IL-17 has a role in inflammation in RA, and its levels in joints correlate with disease severity. Multiple RCTs have been performed to study effects of anti-IL-17 agents. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze the efficacy and safety of anti-IL-17 agents in the management of RA. This work is based on a systematic review of studies retrieved by a sensitive search strategy in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception through 9/7/15. Study selection criteria were the following: adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with RAs, random selection of patients for anti-IL-17 therapy and treatment response compared to placebo. We performed systematic literature review per PRISMA guideline and two investigators independently selected seven randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for meta-analysis. We used random effect model calculating odds ratio (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) to measure the efficacy with ACR20/50/70 responses and the safety with adverse events. Seven studies with total of 1226 patients including 905 in anti-IL-17 group and 321 in placebo were included in the meta-analysis. Anti-IL-17 was effective in achieving ACR20 and ACR50 compared to placebo (OR 2.47, 95 % CI 1.29-4.72, P = 0.006, I (2) 77 % and OR 2.94, 95 % CI 1.37-6.28, P = 0.005, I (2) 64 %, respectively). Data analysis for ACR70 showed a favorable trend toward anti-IL-17 (OR 2.62, 95 % CI 1-6.89, P = 0.05, I (2) 15 %). Subgroup analysis of ACR20 for individual anti-IL-17 agents showed that ixekizumab was more effective than placebo, while secukinumab showed a trend toward achieving the ACR20 response. However, brodalumab was not effective compared to placebo. Safety analysis did not show increased risk of any or serious adverse effects by anti-IL-17 compared to placebo (OR 1.23, 95 % CI 0.94-1.61, P = 0.13, I (2) = 0 % and OR 1.28, 95 % CI 0.57-2.88, P = 0.55, I (2) = 0 %, respectively). This meta-analysis concludes that anti-IL-17 is effective in the treatment of RA without increased risk of any or serious adverse effects; however, the results are limited by significant heterogeneity and small duration of studies.

No abstract

New autologous skin regeneration technology yielded full‐thickness skin as evidenced by clinical observation and skin biopsy 5 months after surgery, providing relief for debilitating split‐thickness skin graft contracture in a pediatric burn case.

No abstract

BACKGROUND:Warfarin is a widely prescribed anticoagulant, and its eff ect depends on various patient factors including genotypes. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing genotypeguided dosing (GD) of warfarin with standard dosing have shown mixed effi cacy and safety outcomes. We performed a meta-analysis of all published RCTs comparing GD vs standard dosing in adult patients with various indications of warfarin use.

IMPORTANCE Treatment with aldosterone antagonists is recommended and has been shown to have beneficial effects in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) less than 40%. However, the role of aldosterone antagonists in patients with ejection fraction greater than 40% or without congestive heart failure is not well known. OBJECTIVES To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis using standard techniques to determine the role of therapy with aldosterone antagonists in this patient population. DATA SOURCES PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central databases were searched and a manual search for relevant references from the selected articles and published reviews was performed from database inception through June 2017. STUDY SELECTION Randomized clinical trials that evaluated treatment with aldosterone antagonists in patients with STEMI without clinical heart failure or LVEF greater than 40% were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were used to conduct and report the meta-analysis, which used a random-effects model. Two investigators independently performed the database search and agreed on the final study selection. A manual search was performed for relevant references from the selected articles and published reviews. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The outcomes analyzed were mortality, new congestive heart failure, recurrent myocardial infarction, ventricular arrhythmia, and changes in LVEF, serum potassium level, and creatinine level at follow-up. RESULTS In all, 10 randomized clinical trials with a total of 4147 unique patients were included in the meta-analysis. In patients who presented with STEMI without heart failure, treatment with aldosterone antagonists compared with control was associated with lower risk of mortality (2.4% vs 3.9%; odds ratio [OR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.91; P = .01) and similar risks of myocardial infarction (1.6% vs 1.5%; OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.57-1.86; P = .91), new congestive heart failure (4.3% vs 5.4%; OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.56-1.20; P = .31), and ventricular arrhythmia (4.1% vs 5.1%; OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.45-1.31; P = .33). Similarly, treatment with aldosterone antagonists compared with control was associated with a small yet significant increase in LVEF (mean difference, 1.58%; 95% CI, 0.18%-2.97%; P = .03), a small increase in serum potassium level (mean difference, 0.07 mEq/L; 95% CI, 0.01-0.13 mEq/L; P = .02), and no change in serum creatinine level (standardized mean difference, 1.4; 95% CI, −0.43 to 3.24; P = .13). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Treatment with aldosterone antagonists is associated with a mortality benefit in patients with STEMI with LVEF greater than 40% or without heart failure.

No abstract

Stroke continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) provides protection against stroke and peripheral embolization in AF but significant proportion of patients could not be started on anticoagulation because of bleeding complications. Left atrial appendage harbors clot in about 90% of nonvalvular AF. The advent of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) techniques has provided these patients with alternative to OAC for stroke prophylaxis. Multiple LAAO devices are currently available with Watchman and Amulet being the most commonly used in clinical practice. Randomized studies are available for Watchman device only. Data on Amplatzer Cardiac Plug, Amulet and Lariat devices are limited by the paucity of randomized data. Long-term data on different LAAO techniques are showing promising results. Device related thrombosis continues to be a serious complication associated with LAAO. Future studies should look into comparative effectiveness between different LAAO techniques, optimal patient selection, risk of complications, and anticoagulant treatment after LAAO. This article aims to provide current available evidence on efficacy and safety of different LAAO devices and future prospective.