Background: The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy and safety of aspirin and rivaroxaban in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) following either total knee arthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty. Methods: A comprehensive literature search of several electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) was conducted to identify relevant studies. Outcomes of interest included VTE rate, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) rate, pulmonary embolism rate, major bleeding events, mortality rate, blood transfusion, and wound complication. Risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were calculated using a fixed-effects model or random-effects model. Results: A total of 8 studies with 97,677 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with rivaroxaban, aspirin had a significantly higher incidence of DVT (RR = 1.48, 95%CI: 1.27, 1.72; P < .001), and decreased risk of blood transfusion (RR = 0.94, 95%CI: 0.93, 0.94; P < .001). However, there were no significant differences between the 2 drugs in terms of total VTE rate (RR = 1.39%, 95%CI: 0.94, 2.05; P = .101), pulmonary embolism rate (RR = 1.64, 95%CI: 0.92, 2.92; P = .094), mortality rate (RR = 1.13, 95%CI: 0.15, 8.27; P = .907), major bleeding (RR = 1.00, 95%CI: 0.44, 2.27; P = .995), and wound complication rate (RR = 0.37, 95%CI: 0.07, 1.87; P = .229). Conclusion: Our results suggested that aspirin and rivaroxaban offered similar effect in the prevention of VTE after total knee arthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty. However, rivaroxaban seemed to have better effect than aspirin in reducing the risk of DVT, and aspirin was safer than rivaroxaban in decreasing the blood transfusion rate.
Background: This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effects and safety of teriparatide with risedronate in the treatment of osteoporosis. Material and methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library database were systematically reviewed for studies published up to February 24, 2019. Eligible studies that compared the effects of teriparatide with risedronate in osteoporosis were included in this meta-analysis. The outcomes included percentage change in bone mineral density (BMD) of lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip, the incidence of clinical fractures, serum bone markers, and adverse events. A random-effects or fixed-effects model was used to pool the estimate, according to the heterogeneity among the included studies. Results: Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with risedronate, teriparatide was associated with a significant increase in lumbar spine BMD [weight mean difference (WMD)=4.24, 95%CI: 3.11, 5.36; P < .001], femoral neck BMD (WMD=2.28, 95%CI: 1.39, 3.18; P < .001), and total hip BMD (WMD = 1.19, 95%CI: 0.47, 1.91; P = .001). Moreover, patients in teriparatide group had significantly lower incidences of clinical fracture (risk ratio [RR] = 0.48, 95%CI: 0.32, 0.72; P < .001), new vertebral fracture (RR = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.32, 0.63; P < .001), and non-vertebral fracture (RR = 0.63, 95%CI: 0.40, 0.98; P = .042) than those in risedronate group. There were significant differences between the 2 groups in serum change, including P1NP (WMD = 122.34, 95%CI: 68.89, 175.99; P < .001), CTx (WMD = 0.62, 95%CI: 0.29, 0.96; P < .001), and iPTH (WMD = -13.18, 95%CI: -15.04, -11.33; P < .001). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the 2 groups (RR = 0.93, 95%CI: 0.69, 1.25; P = .610). Conclusion: This study suggested that teriparatide was more effective than risedronate for increasing the BMD in lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total hip, as well as reducing the incidences of clinical fracture, new vertebral fracture and non-vertebral fracture. There was no significant difference in incidence of adverse events between the 2 drugs. Considering the potential limitations in the present study, further large-scale, well-performed randomized trials are needed to verify our findings.
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.