IntroductionThe prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection (HPI) has been decreasing in developed countries, with an increasing prevalence of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) at the same time. The aim of our meta‐analysis was to quantify the risk of BE in the context of HPI.MethodsA systematic search was conducted in 3 databases for studies on BE with data on prevalence of HPI from inception until December 2016. Odds ratios for BE in HPI were calculated by the random effects model with subgroup analyses for geographical location, presence of dysplasia in BE, and length of the BE segment.ResultsSeventy‐two studies were included in the meta‐analysis, including 84 717 BE cases and 390 749 controls. The overall analysis showed that HPI reduces the risk of BE; OR = 0.68 (95% CI: 0.58‐0.79, P < .001). Subgroup analyses revealed risk reduction in Asia OR = 0.53 (95% CI: 0.33‐0.84, P = .007), Australia OR = 0.56 (95% CI: 0.39‐0.80, P = .002), Europe OR = 0.77 (95% CI: 0.60‐0.98, P = .035), and North‐America OR = 0.59 (95% CI: 0.47‐0.74, P < .001). The risk was significantly reduced for dysplastic BE, OR = 0.37 (95% CI: 0.26‐0.51, P < .001) for non‐dysplastic BE, OR = 0.51 (95% CI: 0.35‐0.75, P = .001), and for long segment BE, OR = 0.25 (95% CI: 0.11‐0.59, P = .001) in case of HPI.ConclusionsThis extensive meta‐analysis provides additional evidence that HPI is associated with reduced risk of BE. Subgroup analyses confirmed that this risk reduction is independent of geographical location. HPI is associated with significantly lower risk of dysplastic, non‐dysplastic, and long segment BE.
The main causes of acute pancreatitis (AP) are biliary disease, alcohol consumption, hypertriglyceridaemia (HTG) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of these aetiological factors on the severity and outcome of AP. Pubmed and Embase were searched between 01/01/2012 and 31/05/2020. Included articles involved adult alcoholic, biliary, HTG- or post-ERCP AP (PAP) patients. Primary outcome was severity, secondary outcomes were organ failures, intensive care unit admission, recurrence rate, pancreatic necrosis, mortality, length of hospital stay, pseudocyst, fluid collection and systematic inflammatory response syndrome. Data were analysed from 127 eligible studies. The risk for non-mild (moderately severe and severe) condition was the highest in HTG-induced AP (HTG-AP) followed by alcoholic AP (AAP), biliary AP (BAP) and PAP. Recurrence rate was significantly lower among BAP vs. HTG-AP or AAP patients (OR = 2.69 and 2.98, 95% CI 1.55–4.65 and 2.22–4.01, respectively). Mortality rate was significantly greater in HTG-AP vs. AAP or BAP (OR = 1.72 and 1.50, 95% CI 1.04–2.84 and 0.96–2.35, respectively), pancreatic necrosis occurred more frequently in AAP than BAP patients (OR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.08–2.30). Overall, there is a potential association between aetiology and the development and course of AP. HTG-AP is associated with the highest number of complications. Furthermore, AAP is likely to be more severe than BAP or PAP. Greater emphasis should be placed on determining aetiology on admission.
In pediatric burns the use of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis is a standard procedure in some burn centers, though its beneficial effect on the infectious complications is debated. The present meta-analysis aimed at determining whether systemic antibiotic prophylaxis prevents infectious complications in pediatric patients with burn injuries. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to August 2019. We included 6 studies, in which event rates of infectious complications were reported in children with burn injuries receiving or not receiving systemic antibiotic prophylaxis. We found that the overall odds ratio (OR) of developing an infection (including local and systemic) was not different between the groups (OR = 1.35; 95% CI, 0.44, 4.18). The chances for systemic infectious complications alone were also not different between antibiotic-treated and non-treated patients (OR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.38, 1.45). Based on the age, affected total body surface area, and country income level, we did not find any subgroup that benefited from the prophylaxis. Our findings provide quantitative evidence for the inefficacy of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing infections in pediatric burns. To validate our conclusion, multinational, randomized trials in a diverse population of children with burn injuries are warranted.
Aims Our aim was to summarize the available literature on the effect of short- versus long-course antibiotic therapy on acute cholangitis. Methods A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA Statement. We searched three databases for papers discussing the length of ABT in acute cholangitis. Long and short therapy groups were defined based on the most recent guideline available at the time of publication of the articles. Primary outcomes were the rate of recurrent cholangitis and mortality; secondary outcomes included length of hospitalization and the duration of fever after ERCP. Data were extracted on these outcomes and on general characteristics. A narrative synthesis was then provided based on collected data. Results Out of 692 articles produced by our search, four met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. These contained 205 acute cholangitis patients, with 137 and 68 patients receiving short and long antibiotic therapy, respectively. No significant difference was observed in any of the studies on the outcomes of mortality and duration of fever after ERCP between the two groups. One out of four studies found the rate of recurrent cholangitis to be significantly lower in the short antibiotic therapy group (0.0% vs. 13.3%, p = 0.036). Length of hospitalization was only compared in the same retrospective article, where it was found to be significantly shorter in the short-term antibiotic therapy group (with a median of 14 vs. 17.5 days, p < 0.001). Conclusions Our review suggests short-course antibiotic therapy is non-inferior to long-course treatment; however, several limitations underline the need for well-designed randomized trials. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10620-018-5327-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
AIMTo analyze the effect of intralesional steroid injections in addition to endoscopic dilation of benign refractory esophageal strictures.METHODSA comprehensive search was performed in three databases from inception to 10 April 2017 to identify trials, comparing the efficacy of endoscopic dilation to dilation combined with intralesional steroid injections. Following the data extraction, meta-analytical calculations were performed on measures of outcome by the random-effects method of DerSimonian and Laird. Heterogeneity of the studies was tested by Cochrane’s Q and I2 statistics. Risk of quality and bias was assessed by the Newcastle Ottawa Scale and JADAD assessment tools.RESULTSEleven articles were identified suitable for analyses, involving 343 patients, 235 cases and 229 controls in total. Four studies used crossover design with 121 subjects enrolled. The periodic dilation index (PDI) was comparable in 4 studies, where the pooled result showed a significant improvement of PDI in the steroid group (MD: -1.12 dilation/month, 95%CI: -1.99 to -0.25 P = 0.012; I2 = 74.4%). The total number of repeat dilations (TNRD) was comparable in 5 studies and showed a non-significant decrease (MD: -1.17, 95%CI: -0.24-0.05, P = 0.057; I2 = 0), while the dysphagia score (DS) was comparable in 5 studies and did not improve (SMD: 0.35, 95%CI: -0.38, 1.08, P = 0.351; I2 = 83.98%) after intralesional steroid injection.CONCLUSIONIntralesional steroid injection increases the time between endoscopic dilations of benign refractory esophageal strictures. However, its potential role needs further research.
Introduction: Some studies suggest that the accuracy of Helicobacter pylori diagnostic tests is decreased in peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). We aimed to assess the accuracy of diagnostic tests for H. pylori in patients with PUB in a diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) network meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic search was carried out in seven databases until November 2019. We collected or calculated true and false positive and negative values, and constructed 2×2 diagnostic contingency tables with reference standards including histology, rapid urease test, urea breath test, serology, stool antigen test, culture, and polymerase chain reaction. We ranked the index tests by the superiority indices (SI) and calculated pooled sensitivity and specificity of each test. Discussion: Our search yielded 40 eligible studies with 27 different diagnostic strategies for H. pylori. In 32 articles, the reference standard was a combination of multiple tests. In 12 studies, the index tests were compared with a single testing method. We analyzed seven networks with the reference standards against a single or a combination of diagnostic index tests. None of the index tests had better diagnostic accuracy (SI between 9.94 and 2.17) compared with the individual index tests as all the confidence intervals included 1. Combined testing strategies had higher sensitivities (0.92–0.62) and lower specificities (0.85–0.46) while single tests proved to have higher specificities (0.83–0.77) and lower sensitivities (0.73–0.42). Conclusion: Use of combined tests may have a rationale in clinical practice due to their higher sensitivities. The differences between the included DTA studies limited the comparison of the testing strategies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.