Gaps in the evidence for prevention and treatment of maternal anaemia: a review of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Anaemia, in particular due to iron deficiency, is common in pregnancy with associated negative outcomes for mother and infant. However, there is evidence of significant variation in management. The objectives of this review of systematic reviews were to analyse and summarise the evidence base, identify gaps in the evidence and develop a research agenda for this important component of maternity care. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library. All systematic reviews relating to interventions to prevent and treat anaemia in the antenatal and postnatal period were eligible. Two reviewers independently assessed data inclusion, extraction and quality of methodology. RESULTS: 27 reviews were included, all reporting on the prevention and treatment of anaemia in the antenatal (n = 24) and postnatal periods (n = 3). Using AMSTAR as the assessment tool for methodological quality, only 12 of the 27 were rated as high quality reviews. The greatest number of reviews covered antenatal nutritional supplementation for the prevention of anaemia (n = 19). Iron supplementation was the most extensively researched, but with ongoing uncertainty about optimal dose and regimen. Few identified reviews addressed anaemia management post-partum or correlations between laboratory and clinical outcomes, and no reviews reported on clinical symptoms of anaemia. CONCLUSIONS: The review highlights evidence gaps including the management of anaemia in the postnatal period, screening for anaemia, and optimal interventions for treatment. Research priorities include developing standardised approaches to reporting of laboratory outcomes, and information on clinical outcomes relevant to the experiences of pregnant women.

Route of delivery and baseline left ventricular ejection fraction, key factors of bone-marrow-derived cell therapy for ischaemic heart disease.

AIMS: Previous evaluation of autologous bone-marrow stem-cell (BMSC) therapy following acute myocardial infarction (AMI) suggests that cell dose and timing of stem-cell administration post-MI are important factors in the efficacy of cellular therapy. This study aimed to assess whether route of delivery and baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of the participants may also affect the outcome of BMSC treatment in patients with AMI and ischaemic heart disease (IHD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Randomized controlled trials of BMSCs as treatment for AMI and IHD were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Current Controlled Trials Register through to November 2008. Twenty-one trials (25 comparisons) with a total of 1091 participants were eligible. Data were analysed using a random-effects model. Improvement in LVEF in favour of the control was observed when BMSC were administered by intracoronary infusion [-0.19% (95% CI, -0.24 to -0.14; P < 0.00001)] in IHD patients. However, the effect on LVEF was statistically significant and in favour of BMSC when cells were delivered by intra-myocardial injection [5.85% (95% CI, 2.50-9.19; P = 0.0006)]. The significant improvement in LVEF observed in AMI patients was independent from the baseline LVEF of the participants. However, in patients suffering from chronic IHD, increase in LVEF was significant only in the group with lower LVEF at baseline [4.42% (CI, 1.87-6.96; P = 0.0007)]. CONCLUSION: Clinical evidence suggests that route of delivery and baseline LVEF influence the effect of BMSC therapy in treating AMI and chronic IHD.

Evidence for the use of recombinant factor VIIa in the prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without hemophilia.

Use of recombinant Factor VIIa (rFVIIa) has extended to nonhemophiliac patients anticipated to be at risk of major bleeding (prophylactic) or who have uncontrolled bleeding (therapeutic). The aim of this review was to systematically appraise randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence for effectiveness of rFVIIa, by updating and extending the earlier Cochrane Systematic Review. Up to January 2007, 17 RCTs were identified in which rFVIIa was used to try to reduce bleeding in patients undergoing planned high blood loss surgery or in acute situations such as trauma, gastrointestinal bleeding, and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Overall, there was little evidence of rFVIIa benefit during planned surgical procedures. Although use in ICH was impressive as both bleed progression and mortality were reduced, preliminary results from a subsequent phase III trial have found no outcome benefit. Selected subgroup analysis or secondary outcome results for other therapeutic trials appeared promising but were usually associated with methodological limitations. The thromboembolic adverse event incidence in subjects who received rFVIIa is of concern and occurred despite a common trial exclusion criterion of patients with a history of previous thromboembolic or vasoocclusive disease. The reasons for increasing use of this drug off license remain unclear, and the results of further trials are required to establish effectiveness.