ABSTRACT
Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) has a serious impact on the prognosis of patients with spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). However, the use of prophylactic heparin remains controversial. Objectives: This study investigated the safety and timing of prophylactic heparin for VTE in patients with sICH. Design: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Methods: Two authors systematically searched Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed to find all published research before June 2023. The incidence of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and mortality were set as primary endpoints. Results: This meta-analysis included seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and five observational studies involving a total of 4419 sICH patients in the heparin (n = 2808) and control (n = 1183) groups. Among these patients, 205 received early heparin administration, while 223 received late heparin administration. The results suggested that, compared to the control group, patients in the heparin group had a lower incidence of VTE [odds ratio (OR), 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31-0.71; p < 0.001], DVT (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.33-0.85; p = 0.009), pulmonary embolism (OR, 0.31 95% CI, 0.15-0.65; p = 0.002), and mortality (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54-0.90; p = 0.006), but there were no statistical differences in hematoma enlargement, extracranial hematoma, and major disability (p > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in DVT, mortality, hematoma enlargement, and extracranial hemorrhage between the early heparin group (<24-48 h) and the late heparin group (p > 0.05). Conclusion: In patients with sICH, prophylactic use of heparin may be beneficial because it reduces the incidence of VTE and mortality without increasing the risk of additional bleeding. In addition, early prophylactic use of heparin appears to be safe. However, large-scale RCTs are lacking to support this evidence.
Prophylactic use of heparin reduces the incidence of venous thromboembolism and reduces overall mortality in patients with spontaneous bleeding in the brain Why was the study done? Venous thromboembolism has a serious impact on the prognosis of patients with spontaneous bleeding in the brain. However, the use of prophylactic heparin remains controversial. This study investigates the safety and timing of prophylactic heparin for venous thromboembolism in patients with spontaneous bleeding in the brain. What did the researchers find? Our results showed that patients in the heparin group had lower rates of blood clot in a deep vein, death, and pulmonary embolism compared with the control group, and there were no significant differences in hematoma enlargement, extracranial hematoma, and severe disability. There were no significant differences in blood clot in a deep vein, mortality, hematoma enlargement, and extracranial hemorrhage between the early and late heparin groups. What do the findings mean? This study suggests that prophylactic use of heparin may be beneficial in patients with spontaneous bleeding in the brain, and that early prophylactic use of heparin appears to be safe.
ABSTRACT
The methylenetetrahydrofolate dehydrogenase 1 (MTHFD1) polymorphism G1958A has been extensively investigated as a potential risk factor for prostate cancer (PCa), but the results have thus far been inconclusive. This meta-analysis was performed to derive a more precise estimation of the association. A comprehensive search was conducted to identify all case-control studies of MTHFD1 G1958A polymorphism and PCa risk. We used odds ratios (ORs) to assess the strength of the association, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) give a sense of the precision of the estimate. Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manage version 5.0 and Stata 10.0. A total of six available studies were considered in the present meta-analysis, with 7,493 patients and 36,941 controls. When all groups were pooled, there was no evidence that G1958A had significant association with PCa under additive, recessive, dominant, and allelic models. This meta-analysis suggests that MTHFD1 G1958A polymorphism might not be a risk factor for PCa. However, further large-scale and well-designed case-control studies are necessary to validate the risk identified in the present meta-analysis.
