Introduction to systematic review and meta-analysis

Ahn, Eun Jin; Kang, Hyun

doi:10.4097/kjae.2018.71.2.103

Cited by 409 publications

(288 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

272

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Due to the identification of only 1 controlled study, and according to the methodological recommendation against performing a meta-analysis of observational studies without a control group, (15) information regarding outcomes reported by each study was presented in tables for comparison without a statistical assessment.…”

Section: Data Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Is there a Role for Antibiotic Prophylaxis Prior to Dental Procedures in Patients with Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Slullitel

Oñativia²,

Piuzzi

et al. 2020

J. Bone Joint Infect.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Background: The indication of prophylactic antibiotics prior to dental procedures for non-infected causes in order to reduce the risk of haematogenous periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains as controversial. We performed a systematic review of the literature assessing the relationship between PJI and invasive dental procedures and whether there is evidence to support the use of antibiotic prophylaxis.Methods: This review was conducted in accordance with the 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for studies focusing on dental procedures after TJA, reporting on PJI as an outcome. The methodological quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for case-control and cohort studies and by the tool proposed by Murad et al. for observational studies.Results: Our systematic literature review yielded 90 individual studies, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria. The overall infection rate ranged from 0.26% to 2.12%. Of these, cases associated with a dental procedure ranged from 0% to 15.9%. Five of the studies described cases in which antibiotic prophylaxis was administered; however, no clear algorithm regarding type and dosage of antibiotic was mentioned. When assessing the methodological quality of the evidence, all studies had an overall low to moderate quality.Conclusion: The current systematic review, mostly composed of low-quality studies, suggests that there is no direct evidence to indicate prophylactic antibiotics prior to dental procedures in patients with TJA. In line with the current guidelines, no prophylaxis should be used on interventions for non-infected causes, except for occasional unusual situations, which can then be judged individually.

show abstract

Section: Data Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

Is there a Role for Antibiotic Prophylaxis Prior to Dental Procedures in Patients with Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Slullitel

Oñativia²,

Piuzzi

et al. 2020

J. Bone Joint Infect.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Systematically reviewing the published literature means answering a defined research question by gathering, appraising and synthesizing all empirical evidence that fits pre‐specified eligibility criteria (Systematic reviews and meta‐analyses: a step‐by‐step guide). A meta‐analysis is the use of statistical methods to quantify and summaries the results of these studies (Ahn & Kang, Systematic reviews and meta‐analyses: a step‐by‐step guide). Informed by the importance of non‐typhoidal Salmonella enterica in public health and to identify gaps in evidence, the main research questions addressed by the present systematic review were (a) “what is the pooled prevalence of non‐typhoidal Salmonella in human populations in the MENA region?”, and (b) what are the most common human Salmonella serotypes in the MENA region?’.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of enteric non‐typhoidal Salmonella in humans in the Middle East and North Africa: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Al‐Rifai

Chaabna

Denagamage

et al. 2019

Zoonoses and Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To enhance efforts related to controlling foodborne pathogens in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), information on epidemiology of non‐typhoidal Salmonella enterica (hereafter termed “Salmonella”) is limited. We quantified the overall regional and country‐specific Salmonella prevalence in different human populations and identified the most common serotypes. Published literature of Salmonella prevalence was systematically reviewed and reported following the Preferred Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Pooled Salmonella prevalence measures were estimated using a random‐effects model. We identified 46 research reports that reported 84 Salmonella prevalence measures in 15 out of 24 countries in MENA. There were 252,831 tested humans with 6,356 Salmonella‐positive cases. The pooled Salmonella prevalence in MENA was estimated at 6.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): 5.4%–7.9%). The highest pooled Salmonella prevalence measures were in Morocco (17.9%, 95% CI: 5.7%–34.8%, 1997–2012), Tunisia (10.2%, 95% CI: 4.3%–18.0%, 1988–2009) and Sudan (9.2%, 95% CI: 6.5%–12.2%, 2006–2008), while the lowest were in Jordan (1.1%, 95% CI: 0.1%–3.0%, 1993–2010), Oman (1.2%, 95% CI: 1.2%–1.3%, 1998–2002) and Palestine (1.2%, 95% CI: 0.4%–2.1%, 1999–2011). In MENA, Salmonella pooled prevalence in gastrointestinal symptomatic, gastrointestinal asymptomatic and food handlers population groups was 13.0% (95% CI: 7.6%–19.6%), 11.4% (95% CI: 2.2%–25.7%) and 3.8% (95% CI: 1.0%–8.0%), respectively. Salmonella prevalence was 14.5% (95% CI: 8.7%–26.1%) in studies tested <100 subjects, whereas 4.6% (95% CI: 3.6%–5.8%) in studies tested ≥100 subjects. Salmonella Enteritidis (29.8%) and Typhimurium (23.6%) were the most common serotypes. Salmonella was a common foodborne pathogen in MENA countries, particularly in North African countries. Findings inform the scientific community, the public and the decision‐makers with Salmonella prevalence and gaps in evidence in MENA to support control and prevention strategies and could leverage more research studies.

show abstract

“…Treatment failure rates, mortality rates, 3-and 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were extracted and entered in the REVMAN 5.2 software. For dichotomous variables, odds ratios with their 95% confidence intervals were calculated with Mantel-Haenszel methods using fixed (if no heterogeneity) or random-effects model (I 2 > 40%) [38]. Heterogeneity was tested using chi-square and I 2 tests, and significance was tested using the Z test.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neoadjuvant strategies in resectable carcinoma esophagus: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The survival benefit of neoadjuvant therapy in resectable carcinoma esophagus has been elucidated. We performed a meta-analysis in light of new studies and long-term results of past trials. The search strategy was refined to include only "neoadjuvant" so that any bias by adjuvant treatment is eliminated. Methods: A detailed search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library was done. Only published randomized English language trials were included. Data were categorized as neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation (NACRT), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART), and neoadjuvant sequential chemoradiotherapy (SCRT). Meta-analysis was done using odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI using fixed/random effects model. Heterogeneity was tested by chi-square and I 2 test. Z probability calculated significant difference across subgroups. Outcomes assessed were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 3 and 5 years, respectively, mortality (30/90 day) and failures (local/systemic). Results: Twenty-five randomized trials involving 5272 patients were included for quantitative analysis. NACRT was evaluated in 12 studies (2676 patients). Superior 3-year OS (OR = 0.68 CI 0.52-0.90, p = 0.007), 3-year DFS (OR = 0.55 CI 0.45-0.68, p = 0.00001), and 5-year DFS (OR = 0.59 CI 0.47-0.74, p = 0.00001), with lower failures (OR = 0.52 CI 0.37-0.73, p = 0.0001), were seen in favor of NACRT at the cost of increased perioperative mortality (OR = 1.79 CI 1.15-2.80, p = .01). However, 5-year OS (OR = 0.78 CI 0.60-0.1.01, p = 0.06) was not found to be significantly superior. NACT, NART, and SCRT were not found to have any benefit over surgery alone. Conclusion: This meta-analysis presents strong evidence favoring NACRT over upfront surgery. It also shows no survival advantage of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

show abstract

Introduction to systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 409 publications

References 35 publications

Is there a Role for Antibiotic Prophylaxis Prior to Dental Procedures in Patients with Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Is there a Role for Antibiotic Prophylaxis Prior to Dental Procedures in Patients with Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Prevalence of enteric non‐typhoidal Salmonella in humans in the Middle East and North Africa: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Neoadjuvant strategies in resectable carcinoma esophagus: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About