| 1. |
- Björk, Mathilda, et al.
(författare)
-
Interventions to facilitate return to work in adults with chronic non-malignant pain: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis
- 2020
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP. - 2044-6055. ; 10:11
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction Work absenteeism due to chronic non-malignant pain (CNMP) is a major societal and individual cause of concern that requires effective treatments. Objective We present a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) aiming to compare available interventions for return to work (RTW) in adults with CNMP. Methods and analysis PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Knowledge and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases will be searched till 31 August 2020 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining interventions for RTW outcomes among patients with CNMP. Two independent investigators will search the databases, perform data extraction and assess the methodological quality of the selected RCTs. The primary outcome will be RTW, if possible, full-time or part-time after work absence due to chronic pain from baseline to the last available follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include self-reported workability or work capacity, or self-reported physical functioning and quality of life as measured by any validated scale. Pairwise meta-analysis and NMA will be conducted for each outcome using a random-effects model. For the primary outcomes, we will also obtain the ranking of all competing interventions within each NMA using surface under the cumulative ranking curve. The assumption of coherence (ie, that direct and indirect evidence are in statistical agreement) will be examined using both a local and a global approach. We will also conduct subgroup and meta-regression analyses, whenever feasible, to investigate the unexplained variation in effect size. The comparison-adjusted funnel plot will be used to evaluate small-study effects. The overall quality of evidence will be rated with the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis tool. Data analysis will be conducted using Stata V.16.0. Ethics and dissemination This systematic review does not require ethical approval since it will not disseminate any private patient data. The results of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020171429.
|
|
| 2. |
- Charitakis, Emmanouil, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: a network meta-analysis
- 2022
-
Ingår i: BMC Medicine. - : BMC. - 1741-7015. ; 20:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: There is no consensus on the most efficient catheter ablation (CA) strategy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of different CA strategies for AF ablation through network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL was performed up to October 5th, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing different CA approaches were included. Efficacy was defined as arrhythmia recurrence after CA and safety as any reported complication related to the procedure during a minimum follow-up time of 6 months. Results: In total, 67 RCTs (n = 9871) comparing 19 different CA strategies were included. The risk of recurrence was significantly decreased compared to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) alone for PVI with renal denervation (RR: 0.60, CI: 0.38-0.94), PVI with ganglia-plexi ablation (RR: 0.62, CI: 0.41-0.94), PVI with additional ablation lines (RR: 0.8, CI: 0.68-0.95) and PVI in combination with bi-atrial modification (RR: 0.32, CI: 0.11-0.88). Strategies including PVI appeared superior to non-PVI strategies such as electrogram-based approaches. No significant differences in safety were observed. Conclusions: This NMA showed that PVI in combination with additional CA strategies, such as autonomic modulation and additional lines, seem to increase the efficacy of PVI alone. These strategies can be considered in treating patients with AF, since, additionally, no differences in safety were observed. This study provides decision-makers with comprehensive and comparative evidence about the efficacy and safety of different CA strategies.
|
|
| 3. |
- Charitakis, Emmanouil, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparing efficacy and safety in catheter ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation: protocol of a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- 2020
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP. - 2044-6055. ; 10:11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia. Catheter ablation (CA) of AF is an increasingly offered therapeutic approach, primary to relieve AF-related symptoms. Despite the development of new ablation approaches, there is no consensus regarding the most efficient ablation strategy. The objective of this network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare the efficacy and safety of all different CA approaches for the treatment of patients with paroxysmal (PAF) and non-PAF (non-PAF). Methods and analysis We will perform a systematic search to identify randomised controlled trials of different CA approaches for the treatment of PAF and non-PAF, through the final search date of 1 March 2020. Information sources will include major bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL) and clinical trial registries. Our primary outcomes will be the efficacy (recurrence-free survival) and safety of different CA approaches for the treatment of AF. Secondary outcomes will be all-cause mortality and procedural time. An NMA will be performed to determine the relative effects of different catheter ablation approaches (such as pulmonary vein isolation alone or in combination with ablation lines, ablation of complex fractionated atrial electrograms, etc). In PAF, a separate analysis will be performed including different energy sources (such as radiofrequency, cryogenic and laser energy). Risk of bias assessment and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings to potential bias. Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval will be needed because data are collected from previous studies. The results will be presented through peer-review journals and conference presentation. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020169494.
|
|
| 4. |
- Charitakis, Emmanouil, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparing Efficacy and Safety in Catheter Ablation Strategies for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation : A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Diagnostics. - : MDPI. - 2075-4418. ; 12:2
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Although catheter ablation (CA) is an established treatment for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF), there is no consensus regarding the most efficient CA strategy. The objective of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the efficacy and safety of different CA strategies for PAF. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL until the final search date, 5 October 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing different CA strategies and methods for pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) were included. Efficacy was defined as lack of arrhythmia recurrence after CA and safety as any reported complication related to the procedure during a minimum follow-up time of six months. In total, 43 RCTs comparing 11 different CA strategies involving 6701 patients were included. The risk of recurrence was significantly decreased in comparison with PVI with radiofrequency only for the following treatments: PVI with adjuvant ablation (RR: 0.79, CI: 0.65-0.97) and PVI with sympathetic modulation (RR: 0.64, CI: 0.46-0.88). However, PVI with radiofrequency was superior to non-PVI strategies (RR: 1.65, CI: 1.2-2.26). No statistically significant difference was found in safety between different CA strategies. Concerning different PVI strategies, no difference was observed either in efficacy or in safety between tested strategies. This NMA suggests that different PVI strategies are generally similar in terms of efficacy, while PVI with additional ablation or sympathetic modulation may be more effective than PVI alone. This study provides decision-makers with insights into the efficacy and safety of different CA strategies.
|
|
| 5. |
- Jussil, Heidi, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparative efficacy and acceptability of different antihypertensive drug classes for cardiovascular disease prevention: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2044-6055. ; 11:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction Clinical practice guidelines differ in their recommendations on first-line antihypertensive drug classes. No adequately powered randomised controlled trial have assessed all major drug classes against each other, and previous meta-analyses have mainly relied on pairwise meta-analyses for treatment comparisons.Methods and analysis A systematic review and network meta-analysis will be carried out to assess the efficacy and acceptability of all major antihypertensive drug classes. PubMed and CENTRAL were searched on 21 February 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials with at least 1000 person-years of follow-up, assessing any antihypertensive agent against other agents or placebo. All trials fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be assessed for risk of bias using the second version of Cochrane's risk of bias assessment tool. The study selection process, risk of bias assessment and data extraction are done by two authors in duplicate. Relative risks from individual trials will be combined in pairwise meta-analyses; in the absence of important intransitivity, random-effects network meta-analysis will be performed. The primary outcome for efficacy will be major adverse cardiovascular events, whereas the primary acceptability outcome will be treatment discontinuation for any reason. Additional outcomes include all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure and acute renal failure. The impact of differences within drug classes will be explored through alternative networks, including analysing thiazide-like and thiazide-type diuretics separately.Ethics and dissemination This review will only process aggregated study level data and does not require ethical approval. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal.PROSPERO registration number CRD42020205482.
|
|
