Meta-analysis of benzodiazepine use in the treatment of insomnia

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the benefits and risks associated with the use of benzodiazepines to treat insomnia in adults. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry were searched for English-language articles published from 1966 to December 1998 that described randomized controlled trials of benzodiazepines for the treatment of insomnia. Key words included "benzodiazepines" (exploded), "randomized controlled trial" and "insomnia." Bibliographies of relevant articles were reviewed for additional studies and manufacturers of benzodiazepines were asked to submit additional randomized controlled trial reports not in the literature. STUDY SELECTION: Articles were considered for the meta-analysis if they were randomized controlled trials involving patients with insomnia and compared a benzodiazepine with placebo or another active agent. Of the 89 trials originally identified, 45 met our criteria, representing a total of 2672 patients. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted regarding the participants, the setting, details of the intervention, the outcomes (including adverse effects) and the methodologic quality of the studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: The meta-analyses of sleep records indicated that, when compared with placebo, benzodiazepines decreased sleep latency by 4.2 minutes (non-significant; 95% confidence interval (CI -0.7 to 9.2) and significantly increased total sleep duration by 61.8 minutes (95% CI 37.4 to 86.2). Patient-reported outcomes were more optimistic for sleep latency; those randomized to benzodiazepine treatment estimated a sleep latency decrease of 14.3 minutes (95% CI 10.6 to 18.0). Although more patients receiving benzodiazepine treatment reported adverse effects, especially daytime drowsiness and dizziness or light-headedness (common odds ratio 1.8, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.4), dropout rates for the benzodiazepine and placebo groups were similar. Cognitive function decline including memory impairment was reported in several of the studies. Zopiclone was not found to be superior to benzodiazepines on any of the outcome measures examined. INTERPRETATION: The use of benzodiazepines in the treatment of insomnia is associated with an increase in sleep duration, but this is countered by a number of adverse effects. Additional studies evaluating the efficacy of nonpharmacological interventions would be valuable.     

特立加压素治疗肝肾综合征的荟萃分析

目的 评价特立加压素治疗肝肾综合征(HRS)的疗效、不良反应和安全性.方法 在Medline、Embase、Cochrane Library、VIP和CNKI中国期刊全文数据库中检索2008年11月1日之前已发表的关于特立加压素治疗HRS的随机对照临床试验.利用Stata 9.0软件进行荟萃分析.结果 按入选标准,共纳入7篇随机对照临床试验,共305例HRS患者纳入荟萃分析.荟萃分析表明:与安慰剂相比,特立加压素治疗HRS缓解率高,比值比(OR)值6.76[95%可信区间(CI)为:3.37～13.56,P=0.000];心肌梗死,心律失常,肠缺血及外周组织缺血发生率差异均无统计学意义[1.37(95%CI:0.26～7.31,P=0.715),3.25(95%CI:0.49～21.31,P=0.222),2.14(95%CI:0.46～10.02,P=0.336),1.72(95%CI:0.34～8.76,P=0.516)];病死率略低,OR值0.55(95%CI:0.31～0.98,P=0.044).与去甲肾上腺素相比,特立加压素治疗HRS缓解率、心肌梗死、心律失常、肠缺血、外周组织缺血发生率及病死率差异均无统计学意义[0.92(95%CI:0.32～2.67,P=0.877),0.92(95%CI:0.06～15.34,P=0.952),0.32(95%CI:0.03～3.73,P=0.364),0.92(95%CI:0.06～15.34,P=0.952),0.92(95%CI:0.06～15.34,P=0.952),0.80(95%CI:0.29～2.24,P=0.673)].结论 特立加压素和去甲肾上腺素均能有效地治疗HRS,特立加压素并不增加心肌梗死、心律失常、肠缺血和外周组织缺血发生率;特立加压素能否降低HRS患者病死率尚需大样本多中心的随机对照临床试验进行研究.     

An overview of interventions to improve compliance with appointment keeping for medical services.

OBJECTIVE--To determine, by a quantitative meta-analysis of randomized trials, the effectiveness of strategies to improve patient compliance with screening, referral, and clinic appointments for health services that are provided at the time of the visit. DATA SOURCES--Computerized searches of MEDLINE (1966 through 1990) were done using two search strategies: (1) (Patient Compliance OR Adhere* OR Dropout*) AND (Appointment*) AND (Screen* OR Follow* OR Refer*); and (2) (Patient Compliance OR Adhere* OR Dropout*) AND (Attend* OR Screen*) OR (Appointment*). A computerized search of PSYCHLIT was done with the terms Compliance AND Appointment*. In addition, the reference list of each retrieved article was reviewed and relevant citations retrieved. STUDY SELECTION--Only randomized trials with quantitative data concerning the effect of interventions to improve attendance at appointments for supervised administration of care were considered for detailed review. Studies of appointment keeping for self-administered treatments or tests were excluded. Two independent reviewers assessed each article for inclusion (kappa, for agreement, 0.66 for MEDLINE; 0.95 for PSYCHLIT) and validity (kappa, 0.62) using a priori criteria. Twenty-three (26%) of 88 relevant articles met all criteria. DATA EXTRACTION--Data on study populations, interventions, and outcomes were extracted and analyzed using pooled odds ratios (ORs). DATA SYNTHESIS--The average rate of compliance with appointments was 58%. Mailed reminders and telephone prompts were consistently useful in reducing broken appointments (OR, 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7 to 2.9; and OR, 2.9, CI, 1.9 to 4.3, respectively). An "orientation statement" (OR, 2.9; CI, 1.5 to 5.6), "contracting" with patients (OR, 1.9; CI, 1.04 to 3.5), and prompts from physicians (OR, 1.6; CI, 1.4 to 2.0) showed positive effects as well. CONCLUSIONS--In clinic settings where kept appointments can be an accurate measure of patient compliance with health care interventions, broken appointments can be reduced by mail, telephone, or physician reminders; orienting patients to the clinic; or contracting with patients.     

胰高血糖素样肽1受体激动剂类降糖药致2型糖尿病患者鼻咽炎和上呼吸道感染的网状meta分析

目的：使用网状meta分析系统评价胰高血糖素样肽1受体激动剂（glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists,GLP-1 RAs）类降糖药对两种常见的呼吸系统不良事件（respiratory system adverse event,RSAE,包括鼻咽炎和上呼吸道感染）的影响。方法：系统检索Medline、Embase、Clinical trials和Cochrane数据库中（截止2015年5月）比较GLP-1 RAs与传统降糖药或安慰剂对鼻咽炎和上呼吸道感染发生风险影响的随机对照研究,采用网状meta分析方法对纳入的研究结果进行加权合并。结果： 共纳入50个研究,包括13种干预措施：7种GLP-1 RAs类药（艾塞那肽、艾塞那肽缓释剂、利拉鲁肽、利西拉来、他司鲁肽、阿必鲁肽、杜拉鲁肽）、5种传统降糖药（胰岛素、二甲双胍、磺脲类、西格列汀、噻唑烷二酮类）和安慰剂。网状meta分析结果显示,与胰岛素相比,他司鲁肽显著降低了鼻咽炎（OR=0.67,95%CI：0.46~0.96）和上呼吸道感染（OR=0.39,95%CI：0.23~0.73）的发生风险;与安慰剂相比,他司鲁肽显著降低了上呼吸道感染（OR=0.57,95%CI：0.34~0.99）的发生风险。此外,基于贝叶斯理论的网状meta分析显示,鼻咽炎和上呼吸道感染发生风险排最末位的均为他司鲁肽。结论： 他司鲁肽显著降低了鼻咽炎和上呼吸道感染的发生风险,但仍有待专门针对RSAE设计的大型前瞻性研究加以验证。     

Preoperative radiotherapy for resectable rectal cancer: A meta-analysis

CONTEXT: The benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy for resectable rectal cancer has been extensively studied, but data on survival are still equivocal despite a reduction in the rate of local recurrence. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of preoperative radiotherapy followed by surgery in the reduction of overall and cancer-related mortality and in the prevention of local recurrence and distant metastases. DATA SOURCES: Computerized bibliographic searches of MEDLINE and CANCERLIT (1970 to December 1999), including non-English sources, were supplemented with hand searches of reference lists. The medical subject headings used were rectal cancer, radiotherapy, surgery, RCT, randomized, and clinical trial. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing preoperative radiotherapy plus surgery with surgery alone and if they included patients with resectable histologically proven rectal adenocarcinoma, without metastatic disease. Fourteen RCTs were analyzed. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on population, intervention, and outcomes were extracted from each RCT according to the intention-to-treat method by 3 independent observers and combined using the DerSimonian and Laird method. DATA SYNTHESIS: Radiotherapy plus surgery compared with surgery alone significantly reduced the 5-year overall mortality rate (odds ratio [OR] 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.98; P =.03), cancer-related mortality rate (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.82; P<.001), and local recurrence rate (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.38-0.62; P<.001). No reduction was observed in the occurrence of distant metastases (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.73-1.18; P =.54). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with resectable rectal cancer, preoperative radiotherapy significantly improved overall and cancer-specific survival compared with surgery alone. The magnitude of the benefit is relatively small and criteria are needed to identify patients most likely to benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy. JAMA. 2000;284:1008-1015     

Preventive effect of ulinastatin and gabexate mesylate on post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Background Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis （PEP） is regarded as one of the worrisome complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography （ERCP）. Results of randomized controlled trials evaluating the preventive effect of ulinastatin and gabexate mesylate （GM） on PEP are contradictory. The present study was designed to evaluate the prophylactic effect of ulinastatin and GM on PEP with meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials （RCTs）. Methods Five electronic databases were searched for RCTs evaluating the preventive effect of ulinastatin and GM on PEP. Summary effects were assessed with the methods recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. Results Twelve studies involving 5105 participants were included in our meta-analyses. Administration of ulinastatin decreased the incidence of PEP only at sufficient doses （OR, 0.39; 95% C/, 0.19 to 0.81; P=0.01）. Number needed to treat （NNT） was 6. And administration of ulinastatin also reduced the incidence of post-ERCP hyperamylasemia （PEHA） （OR, 0.40; 95% C/, 0.28 to 0.58; P〈0.000 01）. Slow infusion of high-dose GM was effective for PEP prevention （OR, 0.44; 95% Cl, 0.25 to 0.79; P=0.006）, and rapid infusion of low-dose GM also showed efficacy for PEP prophylaxis （OR, 0.37; 95% C/, 0.20 to 0.69; P=0.002）. NNT was 7 and 6 respectively. However, administration of GM at low doses and by slow infusions was ineffective （OR, 0.99; 95% Cl, 0.64 to 1.55; P=0.98）. Administration of GM had the tendency to reduce PEHA rate, but not to a statistical significance （OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.01; P=0.06）. When low-quality studies were excluded, the meta-analysis with two high-quality studies indicated that ulinastatin did not reduce the rate of PEP （OR, 0.63; 95% Cl, 0.32 to 1.26; P=0.19） and PEHA incidence （OR, 0.80; 95% Cl, 0.31 to 2.07; P=0.64）. The meta-analysis with six high-quality studies showed that GM administration decreased PEP incidence （OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.91; P=-0,02）, while was not efficacious for PEHA prevention （OR, 0.88; 95% C/, 0.74 to 1.04; P=0.12）. Conclusions Ulinastatin and GM may be of value for the prophylaxis of PEP. GM should be administered at high doses and by rapid infusions. And the doses of ulinastatin should be sufficient. However, the conclusions are not overwhelming. More large-sample size and high-quality RCTs are still needed to elucidate whether administrations of the two drugs really have prophylactic effect on PEP.     

舌下含服尘螨制剂治疗变应性鼻炎有效性及安全性Meta分析

目的通过Meta分析评价舌下含服尘螨制剂治疗变应性鼻炎(AR)的安全性、有效性。方法检索尘螨变应原制剂舌下免疫治疗(SLIT)AR的随机对照研究(RCT),主要包括SLIT与安慰剂相比及SLIT与传统药物相比较的两类RCT。对纳入文献评价,提取相关文献的纳入数据进行Meta分析。对二分类变量采取风险比(RR)作为结局指标,对于连续性数值变量采取标准化均数差(SMD)或加权均数差(WMD)作为结局指标,并计算相应指标的95%可信区间。结果纳入文献16篇,其中10篇是SLIT与安慰剂组之间的RCT,另6篇是SLIT与常规药物治疗之间的RCT。Meta分析显示:在SLIT与安慰剂对照的RCT中,总有效率、鼻症状评分差异显著(RR=1.45,95%CI:1.29～1.63;WMD=-0.72,95%CI:-0.92～-0.52),而不良反应发生率、药物使用评分、治疗后血清sIgE、血清sIgG4等差异无统计学意义,提示与安慰剂相比SLIT安全有效,而相应的血清学指标无明显变化。在SLIT与常规药物组的RCT研究中,总有效率、不良反应发生率、鼻症状评分及药物使用评分等均呈现出显著差异(RR=1.15,95%CI:1.00～1.33;RR=1.91,95%CI:1.01～3.59; WMD=-2.85,95%CI:-3.94～-1.75;SMD=-2.60,95%CI:-3.82～-1.37),提示与传统药物相比,SLIT可显著降低患者鼻部症状及常规药物的使用量。结论尘螨变应原SLIT治疗AR安全可靠,优于常规药物,但需高质量研究加以验证。     

Risk of infections of biological and targeted drugs in patients with spondyloarthritis: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background: Concerns exist regarding the risk of infections in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) treated with biologics. We assessed the risk of infections of biological and targeted drugs in patients with SpA by performing a meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and China Biology Medicine Disc for RCTs evaluating the risk of infections of biological therapy in ...     

Health outcomes associated with various antihypertensive therapies used as first-line agents: a network meta-analysis

CONTEXT: Establishing relative benefit or harm from specific antihypertensive agents is limited by the complex array of studies that compare treatments. Network meta-analysis combines direct and indirect evidence to better define risk or benefit. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the available clinical trial evidence concerning the safety and efficacy of various antihypertensive therapies used as first-line agents and evaluated in terms of major cardiovascular disease end points and all-cause mortality. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: We used previous meta-analyses, MEDLINE searches, and journal reviews from January 1995 through December 2002. We identified long-term randomized controlled trials that assessed major cardiovascular disease end points as an outcome. Eligible studies included both those with placebo-treated or untreated controls and those with actively treated controls. DATA EXTRACTION: Network meta-analysis was used to combine direct within-trial between-drug comparisons with indirect evidence from the other trials. The indirect comparisons, which preserve the within-trial randomized findings, were constructed from trials that had one treatment in common. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were combined from 42 clinical trials that included 192 478 patients randomized to 7 major treatment strategies, including placebo. For all outcomes, low-dose diuretics were superior to placebo: coronary heart disease (CHD; RR, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-0.92); congestive heart failure (CHF; RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.42-0.62); stroke (RR, 0.71; 0.63-0.81); cardiovascular disease events (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69-0.83); cardiovascular disease mortality (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.92); and total mortality (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84-0.96). None of the first-line treatment strategies-beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), alpha-blockers, and angiotensin receptor blockers-was significantly better than low-dose diuretics for any outcome. Compared with CCBs, low-dose diuretics were associated with reduced risks of cardiovascular disease events (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-1.00) and CHF (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.67-0.81). Compared with ACE inhibitors, low-dose diuretics were associated with reduced risks of CHF (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80-0.96), cardiovascular disease events (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-1.00), and stroke (RR, 0.86; 0.77-0.97). Compared with beta-blockers, low-dose diuretics were associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease events (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80-0.98). Compared with alpha-blockers, low-dose diuretics were associated with reduced risks of CHF (RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.43-0.60) and cardiovascular disease events (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.75-0.93). Blood pressure changes were similar between comparison treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose diuretics are the most effective first-line treatment for preventing the occurrence of cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality. Clinical practice and treatment guidelines should reflect this evidence, and future trials should use low-dose diuretics as the standard for clinically useful comparisons.     

Efficacy and safety of glucosamine,diacerein, and NSAIDs in osteoarthritis knee: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

To conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with the aims of comparing relevant clinical outcomes (that is, visual analog scores (VAS), total and sub-Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) scores, Lequesne algofunctional index, joint space width change, and adverse events) between diacerein, glucosamine, and placebo.

Methods

Medline and Scopus databases were searched from inception to 29 August 2014, using PubMed and Scopus search engines and included RCTs or quasi-experimental designs comparing clinical outcomes between treatments. Data were extracted from original studies. A network meta-analysis was performed by applying weight regression for continuous outcomes and a mixed-effect Poisson regression for dichotomous outcomes.

Results

Thirty-one of 505 identified studies were eligible. Compared to placebo, glucosamine showed a significant improvement with unstandardized mean differences (UMD) in total WOMAC, pain WOMAC, function WOMAC, and Lequesne score of −2.49 (95% confidence interval (CI) −4.14, −0.83), −0.75 (95% CI: −1.18, −0.32), −4.78 (95% CI: −5.96, −3.59), and −1.03 (95% CI: −1.34, −0.72), respectively. Diacerein clinically improves visual analog scores, function WOMAC, and stiffness WOMAC with UMD values of −2.23 (95% CI: −2.82, −1.64), −6.64 (95% CI: −10.50, −2.78), and −0.68 (95% CI: −1.20, −0.16) when compared to placebo.

Conclusions

The network meta-analysis suggests that diacerein and glucosamine are equally efficacious for symptom relief in knee OA, but that the former has more side effects.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40001-015-0115-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

Safety outcomes in meta-analyses of phase 2 vs phase 3 randomized trials: Intracranial hemorrhage in trials of bolus thrombolytic therapy

CONTEXT: Recent studies have reported disagreement between meta-analysis of small trials and subsequent large trials addressing the same question. However, disagreement for uncommon but serious adverse safety outcomes has not been examined. OBJECTIVE: To explore disagreement for serious adverse safety (intracranial hemorrhage [ICH]) and efficacy outcomes between meta-analysis of phase 2 (small) vs meta-analysis of phase 3 (large) randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of bolus thrombolytic therapy with infusion for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Clinical Trials) between January 1980 and December 1999 using the search terms thrombolysis, thrombolytic therapy, and myocardial infarction; conference proceedings; and reference lists. STUDY SELECTION: Fifteen randomized trials comparing thrombolytic agents administered by bolus injection with standard infusion therapy in patients with AMI. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on ICH, other causes of stroke, total mortality, and reinfarction were independently extracted from each study by 2 observers. DATA SYNTHESIS: Meta-analysis of 9 phase 2 trials (n = 3956) revealed a lower risk of ICH with bolus thrombolytic therapy (odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-1.01), which was not statistically significant. Meta-analysis of 6 phase 3 trials (n = 62 673) indicated a significant increase in risk of ICH (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.06-1.49). These results were significantly different (P =.01). There was no disagreement for efficacy outcomes. Phase 2 trials included younger and heavier patients with lower baseline blood pressures, and were more often open-label. Subgroup analyses suggested that each of these factors was associated with a lower estimate of risk of ICH with bolus agents. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that when therapeutic interventions are associated with a potential for uncommon but serious adverse safety outcomes, there may be differences between small phase 2 and large phase 3 trials that result in their disagreement for safety but not necessarily efficacy outcomes. Further investigation of the frequency and causes of disagreement between small and large trials for safety outcomes is warranted.     

Systematic evaluation of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation versus percutaneous ethanol injection for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis

Background

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI) have been used for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, which therapy is superior remains to be further elucidated. We aimed to conduct a systematic review to assess survival and local tumor recurrence rate with RFA compared with PEI therapy for HCC.

Methods

We conducted systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to 2014 in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBSCO, Springer, Ovid and the Cochrane library. Only RCTs that evaluated survival rate and occurrence of HCC between RFA and PEI therapy were included. The OR (odds ratio) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated by the Revman 5.0 software.

Results

A total of six studies including 983 HCC patients were eligible for this analysis. The survival rate showed a significant benefit under RFA therapy over PEI at 1-year (P = 0.02, OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.09 to 3.22), 2-years (P = 0.0003, OR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.39 to 3.05) and 3-years (P = 0.0007, OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.25 to 2.27). Likewise, RFA achieved significantly lower rates of local tumor recurrence over PEI at 1-year (P = 0.002, OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.73), 2-year (P = 0.03, OR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.88) and 3-year (P = 0.003, OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.84).

Conclusions

The current evidence suggests that RFA is superior to PEI in better survival and local disease control for small HCCs <5 cm in diameter and that RFA is worthy of promotion in clinical applications.     

比较复方丹参滴丸与地奥心血康胶囊治疗心绞痛随机对照临床试验的系统评价和meta分析

背景：复方丹参滴丸与地奥心血康胶囊是治疗冠心病心绞痛的常用中成药,已有临床试验比较它们的疗效,但尚未发现比较两者治疗心绞痛疗效的系统评价报告。目的：基于复方丹参滴丸和地奥心血康胶囊治疗心绞痛的临床随机对照试验（radominzed controlled trial,RCT）,通过meta分析系统评价两者治疗心绞痛的疗效。检索策略：检索发表于1994年至2011年的复方丹参滴丸和地奥心血康胶囊治疗心绞痛的RCT报告。检索的中文数据库包括中国博士学位论文全文数据库、中国期刊全文数据库、中国优秀硕士学位论文全文数据库和万方数据库;检索的外文数据库为Cochrane图书馆、荷兰医学文摘、ScienceDirect、MEDLINE（EBSCOhost）和PubMed。最后检索日期为2011年4月7日。纳入标准：报告描述为RCT,不限定发表语言;干预措施为使用药物治疗心绞痛;治疗组和对照组分别采用复方丹参滴丸和地奥心血康胶囊;治疗结局指标包括总体疗效和心电图改善;试验参与者需为冠心病心绞痛患者;疗程至少为28d。资料提取与分析：提取的数据项如下：发表年份;作者姓名;试验日期;试验组与对照组参与者的基线可比性;总样本量;疗效指标,包括总体疗效和心电图改善;疗程;每天给药剂量;复方丹参滴丸和地奥心血康胶囊的不良反应;总体疗效和心电图改善的有关数据。通过纳入和排除标准筛选检索到的RCT,利用Jadad评分量表和Cochrane偏倚风险评估量表进行质量评分。采用优势比（odds ratio,OR）和95%可信区间（confidence interval,CI）衡量总体疗效和心电图改善的效应值。根据纳入RCT的基本特征,进行亚组分析和敏感性分析。结果：最终纳入9篇RCT报告,包括926名试验参与者。9篇RCT中8篇的Jadad得分为2,另外1篇得分为4。复方丹参滴丸对地奥心血康胶囊的总体疗效的优势比为2.06（95%CI：1.03～4.12;P总效应=0.04）。6篇报告心电图疗效的RCT中复方丹参滴丸对地奥心血康胶囊的优势比为1.92（95%CI：1.23～3.00;P心电图疗效=0.004）。亚组分析及敏感性分析未发现可以显著影响结果稳定性的因素。结论：研究结果表明复方丹参滴丸治疗冠心病心绞痛的疗效优于地奥心血康,但尚需要更多高质量的RCT以确定疗效的差异程度。     

Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of Chinese and Western integrative medicine on medium and advanced lung cancer

<正>Objective:To summarize the effectiveness of Chinese and Western integrative medicine in treating medium and advanced lung cancer,and to provide guidelines for clinical application.Methods:For this metaanalysis, a comparative search of Chinese medicine data in Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI) and Chinese BioMedical Literature Database(CBM) was undertaken to identify articles related to randomized comparative research of Chinese and Western integrative medicine in treating medium and advanced lung cancer between 1996 to 2006.Quality of life(QOL) was estimated using RevMan 4.2 software for data processing, adopting the odd ratio(OR) and the 95%confidence interval(CI).Results:Through meta-analysis of 10 qualified articles,the results were as follows:the merging effectiveness of QOL[OR=3.80,95%CI(2.65,5.47)];the rate of survival[OR=3.44,95%CI(2.04,5.80)];the tumor response rate[OR=1.88,95%CI(1.37,2.58)];the tumor developing rate[OR=0.33,95%CI(0.23,0.48)].Significant differences existed between the Chinese and Western integrative medicine treatment group and the Western treatment group(P0.01).Conclusions:Chinese and Western integrative medicine treatment of medium and advanced lung cancer has shown to improve patients' QOL and survival rate;it also can control tumor development in the short term.     

Blood-Letting Therapy for Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of blood-letting therapy (BLT) in treatment of hypertension. Methods: A comprehensive electronic and manual bibliographic searches were performed in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Excerpt Medica Database (EMBASE), PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and Wanfang Database to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which hypertensive patients were treated with BLT or BLT plus antihypertensive drugs (BPAD) against placebo, no treatment or antihypertensive drugs. The Cochrane Risk Assessment Tool was used to assess the methodological quality of trials. The Review Manager 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. Results: A total of 7 RCTs with 637 hypertensive patients from 1989 to 2017 were identified. Compared with antihypertensive drugs, blood pressure was significantly reduced by BLT (RR=1.21, 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.44, P=0.03; heterogeneity: P=0.06, I2=60%) and BPAD (RR=1.25, 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.53, P=0.03; heterogeneity: P= 0.01, I2=71%). Moreover, a significant improvement in Chinese medicine syndrome by BLT (RR=1.32; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.53, P=0.0002; heterogeneity: P=0.53, I2=0%) and BPAD (RR=1.47; 95% CI: 1.06 to 2.04, P=0.02; heterogeneity: P=0.13, I2=56%) was identified. The reported adverse effects were well tolerated. Conclusions: Although some positive findings were identified, no definite conclusions regarding the efficacy and safety of BLT as complementary and alternative approach for treatment of hypertension could be drew due to the generally poor methodological design, significant heterogeneity, and insufficient clinical data. Further rigorously designed trials are warranted to confirm the results.     

稳心颗粒治疗心房颤动疗效及安全性Meta分析

目的系统评价稳心颗粒治疗心房颤动的临床疗效及安全性。方法计算机检索中国知网、万方数据知识服务平台、读秀中文学术搜索、PubMed数据库中关于稳心颗粒治疗心房颤动的临床随机对照试验,经质量评价最终纳入文献后,采用Review Manager 5.0软件进行Meta分析。结果共纳入13个研究,全部为中文,Jadad评分均为1分。Meta分析结果显示,稳心颗粒组与西药常规治疗组比较,稳心颗粒可提高临床疗效(OR=3.40,95%CI为2.41~4.80,P0.01),降低心室率(WMD=-5.86,95%CI为-6.73~-4.99,P0.01),提高转复率(OR=2.76,95%CI为1.29~5.92,P0.01),降低不良反应率(OR=0.52,95%CI为0.29~0.94,P=0.03)。结论与西药常规疗法比较,稳心颗粒治疗心房颤动可进一步提高临床疗效,降低心室率,提高转复率,降低不良反应率。     

Association of the ADIPOQ Rs2241766 and Rs266729 Polymorphisms with Metabolic Syndrome in the Chinese Population：A Meta-analysis

Objective This meta-analysis was performed to summarize the association of the ADIPOQ rs2241766 and rs266729 polymorphisms with metabolic syndrome (MS) in the Chinese population.
Methods We searched for articles in MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, HuGE Navigator, CNKI, and Wanfang databases and calculated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to determine the strength of associations in fixed- or random-effects models.
Results We included 21 articles in the meta-analysis: 17 reports of ADIPOQ rs2241766 with 3628 cases and 3000 controls and 8 of rs266729 with 2021 cases and 2226 controls. We found an increased risk of MS with the ADIPOQ rs2241766 polymorphism in some genetic models (allele model: OR=1.12, 95% CI:1.03-1.21; dominant model: OR=1.15, 95% CI: 1.04-1.28; homozygote model: OR=1.22, 95% CI:1.00-1.49) but no association with the ADIPOQ rs266729 polymorphism (allele model: OR=0.98, 95% CI:0.82-1.17; dominant model: OR=0.90, 95% CI: 0.79-1.02; recessive model: OR=1.09, 95% CI: 0.85-1.39;homozygote model: OR=1.03, 95% CI: 0.80-1.33).
Conclusion The results of this meta-analysis suggest an association between the ADIPOQ rs2241766 polymorphism and MS in the Chinese population. G allele of ADIPOQ rs2241766 increases the risk of MS. Better designed studies with different ethnic populations and larger sample sizes are needed for assessing the relationship between ADIPOQ rs2241766 and rs266729 polymorphisms and MS in the future.     

决奈达隆治疗房颤、房扑有效性与安全性的Meta分析

目的 评价决奈达隆治疗心房颤动、心房扑动的疗效及安全性。方法 计算机检索PubMed、Embase、the Cochrane Collaboration Database,查找建库至2014年2月28日期间发表的所有关于决奈达隆治疗房颤、房扑的英文随机对照试验（RCT）。由两位研究者按照纳入排除标准进行文献筛选、资料提取和方法学质量评价后,采用RevMan 5.2软件进行Meta分析。结果 最终纳入6个RCT,共计9 377例患者。Meta分析结果显示：1与安慰剂比较,决奈达隆能显著降低房颤、房扑的复发率[OR=0.55,95%CI（0.43,0.72）,P〈0.000 01]和心室率[MD=-12.25,95%CI（-17.09,-7.40）,P〈0.000 01];2与安慰剂相比比较,决奈达隆增加了患者的心血管事件住院率[OR=1.17,95%CI（0.43,3.21）,P=0.76],降低了患者的总死亡率[OR=0.95,95%CI（0.76,1.20）,P=0.67],但差异均无统计学意义;3与安慰剂比较,决奈达隆增加了总的不良反应发生率[OR=1.48,95%CI（1.06,2.05）,P=0.02],但未显著增加严重不良反应发生率[OR=1.17,95%CI（0.79,1.72）,P=0.43]。结论 决奈达隆对于房颤、房扑患者疗效显著且耐受良好,但要慎用于有严重器质性心脏病的永久性房颤患者。由于纳入研究数量及质量有限,需要开展更多高质量随机对照临床试验进一步确认。     

A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE--To examine the temporal relationship between accumulating data from randomized control trials of treatments for myocardial infarction and the recommendations of clinical experts writing review articles and textbook chapters. DATA SOURCES--(1) MEDLINE search from 1966 to present; search terms used were myocardial infarction, clinical trials, multicenter studies, double-blind method, meta-analysis, and the text word "random:"; (2) references from pertinent articles and books; and (3) all editions of English-language general medical texts and manuals and review articles on treatment of myocardial infarction. STUDY SELECTION--Randomized control trials of therapies for reducing the risk of total mortality in myocardial infarction (acute and secondary prevention). Review articles and textbook chapters dealing with the general clinical management of patients with myocardial infarction. DATA EXTRACTION--Two authors read the material and recorded the results; disagreements were resolved by conference. DATA SYNTHESIS--We used the technique of cumulative meta-analysis (performing a new meta-analysis when the results of a new clinical trial are published) and compared the results with the recommendations of the experts for various treatments for myocardial infarction. Discrepancies were detected between the meta-analytic patterns of effectiveness in the randomized trials and the recommendations of reviewers. Review articles often failed to mention important advances or exhibited delays in recommending effective preventive measures. In some cases, treatments that have no effect on mortality or are potentially harmful continued to be recommended by several clinical experts. CONCLUSIONS--Finding and analyzing all therapeutic trials in a given field has become such a difficult and specialized task that the clinical experts called on to summarize the evidence in a timely fashion need access to better databases and new statistical techniques to assist them in this important task.     

Serum Ferritin and the Risk of Metabolic Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Cross-sectional Studies

Objective This study aims to assess the dose-response relationship between serum ferritin (SF) and metabolic syndrome (MetS) in the two sexes.Methods We searched for articles on PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and the Web of Science databases that were published from 1950 to 2020. The summary odds ratio (OR) and 95％ confidence interval (CI) of the association between SF and MetS were estimated using a random-effects model through a meta-analysis. Based on the methods described by Greenland and Longnecker, we explored the dose-response relationship between the two sexes. Results This study included 14 studies and 74,710 samples. The results of the classical meta-analysis showed that SF was positively associated with MetS (OR = 1.77, 95％ CI: 1.59–1.98). Regarding the components of MetS (8 studies included), the results showed that SF was positively associated with abdominal obesity (OR = 1.42, 95％ CI: 1.24–1.62), elevated fasting plasma glucose (OR = 1.84, 95％ CI:1.50–2.25), elevated blood pressure (OR = 1.17, 95％ CI: 1.08–1.26), elevated triglycerides (OR = 2.09, 95％ CI: 1.72–2.54), and reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (OR = 1.33, 95％ CI: 1.19–1.49). In the linear dose-response meta-analysis, the ORs of males, females, and postmenopausal females were 1.14 (95％ CI: 1.13–1.16), 1.32 (95％ CI: 1.26–1.39), and 1.34 (95％ CI: 1.22–1.47), respectively.Conclusions Our study shows that SF is significantly and positively associated with MetS, and the risk in the male population is higher than that in the female population. This finding also supports the recommendation of using SF as an early warning marker of MetS.