Tenecteplase (TNK) is a promising candidate to replace alteplase as the standard of care for acute ischemic stroke (AIS); however, the optimal dosage is still to be investigated. Therefore, we aim to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TNK versus alteplase and to investigate the optimal TNK dosage. A systematic review, pairwise, and network meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from WOS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and PubMed until July 26th, 2022. We used the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes presented with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We registered our protocol in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022352038. Nine RCTs with a total of 3,707 patients were included. TNK significantly led to complete recanalization (RR: 1.27 with 95% CI [1.02, 1.57], P = 0.03); however, we found no difference regarding early neurological improvement (RR: 1.07 with 95% CI [0.94, 1.21], P = 0.33) and excellent neurological recovery (RR: 1.03 with 95% CI [0.96, 1.10], P = 0.42). Also, TNK was similar to alteplase regarding mortality (RR: 0.99 with 95% CI [0.82, 1.18], P = 0.88), intracranial haemorrhage (RR: 1.00 with 95% CI [0.85, 1.18], P = 0.99), and parenchymal hematoma (RR: 1.13 with 95% CI [0.83, 1.54], P = 0.44). TNK in the dose of 0.25 mg is a viable candidate to displace alteplase as the standard of care in patients with an AIS within 4.5 h of presentation due to its better rate of early neurological recovery and non-inferiority in terms of safety outcomes. However, the evidence regarding TNK’s role in AIS presenting after 4.5 h from symptoms onset, wake-up stroke, and minor stroke/TIA is still lacking, necessitating further double-blinded pragmatic RCTs in this regard.

Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is the most prevalent etiology of gastritis worldwide. H. pylori management depends mainly on antibiotics, especially the triple therapy formed of clarithromycin, amoxicillin, and proton pump inhibitors. Lately, many antibiotic-resistant strains have emerged, leading to a decrease in the eradication rates of H. pylori. Polaprezinc (PZN), a mucosal protective zinc-L-carnosine complex, may be a non-antibiotic agent to treat H. pylori without the risk of resistance. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a PZN-based regimen for the eradication of H. pylori. This study used a systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from WOS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, PubMed, and Google Scholar until 25 July 2022. We used the odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous outcomes presented with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We registered our protocol in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022349231. We included 3 trials with a total of 396 participants who were randomized to either PZN plus triple therapy (n = 199) or triple therapy alone (control) (n = 197). Pooled OR found a statistical difference favoring the PZN arm in the intention to treat and per protocol H. pylori eradication rates (OR: 2.01 with 95% CI [1.27, 3.21], p = 0.003) and (OR: 2.65 with 95% CI [1.55, 4.54], p = 0.0004), respectively. We found no statistical difference between the two groups regarding the total adverse events (OR: 1.06 with 95% CI [0.55, 2.06], p = 0.85). PZN, when added to the triple therapy, yielded a better effect concerning the eradication rates of H. pylori with no difference in adverse event rates, and thus can be considered a valuable adjuvant for the management of H. pylori. However, the evidence is still scarce, and larger trials are needed to confirm or refute our findings.

Olokizumab (OKZ) is a novel IL-6 inhibitor that directly targets IL-6 rather than its receptor. We aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OKZ for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to investigate the optimal treatment regimen. A systematic review, pairwise, and network meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from WOS, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and PubMed until August 31, 2022. We used the risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively, presented with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We registered our protocol in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022358082. Five RCTs with 2277 patients were included. OKZ significantly improved the American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR) 20 (RR: 1.97 with 95% CI [1.49, 2.58], P = 0.00001), ACR50 (RR: 3.83 with 95% CI [2.13, 6.87], P = 0.00001), ACR70 (RR: 3.83 with 95% CI [2.13, 6.87], P = 0.00001), disease activity score 28 based on C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) (RR: 3.91 with 95% CI [2.65, 5.79], P = 0.00001), clinical disease activity index (CDAI) (RR: 2.80 with 95% CI [1.43, 5.48], P = 0.003), and health assessment questionnaire disability index (HAQ-DI) (MD: − 0.28 with 95% CI [− 0.38, − 0.18], P = 0.00001) after 12 weeks, compared to placebo. However, OKZ was also associated with a higher incidence of any adverse events (AEs) (RR: 1.15 with 95% CI [1.06, 1.25], P = 0.0005) and AEs leading to drug discontinuation (RR: 1.86 with 95% CI [1.05, 3.29], P = 0.03). OKZ is effective and with acceptable safety profile when administrated with methotrexate in patients with RA not adequately controlled by tumor necrosis factor inhibitors; however, more large-scale RCTs are still required to investigate the optimal dosing, long-term effects, and comparative efficacy versus established biological DMARDs. Key Points• OKZ is effective especially with methotrexate in RA patients.

Background and objective There is currently no FDA-approved medical therapy for delayed graft function (DGF). Dexmedetomidine (DEX) has multiple reno-protective effects preventing ischemic reperfusion injury, DGF, and acute kidney injury. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the reno-protective effects of perioperative DEX during renal transplantation. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from WOS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, PubMed, and CENTRAL until June 8th, 2022. We used the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference for continuous outcomes; both presented with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We registered our protocol in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022338898. Results We included four RCTs with 339 patients. Pooled risk ratio found no difference between DEX and placebo in reducing DGF (RR: 0.58 with 95% CI [0.34, 1.01], p = 0.05) and acute rejection (RR: 0.88 with 95% CI [0.52, 1.49], p = 0.63). However, DEX improved short-term creatinine on day 1 (MD: − 0.76 with 95% CI [− 1.23, − 0.3], p = 0.001) and day 2 (MD: − 0.28 with 95% CI [− 0.5, − 0.07], p = 0.01); and blood urea nitrogen on day 2 (MD: − 10.16 with 95% CI [− 17.21, − 3.10], p = 0.005) and day 3 (MD: − 6.72 with 95% CI [− 12.85, − 0.58], p = 0.03). Conclusion Although there is no difference between DEX and placebo regarding reducing DGF and acute rejection after kidney transplantation, there may be some evidence that it has reno-protective benefits because we found statistically significant improvement in the short-term serum creatinine and blood urea nitrogen levels. More trials are required to investigate the long-term reno-protective effects of DEX.

No abstract