Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Ann Med Surg (Lond) ; 86(7): 4075-4082, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38989229

RESUMO

Background: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 have shown a significant occurrence of thromboembolism and a heightened risk of death. It remains unclear whether factor Xa inhibitors are superior to enoxaparin in this context. Hence, there is a need for a direct comparison to assess the preventive effects and safety of factor Xa inhibitors versus enoxaparin in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or retrospective studies that compared the effectiveness or safety of factor Xa inhibitors and enoxaparin in preventing thromboembolism in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Embolic incidence, incidence of bleeding, and all-cause mortality were among the outcomes of interest. Mantel-Haenszel weighted random-effects model was used to calculate relative risks (RRs) with 95 percent CIs. Results: The analysis included six RCTs and two retrospective studies containing 4048 patients. Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant reduction among patients on factor Xa inhibitors compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in the embolic incidence [risk ratio (RR) 0.64 (95%, CI 0.42, 0.98); P=0.04, I2=12%]. Upon subgroup analysis by type of study design, no significant reductions were noted in patients on factor Xa inhibitors in RCTs (RR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.33-1.17; P=0.14) or observational studies (RR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.23-1.26; P=0.15) when compared with enoxaparin Factor Xa inhibitors were not significantly associated with incidence of bleeding [RR 0.76 (95% CI 0.36, 1.61); P=0.47, I2=0%] or all-cause mortality (RR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.48-1.36; P=0.43). Consistent results were obtained upon subgroup analysis by the type of study design. Conclusion: Factor Xa inhibitors are more effective than enoxaparin in preventing thromboembolism among patients with COVID-19 who are not acutely ill and are hospitalized. Additional rigorous RCTs comparing factor Xa inhibitors with enoxaparin are warranted.

2.
Ann Med Surg (Lond) ; 86(5): 2992-3000, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38694373

RESUMO

Background: The optimal treatment regimen for patients with Hughes syndrome remains unclear. Therefore, the authors sought to compare the outcomes of warfarin vs. factor Xa inhibitors in patients with Hughes syndrome. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 8 efficacy and safety of warfarin and factor Xa inhibitors in patients with Hughes syndrome. Recurrent thrombosis, all-cause mortality, stroke, adverse reactions, and bleeding were among 10 outcomes of interest. Mantel-Haenszel weighted random-effects model was used to calculate 11 relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs. Results: The analysis included 625 patients from four RCTs and one post-hoc analysis. Meta-analysis showed a statistically non-significant difference between factor Xa inhibitors and warfarin in the recurrent thrombosis risk (arterial or venous) [RR 2.77 (95%, CI 0.79, 9.65); P=0.11, I2=50%]. Consistent results were revealed among patients with a previous history of arterial thrombosis [RR 2.76 (95% CI 0.93, 8.16); P=0.75, I2=0%], venous thrombosis [RR 1.71 (95% CI 0.60, 4.84); P=0.31, I2=15%] and patients who were triple antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) positive [RR 4.12 (95% CI 0.46, 37.10); 21 P=0.21, I2=58%]. Factor Xa inhibitors were significantly associated with an increased risk of stroke [RR 8.51 (95% CI 2.35, 13.82); P=0.47, I2=0%]. Conclusion: Factor Xa inhibitors exhibited an increased risk of stroke among patients with Hughes syndrome. In addition, although not significant, the higher RRs among patients on factor Xa inhibitors may indicate a higher risk of thrombotic events associated with factor Xa inhibitors.

3.
Ann Med Surg (Lond) ; 86(4): 2098-2104, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38576935

RESUMO

Background: Cerebral venous thromboembolism (CVT) poses a significant risk of venous infarction and haemorrhage, which can lead to neurological deficits and, in severe cases, even death. The optimal treatment regimen for patients with CVT remains unclear. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, Web of Science (WoS), and Cochrane Central databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in patients with CVT. All-site venous thromboembolism (VTE), risk of clinically relevant non-major bleeding, incidence of partial recanalization, complete recanalization and major haemorrhage were among outcomes of interest. Mantel-Haenszel weighted random-effects model was used to calculate relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs. Results: The analysis included 1 RCT and 3 observational studies containing 211 patients. Compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), rivaroxaban did not significantly decrease the all-site VTE [RR 0.31 (95% CI 0.01, 8.43); P=0.49, I2=0%]. Compared with VKAs, patients on rivaroxaban did not show a significantly reduced risk of recurrent cerebral venous thrombosis. In terms of incidence of partial recanalization, there was no discernible difference between rivaroxaban and VKAs [RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.66, 1.22); P=0.49, I2=0%]. There was no discernible difference in incidence of complete recanalization [RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.32, 3.03); P=0.97, I2=28%] and incidence of major haemorrhage [RR 0.19 (95% CI 0.01, 4.54); P=0.30]. Conclusion: Rivaroxaban was found to have similar efficacy to VKAs. Due to its lower risk of severe bleeding and no need for INR monitoring, rivaroxaban may be a preferable treatment option for CVT.

4.
Ann Med Surg (Lond) ; 86(2): 986-993, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38333250

RESUMO

Background: Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation with diabetes face increased stroke and cardiovascular risks. This study compares factor Xa inhibitors and warfarin using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched for RCTs comparing the risk of efficacy and safety of any factor Xa inhibitors with dose-adjusted warfarin by diabetes status. Incidence of stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, ischemic stroke, all-cause mortality, risk of hemorrhagic stroke, and myocardial infarction were among the outcomes of interest. A generic inverse-weighted random-effects model was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95 percent confidence intervals (CIs). Results: After applying exclusion criteria, four RCTs containing 19 818 patients were included in the analysis. Compared with warfarin, meta-analysis showed statistically significant reduction in incidence of stroke/systemic embolism (HR 0.80 [95% CI 0.69-0.92]; P=0.002), intracranial hemorrhage (HR 0.49 [95% CI 0.37-0.65]; P<0.001), and risk of hemorrhagic stroke (HR 0.37 [95% CI 0.20-0.66]; P=0.001) in patients on factor Xa inhibitors. However, there was no discernible difference between two treatment arms in incidence of major bleeding (HR 0.93 [95% CI 0.84-1.04]; P=0.19), ischemic stroke (risk ratio (RR) 0.90 [95% CI 0.73-1.12; P=0.34), myocardial infarction (RR 0.88 [95% CI 0.67-1.15]; P=0.35), and all-cause mortality (RR 0.89 [95% CI 0.79-1.01]; P=0.06). Conclusion: Factor Xa inhibitors show a favorable balance between efficacy and safety compared with warfarin, which is consistent across a wide range of patients with atrial fibrillation known to be at high risk for both ischemic and bleeding events.

5.
Radiol Case Rep ; 18(10): 3406-3409, 2023 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37502480

RESUMO

Cystic echinococcosis (CE), or hydatid disease, is a parasitic infection caused by Echinococcus granulosus endemic to areas with considerable pastoral farming and animal husbandry. Typical presentations include hydatid cyst formation in the liver, lungs, brain, kidneys, or bones. An isolated splenic hydatid cyst is an extremely rare occurrence, accounting for only 0.5%-4% worldwide incidence rates, and recurrent cases are even more infrequent. Globalization, cross-border travel, and altered immigration patterns over time have shifted some of the burden of CE from the developing to the developed world, making the diagnosis challenging for these nonendemic areas. Judicious use of imaging modalities for prompt diagnosis and effective intervention is necessary to treat the initial disease and prevent a recurrence. Herein, we present the case of a 13-year-old male with recurrent isolated splenic hydatid cyst. The patient presented with chronic and nonradiating pain in his left hypochondrium. Physical examination revealed splenomegaly. Ultrasonography showed multiple cysts. Computerized tomography (CT) scan showed cystic lesions in splenic parenchyma with numerous internal enhancing septae. Surgical evacuation was performed for the management of disease.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...