Interaction analysis of subgroup effects in randomized trials: the essential methodological points.

Subgroup analysis aims to identify subgroups (usually defined by baseline/demographic characteristics), who would (or not) benefit from an intervention under specific conditions. Often performed post hoc (not pre-specified in the protocol), subgroup analyses are prone to elevated type I error due to multiple testing, inadequate power, and inappropriate statistical interpretation. Aside from the well-known Bonferroni correction, subgroup treatment interaction tests can provide useful information to support the hypothesis. Using data from a previously published randomized trial where a p value of 0.015 was found for the comparison between standard and Hemopatch® groups in (the subgroup of) 135 patients who had hand-sewn pancreatic stump closure we first sought to determine whether there was interaction between the number and proportion of the dependent event of interest (POPF) among the subgroup population (patients with hand-sewn stump closure and use of Hemopatch®), Next, we calculated the relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI) and the "attributable proportion" (AP). The p value of the interaction was p = 0.034, the RERI was - 0.77 (p = 0.0204) (the probability of POPF was 0.77 because of the interaction), the RERI was 13% (patients are 13% less likely to sustain POPF because of the interaction), and the AP was - 0.616 (61.6% of patients who did not develop POPF did so because of the interaction). Although no causality can be implied, Hemopatch® may potentially decrease the POPF after distal pancreatectomy when the stump is closed hand-sewn. The hypothesis generated by our subgroup analysis requires confirmation by a specific, randomized trial, including only patients undergoing hand-sewn closure of the pancreatic stump after distal pancreatectomy.Trial registration: INS-621000-0760.

Intermittent blood flow restriction with low-load resistance training for older adults with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a chronic musculoskeletal disorder characterized by pain and functional impairment. Blood flow restriction (BFR) with low-load resistance training (LLRT) demonstrates a similar improvement in clinical outcomes to high-load resistance training (HLRT) in treating KOA. It has not been established whether intermittent blood flow restriction (iBFR) with LLRT can lead to clinical outcomes that are comparable to those produced by continuous blood flow restriction (cBFR) with LLRT and HLRT. The aim of the proposed study is to evaluate the efficacy of iBFR with LLRT on pain, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), muscle strength, muscle mass, physical function, perceptions of discomfort and effort, and adherence in KOA patients. METHODS: This is a three-arm, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial utilizing blinded assessors. Two hundred thirteen participants will be randomly allocated to one of the following three groups: iBFR group-receiving 4 months of LLRT with iBFR, twice weekly (n = 71); cBFR group-receiving 4 months of LLRT with cBFR, twice weekly (n = 71); or HLRT group-receiving 4 months of HLRT without BFR, twice weekly (n = 71). The primary outcome is pain. The secondary outcomes include the WOMAC, muscle strength, muscle mass, physical function, perceptions of discomfort and effort, and adherence. Pain and WOMAC will be measured at the baseline and 4 and 12 months after randomizations. Muscle strength, muscle mass, and physical function will be measured at the baseline and 4 months after randomizations. The perceptions of discomfort and effort will be measured during the first and final sessions. DISCUSSION: BFR with LLRT has a similar improvement in clinical outcomes as HLRT. However, cBFR may cause elevated ratings of perceived exertion and local discomfort, compromising patient tolerability and treatment adherence. If iBFR with LLRT could produce improvement in clinical outcomes analogous to those of HLRT and iBFR with LLRT, it could be considered an alternative approach for treating patients with KOA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2300072820. Registered on June 26, 2023.

Survival analysis for AdVerse events with VarYing follow-up times (SAVVY): summary of findings and assessment of existing guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The SAVVY project aims to improve the analyses of adverse events (AEs) in clinical trials through the use of survival techniques appropriately dealing with varying follow-up times and competing events (CEs). This paper summarizes key features and conclusions from the various SAVVY papers. METHODS: Summarizing several papers reporting theoretical investigations using simulations and an empirical study including randomized clinical trials from several sponsor organizations, biases from ignoring varying follow-up times or CEs are investigated. The bias of commonly used estimators of the absolute (incidence proportion and one minus Kaplan-Meier) and relative (risk and hazard ratio) AE risk is quantified. Furthermore, we provide a cursory assessment of how pertinent guidelines for the analysis of safety data deal with the features of varying follow-up time and CEs. RESULTS: SAVVY finds that for both, avoiding bias and categorization of evidence with respect to treatment effect on AE risk into categories, the choice of the estimator is key and more important than features of the underlying data such as percentage of censoring, CEs, amount of follow-up, or value of the gold-standard. CONCLUSIONS: The choice of the estimator of the cumulative AE probability and the definition of CEs are crucial. Whenever varying follow-up times and/or CEs are present in the assessment of AEs, SAVVY recommends using the Aalen-Johansen estimator (AJE) with an appropriate definition of CEs to quantify AE risk. There is an urgent need to improve pertinent clinical trial reporting guidelines for reporting AEs so that incidence proportions or one minus Kaplan-Meier estimators are finally replaced by the AJE with appropriate definition of CEs.

Alleviating severity of limb trauma pain with coadministration of topical sesame oil and standard treatments: A GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the analgesic activity of sesame oil among patients with limb trauma; nevertheless, their findings are inconsistent. Hence, this review aimed to clarify the impact of topical administration of sesame oil on acute pain of adult outpatients with minor limb trauma. The online databases (e.g., Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science) were searched up to 31 January 2024. The RCTs were included if they compared the effect of applying standard treatments plus topical sesame oil to administering standard treatments alone or with a placebo/sham treatment. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) and the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool were applied to address the evidence quality and the study's methodological rigour, respectively. Four RCTs had the inclusion criteria, and their findings were pooled in a meta-analysis employing a random-effects approach. According to the pooled analysis, the reduction in mean change of the pain score from baseline to the second/third intervention day was significantly higher in favour of clients who received standard care plus daily massage of the trauma site with sesame oil compared to those who received a control condition (weighted mean difference: -1.10; 95% confidence interval [-1.62, -0.57]; p < 0.001). However, the evidence quality was moderate, and only two studies had good methodological rigour. Hence, more high-quality studies are needed to make a solid evidence-based conclusion about the favourable consequence of topical sesame oil on alleviating acute traumatic limb pain.

Effective dosage and mode of exercise for enhancing cognitive function in Alzheimer's disease and dementia: a systematic review and Bayesian Model-Based Network Meta-analysis of RCTs.

OBJECTIVE: Research the dose-response relationship between overall and certain types of exercise and cognitive function in older adults with Alzheimer's disease and dementia. DESIGN: Systemic and Bayesian Model-Based Network Meta-Analysis. METHODS: In our study, we analyzed data from randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of different exercises on cognitive outcomes in older adults with AD. We searched the Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase up to November 2023. Using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (Rob2) for quality assessment and R software with the MBNMA package for data analysis, we determined standard mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CrI) to evaluate exercise's impact on cognitive function in AD. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies with 2,242 AD patients revealed a nonlinear relationship between exercise and cognitive improvement in AD patients. We observed significant cognitive enhancements at an effective exercise dose of up to 1000 METs-min/week (SMDs: 0.535, SD: 0.269, 95% CrI: 0.023 to 1.092). The optimal dose was found to be 650 METs-min/week (SMDs: 0.691, SD: 0.169, 95% CrI: 0.373 to 1.039), with AE (Aerobic exercise) being particularly effective. For AE, the optimal cognitive enhancement dose was determined to be 660 METs-min/week (SMDs: 0.909, SD: 0.219, 95% CrI: 0.495 to 1.362). CONCLUSION: Nonlinear dose-response relationship between exercise and cognitive improvement in Alzheimer's disease, with the optimal AE dose identified at 660 METs-min/week for enhancing cognitive function in AD.

Role of vitamin B12 and folic acid in treatment of Alzheimer's disease: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials.

Vitamin B12 and folic acid could reduce blood homocysteine levels, which was thought to slow down the progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD), but previous studies regarding the effect of vitamin B12 and folic acid in treatment of AD have not reached conclusive results. We searched PubMed and Embase until January 12, 2023. Only randomized control trials involving participants clearly diagnosed with AD and who received vitamin B12 and folic acid were enrolled. Five studies that met the criteria were selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Changes in cognitive function were measured based on either the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) or the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog). Changes in daily life function and the level of blood homocysteine were also investigated. After a 6-month treatment, administration of vitamin B12 and folic acid improved the MMSE scores more than placebo did (SMD = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.32, p = 0.04) but did not significantly affect ADAS-Cog scores (SMD = 0.06, 95% CI = -0.22 to 0.33, p = 0.68) or measures of daily life function. Blood homocysteine levels were significantly decreased after vitamin B12 and folic acid treatment. Participants with AD who received 6 months of vitamin B12 and folic acid supplementation had better MMSE scores but had no difference in ADAS-Cog scores. Daily life function did not improve after treatment.

Effectiveness of sensor-based interventions in improving gait and balance performance in older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Sensor-based interventions (SI) have been suggested as an alternative rehabilitation treatment to improve older adults' functional performance. However, the effectiveness of different sensor technologies in improving gait and balance remains unclear and requires further investigation. METHODS: Ten databases (Academic Search Premier; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Complete; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; PubMed; Web of Science; OpenDissertations; Open grey; ProQuest; and Grey literature report) were searched for relevant articles published up to December 20, 2022. Conventional functional assessments, including the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, normal gait speed, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), and Falling Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), were used as the evaluation outcomes reflecting gait and balance performance. We first meta-analyzed the effectiveness of SI, which included optical sensors (OPTS), perception sensors (PCPS), and wearable sensors (WS), compared with control groups, which included non-treatment intervention (NTI) and traditional physical exercise intervention (TPEI). We further conducted sub-group analysis to compare the effectiveness of SI (OPTS, PCPS, and WS) with TPEI groups and compared each SI subtype with control (NTI and TPEI) and TPEI groups. RESULTS: We scanned 6255 articles and performed meta-analyses of 58 selected trials (sample size = 2713). The results showed that SI groups were significantly more effective than control or TPEI groups (p < 0.000) in improving gait and balance performance. The subgroup meta-analyses between OPTS groups and TPEI groups revealed clear statistically significant differences in effectiveness for TUG test (mean difference (MD) = - 0.681 s; p < 0.000), normal gait speed (MD = 4.244 cm/s; p < 0.000), BBS (MD = 2.325; p = 0.001), 6MWT (MD = 25.166 m; p < 0.000), and FES-I scores (MD = - 2.036; p = 0.036). PCPS groups also presented statistically significant differences with TPEI groups in gait and balance assessments for normal gait speed (MD = 4.382 cm/s; p = 0.034), BBS (MD = 1.874; p < 0.000), 6MWT (MD = 21.904 m; p < 0.000), and FES-I scores (MD = - 1.161; p < 0.000), except for the TUG test (MD = - 0.226 s; p = 0.106). There were no statistically significant differences in TUG test (MD = - 1.255 s; p = 0.101) or normal gait speed (MD = 6.682 cm/s; p = 0.109) between WS groups and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: SI with biofeedback has a positive effect on gait and balance improvement among a mixed population of older adults. Specifically, OPTS and PCPS groups were statistically better than TPEI groups at improving gait and balance performance, whereas only the group comparison in BBS and 6MWT can reach the minimal clinically important difference. Moreover, WS groups showed no statistically or clinically significant positive effect on gait and balance improvement compared with control groups. More studies are recommended to verify the effectiveness of specific SI. Research registration PROSPERO platform: CRD42022362817. Registered on 7/10/2022.

INTRA-ARTICULAR PHARMACOLOGICAL INJECTIONS FOR TEMPOROMANDIBULAR JOINT OSTEOARTHRITIS ARE COMPARABLE TO PLACEBO.

ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION: Effectiveness of intra-articular injections of sodium hyaluronate, corticosteroids, platelet-rich plasma on temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Xie Y, Zhao K, Ye G, Yao X, Yu M, Ouyang H. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2022 Sep;22(3):101720. doi:10.1016/j.jebdp.2022.101720. SOURCE OF FUNDING: National Natural Science Foundation of China (nos. T2121004, 81630065). TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN: Systematic review with network meta-analysis of data.

Educational interventions to reduce depression and anxiety in older adults with cancer in the community: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Older adults make up half of those with cancer and are prone to mood disorders, such as depression and severe anxiety, resulting in negative repercussions on their health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL). Educational interventions have been shown to reduce adverse psychological outcomes. We examined the effect of educational interventions on the severity of psychological outcomes in older adults with cancer (OAC) in the community. METHOD: This PRISMA-adherent systematic review involved a search of PubMed, MedLine, Embase and PsycINFO for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated educational interventions impacting the severity of depression, anxiety and HRQOL in OAC. Random effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions were used for the primary analysis. RESULTS: Fifteen RCTs were included. Meta-analyses showed a statistically insignificant decrease in the severity of depression (SMD = -0.30, 95%CI: -0.69; 0.09), anxiety (SMD = -0.30, 95%CI: -0.73; 0.13) and improvement in overall HRQOL scores (SMD = 0.44, 95%CI: -0.16; 1.04). However, subgroup analyses revealed that these interventions were particularly effective in reducing the severity of depression and anxiety in specific groups, such as OAC aged 60-65, those with early-stage cancer, those with lung cancer and those treated with chemotherapy. A systematic review found that having attained a higher education and income level increased the efficacy of interventions in decreasing the severity of adverse psychological outcomes. CONCLUSION: Although overall meta-analyses were statistically insignificant, subgroup meta-analyses highlighted a few specific subgroups that the educational interventions were effective for. Future interventions can be implemented to target these vulnerable groups.

Psychological and social interventions for the promotion of mental health in people living in low- and middle-income countries affected by humanitarian crises.

BACKGROUND: Because of wars, conflicts, persecutions, human rights violations, and humanitarian crises, about 84 million people are forcibly displaced around the world; the great majority of them live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). People living in humanitarian settings are affected by a constellation of stressors that threaten their mental health. Psychosocial interventions for people affected by humanitarian crises may be helpful to promote positive aspects of mental health, such as mental well-being, psychosocial functioning, coping, and quality of life. Previous reviews have focused on treatment and mixed promotion and prevention interventions. In this review, we focused on promotion of positive aspects of mental health. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions aimed at promoting mental health versus control conditions (no intervention, intervention as usual, or waiting list) in people living in LMICs affected by humanitarian crises. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and seven other databases to January 2023. We also searched the World Health Organization's (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify unpublished or ongoing studies, and checked the reference lists of relevant studies and reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychosocial interventions versus control conditions (no intervention, intervention as usual, or waiting list) to promote positive aspects of mental health in adults and children living in LMICs affected by humanitarian crises. We excluded studies that enrolled participants based on a positive diagnosis of mental disorder (or based on a proxy of scoring above a cut-off score on a screening measure). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were mental well-being, functioning, quality of life, resilience, coping, hope, and prosocial behaviour. The secondary outcome was acceptability, defined as the number of participants who dropped out of the trial for any reason. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for the outcomes of mental well-being, functioning, and prosocial behaviour. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 RCTs with 7917 participants. Nine RCTs were conducted on children/adolescents, and four on adults. All included interventions were delivered to groups of participants, mainly by paraprofessionals. Paraprofessional is defined as an individual who is not a mental or behavioural health service professional, but works at the first stage of contact with people who are seeking mental health care. Four RCTs were carried out in Lebanon; two in India; and single RCTs in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Jordan, Haiti, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the occupied Palestinian Territories (oPT), Nepal, and Tanzania. The mean study duration was 18 weeks (minimum 10, maximum 32 weeks). Trials were generally funded by grants from academic institutions or non-governmental organisations. For children and adolescents, there was no clear difference between psychosocial interventions and control conditions in improving mental well-being and prosocial behaviour at study endpoint (mental well-being: standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.29; 3 RCTs, 3378 participants; very low-certainty evidence; prosocial behaviour: SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.10; 5 RCTs, 1633 participants; low-certainty evidence), or at medium-term follow-up (mental well-being: mean difference (MD) -0.70, 95% CI -2.39 to 0.99; 1 RCT, 258 participants; prosocial behaviour: SMD -0.48, 95% CI -1.80 to 0.83; 2 RCT, 483 participants; both very low-certainty evidence). Interventions may improve functioning (MD -2.18, 95% CI -3.86 to -0.50; 1 RCT, 183 participants), with sustained effects at follow-up (MD -3.33, 95% CI -5.03 to -1.63; 1 RCT, 183 participants), but evidence is very uncertain as the data came from one RCT (both very low-certainty evidence). Psychosocial interventions may improve mental well-being slightly in adults at study endpoint (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.14; 3 RCTs, 674 participants; low-certainty evidence), but they may have little to no effect at follow-up, as the evidence is uncertain and future RCTs might either confirm or disprove this finding. No RCTs measured the outcomes of functioning and prosocial behaviour in adults. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: To date, there is scant and inconclusive randomised evidence on the potential benefits of psychological and social interventions to promote mental health in people living in LMICs affected by humanitarian crises. Confidence in the findings is hampered by the scarcity of studies included in the review, the small number of participants analysed, the risk of bias in the studies, and the substantial level of heterogeneity. Evidence on the efficacy of interventions on positive mental health outcomes is too scant to determine firm practice and policy implications. This review has identified a large gap between what is known and what still needs to be addressed in the research area of mental health promotion in humanitarian settings.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for people with chronic kidney disease and diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is associated with high risks of premature chronic kidney disease (CKD), cardiovascular diseases, cardiovascular death and impaired quality of life. People with diabetes are more likely to develop kidney impairment, and approximately one in three adults with diabetes have CKD. People with CKD and diabetes experience a substantially higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes. Sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have shown potential effects in preventing kidney and cardiovascular outcomes in people with CKD and diabetes. However, new trials are emerging rapidly, and evidence synthesis is essential to summarising cumulative evidence. OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to assess the benefits and harms of SGLT2 inhibitors for people with CKD and diabetes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 17 November 2023 using a search strategy designed by an Information Specialist. Studies in the Register are continually identified through regular searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled studies were eligible if they evaluated SGLT2 inhibitors versus placebo, standard care or other glucose-lowering agents in people with CKD and diabetes. CKD includes all stages (from 1 to 5), including dialysis patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the study risk of bias. Treatment estimates were summarised using random effects meta-analysis and expressed as a risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The primary review outcomes were all-cause death, 3-point and 4-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), fatal or nonfatal stroke, and kidney failure. MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-three studies randomising 65,241 people with CKD and diabetes were included. SGLT2 inhibitors with or without other background treatments were compared to placebo, standard care, sulfonylurea, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, or insulin. In the majority of domains, the risks of bias in the included studies were low or unclear. No studies evaluated the treatment in children or in people treated with dialysis. No studies compared SGLT2 inhibitors with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists or tirzepatide. Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors decreased the risk of all-cause death (20 studies, 44,397 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.94; I2 = 0%; high certainty) and cardiovascular death (16 studies, 43,792 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.93; I2 = 29%; high certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably make little or no difference to the risk of fatal or nonfatal MI (2 studies, 13,726 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14; I2 = 24%; moderate certainty), and fatal or nonfatal stroke (2 studies, 13,726 participants: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.30; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably decrease 3-point MACE (7 studies, 38,320 participants: RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98; I2 = 46%; moderate certainty), and 4-point MACE (4 studies, 23,539 participants: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.96; I2 = 77%; moderate certainty), and decrease hospital admission due to heart failure (6 studies, 28,339 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.79; I2 = 17%; high certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors may decrease creatinine clearance (1 study, 132 participants: MD -2.63 mL/min, 95% CI -5.19 to -0.07; low certainty) and probably decrease the doubling of serum creatinine (2 studies, 12,647 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.89; I2 = 53%; moderate certainty). SGLT2 inhibitors decrease the risk of kidney failure (6 studies, 11,232 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and kidney composite outcomes (generally reported as kidney failure, kidney death with or without ≥ 40% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)) (7 studies, 36,380 participants: RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.78; I2 = 25%; high certainty) compared to placebo. Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors incur less hypoglycaemia (16 studies, 28,322 participants: RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and hypoglycaemia requiring third-party assistance (14 studies, 26,478 participants: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.88; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and probably decrease the withdrawal from treatment due to adverse events (15 studies, 16,622 participants: RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.08; I2 = 16%; moderate certainty). The effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on eGFR, amputation and fracture were uncertain. No studies evaluated the effects of treatment on fatigue, life participation, or lactic acidosis. The effects of SGLT2 inhibitors compared to standard care alone, sulfonylurea, DPP-4 inhibitors, or insulin were uncertain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: SGLT2 inhibitors alone or added to standard care decrease all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and kidney failure and probably decrease major cardiovascular events while incurring less hypoglycaemia compared to placebo in people with CKD and diabetes.

Antioxidant supplementation for sickle cell disease.

BACKGROUND: Sickle cell disease (SCD) refers to a group of genetic disorders characterized by the presence of an abnormal haemoglobin molecule called haemoglobin S (HbS). When subjected to oxidative stress from low oxygen concentrations, HbS molecules form rigid polymers, giving the red cell the typical sickle shape. Antioxidants have been shown to reduce oxidative stress and improve outcomes in other diseases associated with oxidative stress. Therefore, it is important to review and synthesize the available evidence on the effect of antioxidants on the clinical outcomes of people with SCD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of antioxidant supplementation for improving health outcomes in people with SCD. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 15 August 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing antioxidant supplementation to placebo, other antioxidants, or different doses of antioxidants, in people with SCD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data, assessed the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence, and reported according to Cochrane methodological procedures. MAIN RESULTS: The review included 1609 participants in 26 studies, with 17 comparisons. We rated 13 studies as having a high risk of bias overall, and 13 studies as having an unclear risk of bias overall due to study limitations. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence. Only eight studies reported on our important outcomes at six months. Vitamin C (1400 mg) plus vitamin E (800 mg) versus placebo Based on evidence from one study in 83 participants, vitamin C (1400 mg) plus vitamin E (800 mg) may not be better than placebo at reducing the frequency of crisis (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 2.18), the severity of pain (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.40 to 4.37), or adverse effects (AE), of which the most common were headache, nausea, fatigue, diarrhoea, and epigastric pain (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.00). Vitamin C plus vitamin E may increase the risk of SCD-related complications (acute chest syndrome: RR 2.66, 95% CI 0.77 to 9.13; 1 study, 83 participants), and increase haemoglobin level (median (interquartile range) 90 (81 to 96) g/L versus 93.5 (84 to 105) g/L) (1 study, 83 participants) compared to placebo. However, the evidence for all the above effects is very uncertain. The study did not report on quality of life (QoL) of participants and their caregivers, nor on frequency of hospitalization. Zinc versus placebo Zinc may not be better than placebo at reducing the frequency of crisis at six months (rate ratio 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.29; 1 study, 36 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether zinc is better than placebo at improving sickle cell-related complications (complete healing of leg ulcers at six months: RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.60 to 6.72; 1 study, 34 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Zinc may be better than placebo at increasing haemoglobin level (g/dL) (MD 1.26, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.26; 1 study, 36 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not report on severity of pain, QoL, AE, and frequency of hospitalization. N-acetylcysteine versus placebo N-acetylcysteine (NAC) 1200 mg may not be better than placebo at reducing the frequency of crisis in SCD, reported as pain days (rate ratio 0.99 days, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.84; 1 study, 96 participants; low-certainty evidence). Low-certainty evidence from one study (96 participants) suggests NAC (1200 mg) may not be better than placebo at reducing the severity of pain (MD 0.17, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.87). Compared to placebo, NAC (1200 mg) may not be better at improving physical QoL (MD -1.80, 95% CI -5.01 to 1.41) and mental QoL (MD 2.00, 95% CI -1.45 to 5.45; very low-certainty evidence), reducing the risk of adverse effects (gastrointestinal complaints, pruritus, or rash) (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.14; low-certainty evidence), reducing the frequency of hospitalizations (rate ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.38; low-certainty evidence), and sickle cell-related complications (RR 5.00, 95% CI 0.25 to 101.48; very low-certainty evidence), or increasing haemoglobin level (MD -0.18 g/dL, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.04; low-certainty evidence). L-arginine versus placebo L-arginine may not be better than placebo at reducing the frequency of crisis (monthly pain) (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.95; 1 study, 50 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, L-arginine may be better than placebo at reducing the severity of pain (MD -1.41, 95% CI -1.65 to -1.18; 2 studies, 125 participants; low-certainty evidence). One participant allocated to L-arginine developed hives during infusion of L-arginine, another experienced acute clinical deterioration, and a participant in the placebo group had clinically relevant increases in liver function enzymes. The evidence is very uncertain whether L-arginine is better at reducing the mean number of days in hospital compared to placebo (MD -0.85 days, 95% CI -1.87 to 0.17; 2 studies, 125 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Also, L-arginine may not be better than placebo at increasing haemoglobin level (MD 0.4 g/dL, 95% CI -0.50 to 1.3; 2 studies, 106 participants; low-certainty evidence). No study in this comparison reported on QoL and sickle cell-related complications. Omega-3 versus placebo Very low-certainty evidence shows no evidence of a difference in the risk of adverse effects of omega-3 compared to placebo (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.48; 1 study, 67 participants). Very low-certainty evidence suggests that omega-3 may not be better than placebo at increasing haemoglobin level (MD 0.36 g/L, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.93; 1 study, 67 participants). The study did not report on frequency of crisis, severity of pain, QoL, frequency of hospitalization, and sickle cell-related complications. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was inconsistent evidence on all outcomes to draw conclusions on the beneficial and harmful effects of antioxidants. However, L-arginine may be better than placebo at reducing the severity of pain at six months, and zinc may be better than placebo at increasing haemoglobin level. We are uncertain whether other antioxidants are beneficial for SCD. Larger studies conducted on each comparison would reduce the current uncertainties.

Interventions for preventing haemodialysis dysequilibrium syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Dialysis dysequilibrium syndrome (DDS) refers to neurological symptoms usually seen during or after new initiation or following reinitiation of haemodialysis (HD) after missing multiple sessions. DDS is associated with death and morbidity. We studied interventions aimed at preventing DDS. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of different types of interventions for preventing DDS. SEARCH METHODS: We contacted the information specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 8 May 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any intervention against standard care, including individuals initiated on HD, regardless of age. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently determined study eligibility, assessed quality and extracted data. Data were collected on methods, interventions, participants, and outcomes (DDS incidence, severe DDS, death, adverse events). Risk ratios (RR) and confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (ROB2) tool. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included two RCTs, enrolling 32 adult participants. Interventions included were slow dialysis, sodium modelling, standard sodium dialysate, and high sodium dialysate. The risk of bias was of some concern to high risk of bias in both studies. Slow dialysis compared to sodium modelling (1 study, 15 participants) may result in little to no difference in DDS, severe DDS, and death (low certainty evidence) and has uncertain effects on adverse events (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.15 to 11.64; very low certainty evidence). Standard sodium dialysate compared to high sodium dialysate (1 study, 17 participants) has uncertain effects on the incidence of DDS (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.12), severe DDS (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.02 to 10.32), and adverse events (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.02) (very low certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In HD patients, sodium modelling, compared to slow dialysis, may result in little to no difference in DDS and death (low certainty evidence) and has uncertain effects on adverse events (very low certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain for the effect of high-sodium dialysate and standard sodium dialysate on DDS, death and adverse events (very low certainty evidence).

Continuous infusion versus bolus injection of loop diuretics for acute heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Acute heart failure (AHF) is new onset of, or a sudden worsening of, chronic heart failure characterised by congestion in about 95% of cases or end-organ hypoperfusion in 5% of cases. Treatment often requires urgent escalation of diuretic therapy, mainly through hospitalisation. This Cochrane review evaluated the efficacy of intravenous loop diuretics strategies in treating AHF in individuals with New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification III or IV and fluid overload. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intravenous continuous infusion versus bolus injection of loop diuretics for the initial treatment of acute heart failure in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We identified trials through systematic searches of bibliographic databases and in clinical trials registers including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CPCI-S on the Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry platform (ICTRP), and the European Union Trials register. We conducted reference checking and citation searching, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. The latest search was performed on 29 February 2024. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults with AHF, NYHA classification III or IV, regardless of aetiology or ejection fraction, where trials compared intravenous continuous infusion of loop diuretics with intermittent bolus injection in AHF. We excluded trials with chronic stable heart failure, cardiogenic shock, renal artery stenosis, or end-stage renal disease. Additionally, we excluded studies combining loop diuretics with hypertonic saline, inotropes, vasoactive medications, or renal replacement therapy and trials where diuretic dosing was protocol-driven to achieve a target urine output, due to confounding factors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened papers for inclusion and reviewed full-texts. Outcomes included weight loss, all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, readmission following discharge, and occurrence of acute kidney injury. We performed risk of bias assessment and meta-analysis where data permitted and assessed certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: The review included seven RCTs, spanning 32 hospitals in seven countries in North America, Europe, and Asia. Data collection ranged from eight months to six years. Following exclusion of participants in subgroups with confounding treatments and different clinical settings, 681 participants were eligible for review. These additional study characteristics, coupled with our strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, improve the applicability of the body of the evidence as they reflect real-world clinical practice. Meta-analysis was feasible for net weight loss, all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, readmission, and acute kidney injury. Literature review and narrative analysis explored daily fluid balance; cardiovascular mortality; B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) change; N-terminal-proBNP change; and adverse incidents such as ototoxicity, hypotension, and electrolyte imbalances. Risk of bias assessment revealed two studies with low overall risk, four with some concerns, and one with high risk. All sensitivity analyses excluded trials at high risk of bias. Only narrative analysis was conducted for 'daily fluid balance' due to diverse data presentation methods across two studies (169 participants, the evidence was very uncertain about the effect). Results of narrative analysis varied. For instance, one study reported higher daily fluid balance within the first 24 hours in the continuous infusion group compared to the bolus injection group, whereas there was no difference in fluid balance beyond this time point. Continuous intravenous infusion of loop diuretics may result in mean net weight loss of 0.86 kg more than bolus injection of loop diuretics, but the evidence is very uncertain (mean difference (MD) 0.86 kg, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 1.28; 5 trials, 497 participants; P < 0.001, I2 = 21%; very low-certainty evidence). Importantly, sensitivity analysis excluding trials with high risk of bias showed there was insufficient evidence for a difference in bodyweight loss between groups (MD 0.70 kg, 95% CI -0.06 to 1.46; 3 trials, 378 participants; P = 0.07, I2 = 0%). There may be little to no difference in all-cause mortality between continuous infusion and bolus injection (risk ratio (RR) 1.53, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.90; 5 trials, 530 participants; P = 0.19, I2 = 4%; low-certainty evidence). Despite sensitivity analysis, the direction of the evidence remained unchanged. No trials measured cardiovascular mortality. There may be little to no difference in the length of hospital stay between continuous infusion and bolus injection of loop diuretics, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -1.10 days, 95% CI -4.84 to 2.64; 4 trials, 211 participants; P = 0.57, I2 = 88%; very low-certainty evidence). Sensitivity analysis improved heterogeneity; however, the direction of the evidence remained unchanged. There may be little to no difference in the readmission to hospital between continuous infusion and bolus injection of loop diuretics (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.16; 3 trials, 400 participants; P = 0.31, I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). Sensitivity analysis continued to show insufficient evidence for a difference in the readmission to hospital between groups. There may be little to no difference in the occurrence of acute kidney injury as an adverse event between continuous infusion and bolus injection of intravenous loop diuretics (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.49; 3 trials, 491 participants; P = 0.92, I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). Sensitivity analysis continued to show that continuous infusion may make little to no difference on the occurrence of acute kidney injury as an adverse events compared to the bolus injection of intravenous loop diuretics. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of available data comparing two delivery methods of diuretics in acute heart failure found that the current data are insufficient to show superiority of one strategy intervention over the other. Our findings were based on trials meeting stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure validity. Despite previous reviews suggesting advantages of continuous infusion over bolus injections, our review found insufficient evidence to support or refute this. However, our review, which excluded trials with clinical confounders and RCTs with high risk of bias, offers the most robust conclusion to date.