Dear Editor, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a viral infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with a mortality rate of 3-7% [1]. The high mortality results from fulminant pneumonia leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome and multiple organ failure [2, 3]. Initial reports suggest that comorbidities cause a more severe course of infection and a poorer prognosis [4, 5]. Considering the fast spread and high mortality of COVID-19, it is necessary to understand the possible risk factors affecting its progression. We aimed to perform a systematic search to evaluate the potential role of all reported comorbidities on the disease course. Details of our report are provided in Supplementary file 1. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus between 01/01/2020 and 05/11/2020. The main outcomes were mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and severity. Definitions of the investigated outcomes are available in Supplementary file 2, Table 2. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to objectify the association between comorbidities and the outcomes by the random-effects model. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020176781). Of 33,987 records screened, 61 cohort studies with 31,089 (median 162; IQR: 103-338) patients were included in the meta-analysis. The overall mortality rate was 10.0%, 19.9% of patients needed intensive, while the reported severity was 24.0%. Underlying chronic

No abstract

Introduction: Some studies suggest that the accuracy of Helicobacter pylori diagnostic tests is decreased in peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). We aimed to assess the accuracy of diagnostic tests for H. pylori in patients with PUB in a diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) network meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic search was carried out in seven databases until November 2019. We collected or calculated true and false positive and negative values, and constructed 2×2 diagnostic contingency tables with reference standards including histology, rapid urease test, urea breath test, serology, stool antigen test, culture, and polymerase chain reaction. We ranked the index tests by the superiority indices (SI) and calculated pooled sensitivity and specificity of each test. Discussion: Our search yielded 40 eligible studies with 27 different diagnostic strategies for H. pylori. In 32 articles, the reference standard was a combination of multiple tests. In 12 studies, the index tests were compared with a single testing method. We analyzed seven networks with the reference standards against a single or a combination of diagnostic index tests. None of the index tests had better diagnostic accuracy (SI between 9.94 and 2.17) compared with the individual index tests as all the confidence intervals included 1. Combined testing strategies had higher sensitivities (0.92–0.62) and lower specificities (0.85–0.46) while single tests proved to have higher specificities (0.83–0.77) and lower sensitivities (0.73–0.42). Conclusion: Use of combined tests may have a rationale in clinical practice due to their higher sensitivities. The differences between the included DTA studies limited the comparison of the testing strategies.

Dronabinol, a natural cannabinoid, and its semi-synthetic derivative, nabilone, are marketed as medicines in several countries. The aim of our work was to systematically evaluate the frequency of adverse events related to dronabinol or nabilone treatment compared to placebo. Scientific databases were searched for placebo-controlled clinical studies of patients receiving either dronabinol or nabilone therapy with placebo control groups. This meta-analysis was reported following the PRISMA guidelines using the PICO format, and it was registered with the PROSPERO register. There were 16 trials included in the meta-analysis. In the nabilone studies, drowsiness was more than 7 times as frequent in patients treated with nabilone than in the placebo group (OR: 7.25; 95% CI: 1.64–31.95), and the risk of dizziness (OR: 21.14; 95% CI: 2.92–152.75) and dry mouth was also higher (OR: 17.23; 95% CI: 4.33–68.55). The frequency of headache was not different in the two groups. In case of dronabinol, the frequency of dry mouth (OR: 5.58; 95% CI: 3.19–9.78), dizziness (OR: 4.60 95% CI: 2.39–8.83) and headache (OR: 2.90; 95% CI: 1.07–7.85) was significantly higher in the dronabinol groups, whereas in case of nausea, drowsiness and fatigue there was no difference. The severity of adverse events was typically mild-to-moderate and transient. In a risk-benefit assessment, these adverse effects are acceptable compared to the achievable benefit. However, considering the diversity of the adverse effects, more studies are needed to provide a more accurate assessment on the side effect profiles of these two compounds.

No abstract