (<1000 g) (3 RCTs; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.45–1.19; I² = 53%). All the included trials reported no systemic infection caused by the supplemental probiotic organisms.Current evidence indicates that probiotic supplementation is safe, and effective in reducing the risk of LOS in preterm neonates in neonatal intensive care units. Further studies are needed to address the optimal probiotic organism, dosing, timing, and duration. High-quality and adequately powered RCTs regarding the efficacy and safety of the use of probiotics in extremely low birth weight infants are still warranted.     

Drug-Eluting Versus Bare-Metal Stents in Older Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BackgroundDespite the high prevalence of ischemic heart disease in older patients, there is a substantial lack of evidence to guide clinical decision-making in this population. Hence, we performed a meta-analysis to determine the safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS).MethodsElectronic databases were searched for randomized trials comparing DES with BMS in patients ≥70 years-old. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Secondary outcomes included different ischemic and bleeding events. Subgroup analyses for dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration were conducted.ResultsWe included 7 trials with a total of 5449 patients. The use of DES compared with BMS was associated with a significant reduction in MACE (odds ratio [OR]:0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.62–0.93; P = 0.007) with no increased risk of bleeding events (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.89–1.27; P = 0.48). However, longer duration of DAPT (>6 months) for the DES group increased bleeding events (OR: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.05–2.20; P = 0.03). In contrast, shorter DAPT showed persistent efficacy in reducing MACE in DES-treated patients with no increased bleeding events (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.60–0.87; P < 0.01 and OR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.84–1.22; P = 0.89, respectively).ConclusionsIn older patients who had undergone PCI, DES showed superior efficacy in reducing MACE with no increased risk of bleeding compared with BMS. Persistent MACE reduction was evident with shorter DAPT durations in DES-treated patients.SummaryThis meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials demonstrated that drug-eluting stents were associated with a significant reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events with no increased risk of bleeding compared with bare-metal stents. The risk of bleeding was high with longer dual antiplatelet therapy duration for patients who underwent DES placement. However, short duration of dual antiplatelet therapy substantially reduced major adverse cardiovascular events with no increased bleeding risk.     

Steroid Injection and Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Agents for Shoulder Pain: A PRISMA Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Advantages and possible risks associated with steroid injection compared with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for shoulder pain are not fully understood.To compare the efficiency and safety of steroid injection versus NSAIDs for patients with shoulder pain.PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched through July 2015.Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions: randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed steroid injection versus NSAIDs for patients with shoulder pain.Study appraisal and synthesis methods: predefined primary efficacy outcome was functional improvement; and secondary efficacy outcomes included pain relief and complications. Relative risks (RRs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model accounting for clinical heterogeneity.Eight RCTs involving 465 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Five trials compared steroid injection with oral NSAIDs, and 3 compared steroids injection with NSAIDs injection. Compared with steroid injection, oral NSAIDs were less effective in 4 or 6 weeks for functional improvement (SMD 0.61; 95% CI, 0.08–1.14; P = 0.01), while there was no significant difference in pain relief (SMD 0.45; 95% CI, −0.50–1.40; P < 0.00001) or complication rate (RR 1.10; 95% CI, 0.26–4.58; P = 0.29). Meta-analysis was not performed for NSAIDs injection due to considerable heterogeneity. Conflicting results were observed in favor of either steroid or NSAIDs injection.Not all diseases that can lead to shoulder pain were included, detailed intervention protocols were inconsistent across studies, and some estimated data were input into comparison while some data were lost, which could exert an influence on pooled results.Steroid injection, compared with oral NSAIDs, provides slightly more improvement in shoulder function without superiority in pain relief or risk of complications at 4 to 6 weeks.Treatment decision should be made based on diseases. NSAIDs injection might be a treatment method for shoulder pain.     

Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Patients with Mild Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective  

This review aims at updating the results of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in mild heart failure patients, and investigating whether CRT can prevent or reverse heart failure progression in an earlier stage.     

The Effectiveness and Safety of Acupuncture for Patients With Alzheimer Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

The use of acupuncture for treating Alzheimer disease (AD) has been increasing in frequency over recent years. As more studies are conducted on the use of acupuncture for treating AD, it is necessary to re-assess the effectiveness and safety of this practice.The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for treating AD.Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Chinese Biomedicine Literature (CBM), Chinese Medical Current Content (CMCC) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched from their inception to June 2014.Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with AD treated by acupuncture or by acupuncture combined with 1 kind of drugs were included.Two authors extracted data independently. The continuous data were expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Weighted MD (WMD) was used instead of standardized MD (SMD) when the same scales were used. Adverse reactions related to acupuncture were also investigated.Ten randomized controlled trials with a total of 585 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The combined results of 6 trials showed that acupuncture was better than drugs at improving scores on the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) scale (MD 1.05, 95% CI 0.16–1.93). Evidence from the pooled results of 3 trials showed that acupuncture plus donepezil was more effective than donepezil alone at improving the MMSE scale score (MD 2.37, 95% CI 1.53–3.21). Out of 141 clinical trials, 2 trials reported the incidence of adverse reactions related to acupuncture. Seven out of 3416 patients had adverse reactions related to acupuncture during or after treatment; the reactions were described as tolerable and not severe.Acupuncture may be more effective than drugs and may enhance the effect of drugs for treating AD in terms of improving cognitive function. Acupuncture may also be more effective than drugs at improving AD patients’ ability to carry out their daily lives. Moreover, acupuncture is safe for treating people with AD.Protocol registration: PROSPERO CRD42014009619.Protocol published in BMJ-open.     

Strategies to Make Ramadan Fasting Safer in Type 2 Diabetics: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Observational Studies

Ramadan is the holy month for Muslims whereby they fast from predawn to after sunset and is observed by all healthy Muslim adults as well as a large population of type 2 diabetic Muslims.To determine the comparative effectiveness of various strategies that have been used for type 2 diabetic Muslim who fast during Ramadan.A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies (RCT) as well as observational studies for patients with type 2 diabetes who fasted during Ramadan was conducted. Eight databases were searched from January 1980 through October 2015 for relevant studies. Two reviewers independently screened and assessed study for eligibility, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted relevant data. A network meta-analysis for each outcome was fitted separately, combining direct and indirect evidence for each comparison.Twenty-nine studies, 16 RCTs and 13 observational studies each met the inclusion criteria. The most common strategy used was drug changes during the Ramadan period, which found that the use of DPP-4 (Dipeptidyl peptidase inhibitor -4) inhibitors were associated with a reduction in incidence of experiencing hypoglycemia during Ramadan in both RCTs (pooled relative risk: 0.56; 95% confidence interval: 0.44–0.72) as well as in observational studies (pooled relative risk: 0.27; 0.09–0.75). Ramadan-focused education was shown to be beneficial in reducing hypoglycemia in observational studies but not RCTs (0.25 versus 1.00). Network meta-analyses suggest that incretin mimetics can reduce the risk of hypoglycemia by nearly 1.5 times.The newer antidiabetic agents appear to lower the risk of hypoglycemia and improved glycemic control when compared with sulfonylureas. Ramadan-focused education shows to be a promising strategy but more rigorous examination from RCTs are required.     

Sevelamer Versus Calcium-Based Binders for Treatment of Hyperphosphatemia in CKD: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background and objectives

People with CKD stages 3–5 and on dialysis (5D) have dramatically increased mortality, which has been associated with hyperphosphatemia in many studies. Oral phosphate binders are commonly prescribed to lower serum phosphate. We conducted an updated meta-analysis of the noncalcium–based binder (non-CBB) sevelamer versus CBBs in CKD stages 3–5D.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements

Randomized, controlled trials comparing sevelamer with CBBs were identified through MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Patient-level outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events and mortality, hospitalization, and adverse effects. Intermediate outcomes included vascular calcification and bone changes. Biochemical outcomes included serum phosphate, calcium, parathyroid hormone, lipids, and hypercalcemia. We conducted and reported this review according to Cochrane guidelines.

Results

We included 25 studies to March 31, 2015 with 4770 participants (88% on hemodialysis). Patients receiving sevelamer had lower all–cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.32 to 0.93), no statistically significant difference in cardiovascular mortality (n=2712; RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.07 to 1.64), and an increase in combined gastrointestinal events of borderline statistical significance (n=384; RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.97 to 2.08). For biochemical outcomes, patients receiving sevelamer had lower total serum cholesterol (mean difference [MD], −20.2 mg/dl; 95% CI, −25.9 to −14.5 mg/dl), LDL-cholesterol (MD, −21.6 mg/dl; 95% CI, −27.9 to −15.4 mg/dl), and calcium (MD, −0.4 mg/dl; 95% CI, −0.6 to −0.2 mg/dl) and a reduced risk of hypercalcemia (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.48). End of treatment intact parathyroid hormone was significantly higher for sevelamer (MD, 32.9 pg/ml; 95% CI, 0.1 to 65.7 pg/ml). Serum phosphate values showed no significant differences.

Conclusions

Patients with CKD stages 3–5D using sevelamer have lower all–cause mortality compared with those using CBBs. Because of a lack of placebo-controlled studies, questions remain regarding phosphate binder benefits for patients with CKD stages 3–5 and not on dialysis.     

Prasugrel vs Ticagrelor for DAPT in Patients with ACS Undergoing PCI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

IntroductionDual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with a P2Y12 inhibitor added to aspirin is considered the standard of care for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous intervention (PCI). Prasugrel and ticagrelor are commonly used P2Y12 inhibitors, and a few head-to-head randomized control trials (RCTs) have been performed. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of these RCTs to compare the efficacy and adverse effects between these two agents when used in patients with ACS undergoing PCI.MethodsWe searched PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane library for RCTs comparing prasugrel to ticagrelor in ACS. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis, major bleeding, and all bleeding event. Estimates were calculated as random effects risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsSix trials with 6807 patients were included. There were no significant difference of MACE (RR 0.93; 95% CI [0.72–1.20]; p = 0.59; I² = 26%), all-cause mortality (RR 0.92; 95% CI [0.73–1.17]; p = 0.51; I² = 0%), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI [0.75–1.31]; p = 0.96; I² = 0%), MI (RR 0.87; 95% CI [0.60–1.27]; p = 0.48; I² = 27%), stent thrombosis (RR 0.64; 95% CI [0.39–1.04]; p = 0.07; I² = 0%), major bleeding (RR 0.94; 95% CI [0.70–1.26]; p = 0.68; I² = 6%), and all bleeding event (RR 0.92; 95% CI [0.77–1.09]; p = 0.32; I² = 0%) for prasugrel compared with ticagrelor.ConclusionThere are no significant difference of MACE, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, MI, stent thrombosis, and bleeding between prasugrel and ticagrelor when added to aspirin among patients with ACS undergoing PCI.     

Short versus Longer Implants in Sites without the Need for Bone Augmentation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objectives: The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to analyse the clinical performance of short compared to longer implants inserted in sites without the need for bone augmentation. Methods: The protocol of the present PRISMA-driven meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021264781). Electronic and manual searches were performed up to January 2022. All Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing short (≤6 mm) to longer (≥8.5 mm) implants placed in non-atrophic and non-augmented sites were included. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized clinical trials (RoB 2) and the quality of evidence was determined with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. A meta-analysis was performed on implant survival rate, marginal bone level change (MBLc), and technical and biological complications at the available follow-up time points. The power of the meta-analytic findings was determined by trial sequential analysis (TSA). Results: From 1485 initial records, 13 articles were finally included. No significant difference was found in the survival rate between short and long implant at any follow-up (moderate quality of evidence). Significantly more bone loss for long implants at 1 and 5 years from implant placement and more technical complications with short implants at 10 years were found. No other significant inter-group differences in terms of MBLc and biological complications were detected. Conclusions: Moderate evidence exists suggesting that short implants perform as well as longer ones in the rehabilitation of edentulous sites without the need for bone augmentation. Further long-term, well-designed RCTs, however, are still needed to provide specific evidence-based clinical recommendations for an extended use of short implants in non-atrophic sites.     

Safety and Efficacy of the Moderate Sedation During Flexible Bronchoscopic Procedure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Moderate sedatives have been increasingly used to improve patient comfort during flexible bronchoscopy (FB). However, routine use of moderate sedation during FB is controversial because its efficacy and safety are not well established.This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of moderate sedation during FB.A search was made of Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to May 2014.Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were included.The main analysis was designed to examine the efficacy of moderate sedation during FB in sedation than no-sedation.The willingness to repeat FB was significantly more in sedation than no-sedation (odds ratio [OR] 2.30; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–4.73; P = 0.02; I² = 22.5). The duration of FB was shorter in sedation group than no-sedation group (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.21; 95% CI −0.38 to −0.03; P = 0.02; I² = 78.3%). Event of hypoxia was not significantly different between sedation and no-sedation groups (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.42–1.73; P = 0.67; I² = 0%). The SpO₂ during procedure was not different between sedation and no-sedation groups (SMD −0.14; 95% CI −0.37 to 0.08; P = 0.21; I² = 49.9%). However, in subgroup analysis without supplemental oxygen, the SpO₂ was significantly lower in sedation than no-sedation group (SMD −0.45; 95% CI −0.78 to −0.11; P = 0.01; I² = 0.0%).According to this meta-analysis, moderate sedation in FB would be useful in patients who will require repeated bronchoscopies as well as safe in respiratory depression. To our knowledge, although the various sedative drugs are already used in the real field, this analysis was the first attempt to quantify objective results. We anticipate more definite and studies designed to elucidate standardized outcomes for moderate sedation in FB.