Health effects of coconut oil: Summary of evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analysis of interventional studies

Background and aimsSystemic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) of interventional studies are considered as the highest level of evidence for clinical decision making. Therefore, we systematically summarized all high-quality evidence on the usage of coconut oil for health-related benefits from SRs and MA.MethodsPubMed®, Web of science®, SciVerse Scopus®, and EMBASE® databases were systematically searched to select SRs and SRs with MA of interventional studies reporting health-related clinical outcomes of coconut oil. Similar studies were grouped based on their respective clinical areas. A methodological quality appraisal was conducted for all included SRs and SRs with MA using the Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews.ResultsA total of seven papers were selected for inclusion in this review, consisting of three MA and one SR on cardio-metabolic health, one SR on oral health, and one SR and one MA each on skin health. Coconut oil significantly increases serum total cholesterol, low-density- and high-density- lipoprotein cholesterol levels compared to poly- and mono-unsaturated oils. Limited studies showed that topical use of coconut oil helps in the prevention and treatment of atopic dermatitis and oil pulling for the prevention of dental caries. All four studies on cardiometabolic health and the SR on oral health had a high score in the quality assessment, SR with MA on skin health fulfilled high-quality scoring whereas the SR on the same topic had a low-quality scoring.ConclusionsIn summary, consistent and strong evidence shows that coconut oil has an adverse effect on the lipids parameters associated with cardio-metabolic health, with limited studies to conclude the effects of atopic dermatitis and oil pulling.     

Helicobacter pylori reinfection and its risk factors after initial eradication: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) infection is a common health problem, which is closely related to peptic ulcers, gastric cancer, and extragastric diseases. Drugs can successfully eradicate it. However, the recurrence of H pylori often occurs after initial eradication. To confirm the global incidence of H pylori reinfection and systematically evaluate its risk factors.Methods:We will search for the relevant literature through Chinese and English databases, with the retrieval deadline being November 2021. Databases include PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Chongqing VIP Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, Wanfang Database, and China Biomedical Literature Database. Stata14.0 will be used to conduct this systematic review. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis protocols statements are followed in this protocol, and the PRISMA statement will be followed in the completed systematic review.Results:The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Conclusions:This systematic review will provide evidence regarding the rate of H pylori reinfection and its risk factors after successful eradication. It can guide the management of patients with H pylori infection.     

Prevalence and risk factors for cage subsidence after lumbar interbody fusion: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction:Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is an effective treatment for lumbar degenerative diseases. Cage subsidence (CS) contitutes one of the most common postoperative complications. Many risk factors for CS after LIF have been reported in some studies. However, controversies still exist. The objective of this study will be to summarize data on the prevalence and risk factors of CS after LIF.Methods and analysis:Our study present a protocol that conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence and risk factors for CS after LIF. Two reviewers retrieved the relevant articles using the 5 databases (PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) from inception to May 31st, 2021. Primary outcome will be the prevalence of CS after LIF. Second outcomes include the risk factors associated with postoperative CS and clinical outcomes associated with postoperative CS. Three reviewers will screen citation titles and abstracts and evaluated full-text of each potentially relevant citation, and then extracted the data using a data extraction form. Any discrepancies in decisions between reviewers will be resolved through discussion. We assessed the methodological quality and risk of bias of the included studies based on the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). The aim of the extra analysis is to explore the explanations of the heterogeneity (age, gender, race, year of publication, type of study and surgical procedure). Publication bias will be assessed by Begg test, Egger test and funnel plots.Ethics and dissemination:No primary data will be collected and individual patient information and endangering participant rights, thus ethics approval is not required. Findings will be reported through publication and media.Protocol registration number:PROSPERO CRD42021257981 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#joinuppage).     

Effect of hyperglycemia on all-cause mortality from pediatric brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:This study aimed to assess the effect of hyperglycemia on all-cause mortality in pediatric patients with brain injury, based on currently available evidence.Methods:We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases with the keywords “hyperglycemia”, “brain injury”, and “pediatrics”. The retrieved records were screened by title, abstract, and full-text to include original articles assessing the effects of hyperglycemia on pediatric brain injury. The extracted data were assessed by a fixed-effects model. The risk of bias in the eligible studies was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Publication bias was visually examined with a funnel plot. Begg and Egger tests, respectively, were used to identify small-study effects. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the robustness of the original effect size.Results:Nine observational studies were identified from 1439 primary hits. A total of 970 pediatric patients, including 304 with hyperglycemia and brain injury, were included for meta-analysis. Hyperglycemia was strongly associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality in pediatric patients (odds ratio = 11.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.88–17.08; I² = 0%). The overall quality of eligible studies was low, but the funnel plot indicated no publication bias.Conclusions:Hyperglycemia is significantly associated with high all-cause mortality in pediatric patients with brain injury. However, the relationship should be confirmed by larger-scale observational studies and randomized controlled trials.     

Bisphosphonates and risk of lung cancer: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

The association between the use of bisphosphonates (BPs) and the risk of lung cancer has been concerned recently. There is no explicit study indicating that whether the use of BPs would affect the risk of lung cancer. So, we conducted a meta-analysis to figure out the relationship between BPs and lung cancer.We searched the databases of PubMed and Embase. The random effects were used to calculate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence interval (CIs) for the risk of lung cancer in BPs users compared with non-users. The stability of our results was evaluated by the sensitivity analysis. The publication bias was assessed in our study. The data in our study comes from the public database, therefore ethical approval is not necessary. Also, our study did not involve patient consent.Four studies met our inclusion criteria. All the included studies are cohort studies. Our analysis indicated that there was no significant association between the use of BPs and the risk of lung cancer (OR 1.02, 95%CI 0.85- 1.24, I² 71%). In our secondary analysis, the use of alendronate may increase the risk of lung cancer. The pooled OR of 3 studies is (OR 1.10, 95%CI 0.84–1.45, I² 77%), but when we performed a sensitivity analysis, 1 of the OR is (OR 1.23, 95%CI 1.02–1.49, I² 4.1%).This is the most detailed meta-analysis on this topic. And there was no significant association between the use of BPs and lung cancer. However, exposure to alendronate may increase the risk of lung cancer. More studies are needed to confirm our findings.     

Ginseng adjuvant therapy on COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is spreading fast and it brings great pressure to the social economy. Many reports revealed that ginseng can develop immunity for respiratory disease, but there is no evidence to prove its effects on COVID-19. This protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis will clarify the safety and effectiveness of ginseng adjuvant therapy on COVID-19 patients.Methods:Different databases (Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, Wan fang Database, ClinicalTrials, World Health Organization Trials, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry) will be retrieved to search related articles according to pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Clinical recovery time and effective rates will be assessed as the primary outcomes and any changes of patient''s condition will be considered as the secondary outcomes. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis will be conducted to explore sources of heterogeneity. Endnote X9.3 will be used to manage data screening. The statistical analysis will be completed by RevMan5.3 and Stata/SE 15.1 software.Results:This study will assess the effects and safety for ginseng adjuvant therapy on COVID-19 patients.Conclusion:The discussion will be considered to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to prove the effects of ginseng adjuvant therapy for COVID-19 patients.Systematic review registration:PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021277843)     

Factors related to the risk of stroke in the population with type 2 diabetes: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:Type 2 diabetes is an independent risk factor for stroke. The main role of the current study is to study the mechanism of stroke induced by diabetes, but there is no systematic summary of daily management and stroke prevention for patients with type 2 diabetes. In order to provide a more detailed stroke prevention program for patients with type 2 diabetes, we included in the study and looked forward to analyzing the risk factors that were more in line with the clinical characteristics of type 2 diabetes.Methods:We will search the following Chinese and English databases: PubMed, Web of science, Cochrane Library, Medline, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure database. All of the above electronic databases will be searched from inception to June 30, 2021. In addition, we will manually search for conference papers, ongoing experiments, and internal reports to supplement the studies retrieved via electronic search. We will use the STATA 16.0 provided by Cochrane Collaboration Network for statistical analysis.Results:The study will prove a collective view on the relationship between related factors and stroke in the type 2 diabetes population.Conclusion:We plan to submit this systematic review to a peer-reviewed journal.INPLASY registration number: INPLASY2021100046     

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for insomnia: A protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background:Although nonpharmacological therapies are recommended as first-line treatments for insomnia, they do not widely implement in practice owing to costly or time-consuming. As a result, pharmacotherapy remains to be commonly prescribed for patients with the sleep disorder. Pharmacotherapy for insomnia consists of different types of drugs. Few studies focused on comprehensively evaluating all available drugs for insomnia. Our review aims to compare efficacy and safety of pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments by synthesizing direct evidence and indirect evidence to help clinicians and patients make informed decisions for insomnia.Methods:We will search the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials between January 2000 and June 12, 2021. Randomized controlled trials of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for insomnia will be included. Study quality will be assessed on the basis of the methodology and categories described in the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. Eight network meta-analyses were conducted. A Bayesian network meta-analysis would be performed, and relative ranking of agents would be assessed. A node splitting method will be used to examine the inconsistency between direct and indirect comparisons when a loop connecting 3 arms exists.Results:The results of this paper will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.Conclusion:The conclusion of our study will provide updated evidence to rank the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for insomnia.Ethics and dissemination:Ethical approval is not applicable, as this study is a network meta-analysis based on published trials.INPLASY registration number:INPLASY202160031     

Mesenteric panniculitis does not confer an increased risk for cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:Mesenteric panniculitis (MP) is a non-specific, localized inflammation at the mesentery of small intestines which often gets detected on computed tomography. An association with malignant neoplasms remains unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the association of malignancy with MP.Methods:MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles published from inception to 2020 that evaluated the association of malignant neoplasms with MP in comparison with control groups. Using random-effects method, a summary odds ratio (OR) estimate with 95% confidence intervals for malignant neoplasms in MP was estimated.Results:Four case-control studies reporting data on 415 MP patients against 1132 matched-controls met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. The pooled OR for finding a malignant neoplasm in patients with MP was 0.907 (95% CI: 0.688–1.196; P = .489). The heterogeneity was mild and non-significant. Also, there was no heightened risk of any specific type of malignancy with MP. Three more case-series with unmatched-control groups (MP: 282, unmatched-controls: 17,691) were included in a separate analysis where the pooled OR of finding a malignant neoplasm was 2.963 (95% CI: 1.434–6.121; P = .003). There was substantial heterogeneity in this group.Conclusion:This meta-analysis of matched controlled studies proves absence of any significant association of malignant neoplasms with MP. Our study also demonstrates that the putative association of malignancy with MP is mainly driven by uncontrolled studies or case-series.     

Effects of consumption of coconut oil or coconut on glycemic control and insulin sensitivity: A systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional trials

Background and aimsThe often purported claim that coconut fat is beneficial for cardiovascular health and was disputed in several recent meta-analyses. However, the evidence on the effects of coconut fat intake on glycemic control remains equivocal. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines to determine the effects of dietary coconut fats on markers of acute and long-term glycemic control.Methods and resultsPubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, and Web-of-Science databases were searched and the records were screened by three independent reviewers to identify interventional studies examining acute and long-term (i.e., >10 days) effects of coconut fat on glycemic control. DerSimonian–Laird random-effects meta-analyses were performed using the meta-package in R (4.0.2). Seven interventional studies on acute effects and 11 interventional studies on long-term effects of coconut fat were included. Meals with coconut fat acutely increased the incremental area under the curve (AUC) of glucose (p = 0.046) and decreased the incremental AUC of insulin (p = 0.037) vs. control meals. Long-term coconut fat intake increased HOMA-IR (p = 0.049), but did not significantly affect fasting glucose, insulin, or HOMA-β vs. control meals.ConclusionsCoconut fat in meals seems to be associated with a diminished postprandial insulin response, resulting in a subtle increase in the postprandial glycemic response. Long-term intake of coconut fat seems to increase insulin resistance, yet does not seem to be beneficial for long-term glycemic control. Thus, our results disprove the popular claim that coconut fat improves glycemic control.RegistrationPROSPERO registry (CRD42020183450).