Risk Factors of Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) in Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This review aimed to assess the risk factors of Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) in pediatric children, a common condition with serious long-term sequela. METHODS: PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched using the keywords "Apnea", "Obstructive Sleep" OR "Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome" AND "Child" OR "Children" OR "Pediatrics". Data from 35 studies involving 497,688 pediatric patients diagnosed with OSA using polysomnography were reviewed. Risk factors examined included sex, obesity, neck circumference, tonsillar/adenoid hypertrophy, respiratory infections, nasal stenosis, parental OSA/smoking, ethnicity, preterm birth, and breastfeeding history. Relative Risk (RR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (95% CI) were calculated, using Cochrane Q and I² statistics to estimate heterogeneity. RESULTS: Tonsillar hypertrophy (RR = 3.55), adenoid hypertrophy (RR = 1.63), respiratory tract infection (RR = 2.59), obesity (RR = 1.74), and family history of OSA (RR = 3.03) were significantly associated with pediatric OSA. White ethnicity was protective (RR = 0.77). DISCUSSION: Recognizing these risk factors aids in early diagnosis and treatment of pediatric OSA.

The neuroprotective effects of Piracetam on cisplatin-induced cognitive decline.

AIM: This work explores the effect of Cisplatin-a chemotherapeutic agent known to cause deterioration in cognitive function in cancer patients, and spatial memory in mice. It also investigates the potential neuroprotective effects of Piracetam, which is a nootropic drug recognized for improving cognitive ability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study incorporates four groups of mice receiving varied medication regimens, with memory tested using the Novel Location Recognition (NLR) method. RESULTS: The findings from our study revealed that memory decline and a suppression of cellular proliferation were observed in adult male mice subjected to Cisplatin treatment; furthermore, a decline in antioxidant efficacy within the hippocampal dentate gyrus was evident. Moreover, analysis of treatment effects on the animals' weight revealed that the Cisplatin and Piracetam group exhibited the most significant weight loss during drug administration. Despite the significant weight loss, the simultaneous use of Cisplatin and Piracetam demonstrated a notable improvement in memory and an augmentation of hippocampal proliferation and antioxidant effect. LIMITATIONS: It is important to note that our study was hampered by budget limits, a lack of additional animals, and mice's low tolerance for protracted treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Should the outcomes of Piracetam observed in this investigation be applicable to patients, it might offer a relatively straightforward approach to mitigate the cognitive impacts endured by cancer survivors following exposure to chemotherapy. Future research will be needed to study Piracetam's effect on mice with brain cancer after Cisplatin treatment in order to extrapolate the results onto cancer patients.

The prevalence of mental health outcomes among eating disorder patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with eating disorders (ED) are known to suffer from various psychological morbidities thus they are expected to be negatively impacted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the pooled prevalence of psychological comorbidities in ED patients. METHODS: Pubmed, Scopus, GoogleScholar, and medRxiv were searched using the keywords COVID19 and Eating Disorders and their related MeSH terms. The articles were included if they contained patients with diagnosed EDs and having evaluated their mental health disturbances during the COVID-19 pandemic. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the "assessing risk of bias in prevalence studies" tool. The heterogeneity was assessed using Cochrane Q and I2 heterogeneity statistics. RESULTS: A total of 13 articles have been included in this meta-analysis with a sample size of 3056. The pooled prevalence of ED patients who experienced worsening of ED symptoms was 57% (95%CI: 36%-76%), anxiety was 64% (95%CI: 39%-78%), and depression was 55% (95%CI: 12%-87%) during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides evidence supporting an increase in the pooled prevalence of mental health disorders among patients suffering from EDs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Meta-analysis of prevalence: the psychological sequelae among COVID-19 survivors.

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aims to estimate the pooled prevalence of mental disorders among COVID-19 survivors. METHODS: The databases Pubmed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and medRxiv have been searched up to 1 August 2021 using COVID-19, survivors, mental disorders, and their related MeSH terms. The included studies were either cross-sectional, cohort, or case-control in design. Those studies included COVID-19 survivors after 14 or more days from their COVID-19 recovery and used validated questionnaires to assess their mental health outcomes. The random-effects model was used to pool the data from the incorporated studies. The heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q heterogeneity test and I2 statistic. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included in the data synthesis with a total sample size of 9605 COVID-19 survivors. The prevalence rates for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), anxiety, psychological distress, depression, and sleeping disorders were 20% (95% CI = 16-24%), 22% (95% CI = 18-27%), 36% (95% CI = 22-51%), 21% (95% CI = 16-28%), and 35% (95% CI = 29-41%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although we found high heterogeneity across the included studies, our meta-analysis provides evidence that there are psychological sequelae in COVID-19 survivors that require medical assiduity as well as further research on the matter.KEY POINTSIncreased prevalence of psychological sequelae among COVID-19 survivors.The prevalence of PTSD was 20% (95% CI = 16-24%) and of anxiety was 22% (95% CI = 18-27%) among COVID-19 survivors.The prevalence of psychological distress was 36% (95% CI = 22-51%), of depression was 21% (95% CI = 16-28%), and of sleep disorders was 35% (95% CI = 29-41%) among COVID-19 survivors.Future researches are recommended to search for effective and safe methods to mitigate the psychological sequelae in COVID-19 patients.

Proton Pump Inhibitors: Current Use and the Risk of Coronavirus Infectious Disease 2019 Development and its Related Mortality. Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing Coronavirus Infectious Disease (COVID-19) pandemic is a global health crisis that has had a magnanimous worldwide impact on all aspects of people's lives. Several observational studies investigated the relationship between Proton Pump Inhibitors use and the risk of COVID-19 development and mortality. AIM OF THE STUDY: The aim of this meta-analysis is to investigate the association between current PPIs use and the development of COVID-19 as well as its mortality. METHODS: Pubmed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect and medRxiv were searched until November 21, 2020 using the following keywords: proton pump inhibitors and COVID-19 as well as their related MESH terms. The studies considered in the meta-analysis were either cohort or case-control in design and adjusted for confounding factors. The quality of the studies included in this meta-analysis was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. In addition, a random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled Odds Ratio (ORs) and the corresponding confidence interval (95% CI). Heterogeneity was evaluated using The Cochran's Q heterogeneity test and I2 statistic. RESULTS: Six observational studies with 195,230 participants were included. In this meta-analysis, current use of PPIs increased risk of COVID-19 development (OR = 1.19; 95% CI: 0.62-2.28) and mortality (OR = 1.67; 95% CI: 1.41-1.97). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis indicates that current PPIs use significantly increased the risk of COVID-19 mortality, but it did not reach a significant threshold in regards to the risk of COVID-19 development.