Shun-Li Kan

Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs as Prophylaxis for Heterotopic Ossification after Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

AbstractHeterotopic ossification (HO) is a frequent complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been used as routine prophylaxis for HO after THA. However, the efficacy of NSAIDs on HO, particularly selective NSAIDs versus nonselective NSAIDs, is uncertain.We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and clinicaltrials.gov to identify randomized controlled trials with respect to HO after THA. Two reviewers extracted the data and estimated the risk of bias. For the ordered data, we followed the Bayesian framework to calculate the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% credible interval (CrI). For the dichotomous data, the OR and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using Stata version 12.0. The subgroup analyses and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach were used.A total of 1856 articles were identified, and 21 studies (5995 patients) were included. In the NSAIDs versus placebo analysis, NSAIDs could decrease the incidence of HO, according to the Brooker scale (OR = 2.786, 95% CrI 1.879–3.993) and Delee scale (OR = 9.987, 95% CrI 5.592–16.17). In the selective NSAIDs versus nonselective NSAIDs analysis, there was no significant difference (OR = 0.7989, 95% CrI 0.5506–1.125) in the prevention of HO. NSAIDs could increase discontinuation caused by gastrointestinal side effects (DGSE) (OR = 1.28, 95% CI 1.00–1.63, P = 0.046) more than a placebo. Selective NSAIDs could decrease DGSE (OR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.24–0.97, P = 0.042) compared with the nonselective NSAIDs. There was no significant difference with respect to discontinuation caused by nongastrointestinal side effects (DNGSE) in NSAIDs versus a placebo (OR = 1.16, 95% CI 0.88–1.53, P = 0.297) and in selective NSAIDs versus nonselective NSAIDs (OR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.50–1.37, P = 0.462).NSAIDs might reduce the incidence of HO and increase DGSE in the short-term.

Rivaroxaban for thromboprophylaxis after total hip or knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the most widespread severe complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We conducted this meta-analysis to further validate the benefits and harms of rivaroxaban use for thromboprophylaxis after THA or TKA. We thoroughly searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was applied to test the robustness of our findings and to obtain a more conservative estimation. Of 316 articles screened, nine studies were included. Compared with enoxaparin, rivaroxaban significantly reduced symptomatic VTE (P = 0.0001) and symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT; P = 0.0001) but not symptomatic pulmonary embolism (P = 0.57). Furthermore, rivaroxaban was not associated with an increase in all-cause mortality, clinically relevant non-major bleeding and postoperative wound infection. However, the findings were accompanied by an increase in major bleeding (P = 0.02). The TSA demonstrated that the cumulative z-curve crossed the traditional boundary but not the trial sequential monitoring boundary and did not reach the required information size for major bleeding. Rivaroxaban was more beneficial than enoxaparin for preventing symptomatic DVT but increased the risk of major bleeding. According to the TSA results, more evidence is needed to verify the risk of major bleeding with rivaroxaban.

Tanezumab for Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Meta-Analysis

Objective Tanezumab is a new therapeutic intervention for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. We performed the present meta-analysis to appraise the efficacy and safety of tanezumab for patients with knee OA. Methods We systematically searched randomized controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). The primary outcomes were mean change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain, the WOMAC physical function and patients global assessment (PGA). Outcomes were reported as the standard mean difference (SMD) or relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed the pooled data using a random-effects model. Results Of the identified studies, four were eligible and were included in this meta-analysis (N = 1839 participants). Compared with the placebo groups, tanezumab yielded a significant reduction in mean change in the WOMAC pain (SMD = 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.69, P<0.00001), the WOMAC physical function (SMD = 0.56, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.74, P<0.00001) and PGA (SMD = 0.34, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.47, P<0.00001). There was no significant difference in serious adverse events (RR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.92, P = 0.84) between the tanezumab and placebo groups. Tanezumab significantly increased discontinuations due to adverse events (RR = 2.89, 95% CI 1.59 to 5.26, P = 0.0005), abnormal peripheral sensations (RR = 3.14, 95% CI 2.12 to 4.66, P<0.00001), and peripheral neuropathy (RR = 6.05, 95% CI 2.32 to 15.81, P = 0.0002). Conclusion Tanezumab can alleviate pain and improve function for patients with OA of the knee. However, considering the limited number of studies, this conclusion should be interpreted cautiously and more clinical randomized controlled trials are needed to verify the efficacy and safety of tanezumab for OA of the knee.

Efficacy and Safety of Bisphosphonates for Low Bone Mineral Density After Kidney Transplantation: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract In patients with low bone mineral density (BMD) after kidney transplantation, the role of bisphosphonates remains unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of bisphosphonates. We retrieved trials from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from inception through May 2015. Only randomized controlled trials that compared bisphosphonate-treated and control groups of patients with low bone mineral density after kidney transplantation were included. The primary outcomes were the percent change in BMD, the absolute change in BMD, and the BMD at the end of study at the lumbar spine. The results were expressed as the mean difference (MD) or relative risk (RR) with the 95% confidence interval (CI). We used a random-effects model to pool the outcomes. We included 17 randomized controlled trials with 1067 patients. Only 1 included trial was found to be at low risk of bias. The rest of the included studies were found to have high to uncertain risk of bias. Compared with the control group, those who received bisphosphonates had a significant increase in percent change in BMD (mean difference [MD] = 5.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.22–7.79, P < 0.00001) and absolute change in BMD (MD = 0.05, 95% CI 0.04–0.05, P < 0.00001), but a nonsignificant increase in BMD at the end of the study (MD = 0.02, 95% CI −0.01 to 0.05, P = 0.25) at the lumbar spine. Bisphosphonates resulted in a significant improvement in percent change in BMD (MD = 4.95, 95% CI 2.57–7.33, P < 0.0001), but a nonsignificant improvement in absolute change in BMD (MD = 0.03, 95% CI −0.00 to 0.06, P = 0.07) and BMD at the end of the study (MD = −0.01, 95% CI −0.04 to 0.02, P = 0.40) at the femoral neck. No significant differences were found in vertebral fractures, nonvertebral fractures, adverse events, and gastrointestinal adverse events. Bisphosphonates appear to have a beneficial effect on BMD at the lumbar spine and do not significantly decrease fracture events in recipients. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to the lack of robustness and the heterogeneity among studies.

Comparison of cutting and pencil-point spinal needle in spinal anesthesia regarding postdural puncture headache: A meta-analysis

Background: Postdural puncture headache (PDPH), mainly resulting from the loss of cerebral spinal fluid (CSF), is a well-known iatrogenic complication of spinal anesthesia and diagnostic lumbar puncture. Spinal needles have been modified to minimize complications. Modifiable risk factors of PDPH mainly included needle size and needle shape. However, whether the incidence of PDPH is significantly different between cutting-point and pencil-point needles was controversial. Then we did a meta-analysis to assess the incidence of PDPH of cutting spinal needle and pencil-point spinal needle. Methods: We included all randomly designed trials, assessing the clinical outcomes in patients given elective spinal anesthesia or diagnostic lumbar puncture with either cutting or pencil-point spinal needle as eligible studies. All selected studies and the risk of bias of them were assessed by 2 investigators. Clinical outcomes including success rates, frequency of PDPH, reported severe PDPH, and the use of epidural blood patch (EBP) were recorded as primary results. Results were evaluated using risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous variables. Rev Man software (version 5.3) was used to analyze all appropriate data. Results: Twenty-five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in our study. The analysis result revealed that pencil-point spinal needle would result in lower rate of PDPH (RR 2.50; 95% CI [1.96, 3.19]; P < 0.00001) and severe PDPH (RR 3.27; 95% CI [2.15, 4.96]; P < 0.00001). Furthermore, EBP was less used in pencil-point spine needle group (RR 3.69; 95% CI [1.96, 6.95]; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Current evidences suggest that pencil-point spinal needle was significantly superior compared with cutting spinal needle regarding the frequency of PDPH, PDPH severity, and the use of EBP. In view of this, we recommend the use of pencil-point spinal needle in spinal anesthesia and lumbar puncture.

Autograft versus allograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

Background:Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is considered as the standard surgical procedure for the treatment of ACL tear. However, there is a crucial controversy in terms of whether to use autograft or allograft in ACL reconstruction. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare autograft with allograft for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction. Methods:PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared autograft with allograft in ACL reconstruction up to January 31, 2016. The relative risk or mean difference with 95% confidence interval was calculated using either a fixed- or random-effects model. The risk of bias for individual studies according to the Cochrane Handbook. The trial sequential analysis was used to test the robustness of our findings and get more conservative estimates. Results:Thirteen trials were included, involving 1636 participants. The results of this meta-analysis indicated that autograft brought about lower clinical failure, better overall International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) level, better pivot-shift test, better Lachman test, greater Tegner score, and better instrumented laxity test (P < 0.05) than allograft. Autograft was not statistically different from allograft in Lysholm score, subjective IKDC score, and Daniel 1-leg hop test (P > 0.05). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that autograft was superior to irradiated allograft for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction in clinical failure, Lysholm score, pivot-shift test, Lachman test, Tegner score, instrumented laxity test, and subjective IKDC score (P < 0.05). Moreover, there were no significant differences between autograft and nonirradiated allograft. Conclusions:Autograft is superior to irradiated allograft for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction concerning knee function and laxity, but there are no significant differences between autograft and nonirradiated allograft. However, our results should be interpreted with caution, because the blinding methods were not well used.

Alendronate prevents glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis in patients with rheumatic diseases: A meta-analysis.

AbstractGlucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) is a serious problem for patients with rheumatic diseases requiring long-term glucocorticoid treatment. Alendronate, a bisphosphonate, has been recommended in the prevention of GIOP. However, the efficacy and safety of alendronate in preventing GIOP remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of alendronate in preventing GIOP in patients with rheumatic diseases.We retrieved randomized controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Two reviewers extracted the data and evaluated the risk of bias and quality of the evidence. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) with a 95% CI for continuous outcomes using Review Manager, version 5.3.A total of 339 studies were found, and 9 studies (1134 patients) were included. Alendronate was not able to reduce the incidence of vertebral fractures (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.10–4.04, P = 0.62) and nonvertebral fractures (RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.15–1.12, P = 0.08). Alendronate significantly increased the percent change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine (MD = 3.66, 95% CI: 2.58–4.74, P < 0.05), total hip (MD = 2.08, 95% CI: 0.41–3.74, P < 0.05), and trochanter (MD = 1.68, 95% CI: 0.75–2.61, P < 0.05). Significant differences were not observed in the percent change in BMD at the femoral neck (MD = −0.33, 95% CI: −2.79 to 2.13, P = 0.79) and total body (MD = 0.64, 95% CI: −0.06 to 1.34, P = 0.07). No significant differences in the adverse events were observed in patients treated with alendronate versus the controls (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.94–1.07, P = 0.89). The odds of gastrointestinal adverse events were significantly reduced (RR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62–0.97, P < 0.05).Our analysis suggests that alendronate can increase the percent change in BMD at the lumbar spine, total hip, and trochanter, and is not associated with an increased incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events; however, the vertebral and nonvertebral fractures cannot be reduced. However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to the poor statistical power.

Silencing Transmembrane Protein 45B (TNEM45B) Inhibits Proliferation, Invasion, and Tumorigenesis in Osteosarcoma Cells

Transmembrane protein 45B (TMEM45B) is a member of the TMEM family of proteins and has been reported to be expressed abnormally in different kinds of human tumors. However, the biological function of TMEM45B in osteosarcoma remains unclear. The objective of this study was to investigate the role of TMEM45B in regulating the biological behavior of osteosarcoma cells. Our results demonstrated that the expression of TMEM45B at both the protein and mRNA levels was dramatically upregulated in human osteosarcoma cell lines. Knockdown of TMEM45B significantly suppressed the proliferation, migration, and invasion of U2OS cells in vitro. Mechanistically, knockdown of TMEM45B sharply downregulated the expression level of β-catenin, cyclin D1, and c-Myc in U2OS cells. Finally, knockdown of TMEM45B attenuated tumor growth in transplanted U2OS-derived tumors in nude mice. Taken together, our results demonstrated that TMEM45B plays an important role in regulating the proliferation, migration, and invasion of osteosarcoma cells and that its effects on proliferation and invasion were mediated partially through the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway. These observations support our belief that TMEM45B may serve as an oncogene in the development and progression of osteosarcoma.

Which is best for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: balloon kyphoplasty, percutaneous vertebroplasty or non-surgical treatment? A study protocol for a Bayesian network meta-analysis

Introduction Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) commonly cause both acute and chronic back pain, substantial spinal deformity, functional disability and decreased quality of life and increase the risk of future vertebral fractures and mortality. Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP), balloon kyphoplasty (BK) and non-surgical treatment (NST) are mostly used for the treatment of OVCFs. However, which treatment is preferred is unknown. The purpose of this study is to comprehensively review the literature and ascertain the relative efficacy and safety of BK, PVP and NST for patients with OVCFs using a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Methods and analysis We will comprehensively search PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, to include randomided controlled trials that compare BK, PVP or NST for treating OVCFs. The risk of bias for individual studies will be assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook. Bayesian network meta-analysis will be performed to compare the efficacy and safety of BK, PVP and NST. The quality of evidence will be evaluated by GRADE. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval and patient consent are not required since this study is a meta-analysis based on published studies. The results of this network meta-analysis will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. PROSPERO registration number CRD42016039452; Pre-results.

Anterior inferior plating versus superior plating for clavicle fracture: a meta-analysis

BackgroundThe position of plate fixation for clavicle fracture remains controversial. Our objective was to perform a comprehensive review of the literature and quantify the surgical parameters and clinical indexes between the anterior inferior plating and superior plating for clavicle fracture.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized and non-randomized studies that compared the anterior inferior plating with the superior plating for clavicle fracture. The relative risk or standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval was calculated using either a fixed- or random-effects model.ResultsFour randomized controlled trials and eight observational studies were identified to compare the surgical parameters and clinical indexes. For the surgical parameters, the anterior inferior plating group was better than the superior plating group in operation time and blood loss (P < 0.05). Furthermore, in terms of clinical indexes, the anterior inferior plating was superior to the superior plating in reducing the union time, and the two kinds of plate fixation methods were comparable in constant score, and the rate of infection, nonunion, and complications (P > 0.05).ConclusionsBased on the current evidence, the anterior inferior plating may reduce the blood loss, the operation and union time, but no differences were observed in constant score, and the rate of infection, nonunion, and complications between the two groups. Given that some of the studies have low quality, more randomized controlled trails with high quality should be conduct to further verify the findings.