BackgroundTo systematically assess the prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations in women with Hereditary Breast and/or Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) in Arab countries and to describe the variability in the BRCA gene mutations in different regions of the Arab world.MethodsObservational studies reporting prevalence of BRCA mutations from 22 Arab countries were systematically searched in databases including PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Two reviewers independently screened the studies and extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Hoy’s risk of Bias tool was used to assess the biases in individual studies. Due to substantial heterogeneity, pooled weighted estimates were calculated using Quality Effect Models (QEM) that adjust for bias, while the Random Effect Models (REM) estimates served as the sensitivity estimates.ResultsFourteen studies reporting prevalence of BRCA were included. The pooled estimate of BRCA among HBOC was 20% (95% CI: 7–36%). Subgroup analysis including only those with low risk of bias provided an estimate of 11% (95% CI: 1–27%). Levant region had higher prevalence 28% (95% CI: 11–49%) compared to Arabian Gulf region and North Africa but differences are not statistically significant, when tested using Z-test for proportions.ConclusionGiven the pooled estimates vary widely with substantial heterogeneity, larger, well-designed studies are warranted to better understand the frequency and the impact of BRCA gene mutations among Arab women.Trial registrationInternational Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration number: CRD42018095905.

ObjectiveParacetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opiates/opioids, administered parenterally via intravenous or intramuscular route, are widely used to provide analgesia for patients with moderate to severe pain. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the level of analgesia provided by intravenous paracetamol (IVP) alone compared with NSAIDs (intravenous or intramuscular), or opioids (intravenous) alone in adults attending the ED with acute pain.MethodsTwo authors independently searched PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Embase (OVID), Cochrane Library, SCOPUS and Google Scholar (3 March 2021–20 May 2022) for randomised trials without any language or date restriction. Clinical trials were evaluated using the Risk of Bias V.2 tool. The primary outcome was mean difference (MD) for pain reduction at 30 min (T30) post analgesia delivery. The secondary outcomes were MD in pain reduction at 60, 90 and 120 min; the need for rescue analgesia; and the occurrence of adverse events (AEs).ResultsTwenty-seven trials (5427 patients) were included in the systematic review and 25 trials (5006 patients) in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in pain reduction at T30 between the IVP group and opioids (MD −0.13, 95% CI −1.49 to 1.22) or IVP and NSAIDs (MD −0.27, 95% CI −1.0 to 1.54. There was also no difference at 60 min, IVP group versus opioid group (MD −0.09, 95% CI −2.69 to 2.52) or IVP versus NSAIDs (MD 0.51, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.91). The quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development and Evaluations methodology was low for MD in pain scores.The need for rescue analgesia at T30 was significantly higher in the IVP group compared with the NSAID group (risk ratio (RR): 1.50, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.83), with no difference found between the IVP group and the opioid group (RR: 1.07, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.70). AEs were 50% lower in the IVP group compared with the opioid group (RR: 0.50, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.62), whereas no difference was observed in the IVP group compared with the NSAID group (RR: 1.30, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.15).ConclusionIn patients presenting to the ED with a diverse range of pain conditions, IVP provides similar levels of pain relief compared with opiates/opioids or NSAIDs at T30 post administration. Patients treated with NSAIDs had lower risk of rescue analgesia, and opioids cause more AEs, suggesting NSAIDs as the first-choice analgesia and IVP as a suitable alternative.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021240099.