Citations

Background: Meniscal allograft transplant (MAT) is an important treatment option for young patients with deficient menisci; however, there is a lack of consensus on the optimal method of allograft fixation. Hypothesis: The various methods of MAT fixation have measurable and significant differences in outcomes. Study Design: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A single-arm meta-analysis of studies reporting graft failure, reoperations, and other clinical outcomes after MAT was performed. Studies were stratified by suture-only, bone plug, and bone bridge fixation methods. Proportionate rates of failure and reoperation for each fixation technique were pooled with a mixed-effects model, after which reconstruction of relative risks with confidence intervals was performed using the Katz logarithmic method. Results: A total of 2604 patients underwent MAT. Weighted mean follow-up was 4.3 years (95% CI, 3.2-5.6 years). During this follow-up period, graft failure rates were 6.2% (95% CI, 3.2%-11.6%) for bone plug fixation, 6.9% (95% CI, 4.5%-10.3%) for suture-only fixation, and 9.3% (95% CI, 6.2%-13.9%) for bone bridge fixation. Transplanted menisci secured using bone plugs displayed a lower risk of failure compared with menisci secured via bone bridges (RR = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-0.99; P = .02). Risks of failure were not significantly different when comparing suture fixation to bone bridge (RR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.99-1.06; P = .12) and bone plugs (RR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96-1.02; P = .64). Allografts secured using bone plugs were at a lower risk of requiring reoperations compared with those secured using sutures (RR = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.87-0.95; P < .001), whereas allografts secured using bone bridges had a higher risk of reoperation when compared with those secured using either sutures (RR = 1.28; 95% CI, 1.19-1.38; P < .001) or bone plugs (RR = 1.41; 95% CI, 1.32-1.51; P < .001). Improvements in Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee scores were comparable among the different groups. Conclusion: This meta-analysis demonstrates that bone plug fixation of transplanted meniscal allografts carries a lower risk of failure than the bone bridge method and has a lower risk of requiring subsequent operations than both suture-only and bone bridge methods of fixation. This suggests that the technique used in the fixation of a transplanted meniscal allograft is an important factor in the clinical outcomes of patients receiving MATs.

Abstract Despite the challenges of the pandemic, there has been substantial progress with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) therapies. Pivotal COVID-19 trials like SOLIDARITY, RECOVERY, and ACCT-1 were rapidly conducted and data disseminated to support effective therapies. However, critical shortcomings remain on trial conduct, dissemination and interpretation of study results, and regulatory guidance in pandemic settings. The lessons that we learned have implications for both the current pandemic and future emerging infectious diseases. There is a need for establishing and standardizing clinical meaningful outcomes in therapeutic trials and for targeting defined populations and phenotypes that will most benefit from specific therapies. Standardized processes should be established for rapid and critical data review and dissemination to ensure scientific integrity. Clarity around the evidence standards needed for issuance of both emergency use authorization (EUA) and biologic license application (BLA) should be established and an infrastructure for executing rapid trials in epidemic settings maintained.

Abstract Given the urgent need for treatments during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the US Food and Drug Administration issued emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for multiple therapies. In several instances, however, these EUAs were issued before sufficient evidence of a given therapy’s efficacy and safety were available, potentially promoting ineffective or even harmful therapies and undermining the generation of definitive evidence. We describe the strengths and weaknesses of the different therapeutic EUAs issued during this pandemic. We also contrast them to the vaccine EUAs and suggest a framework and criteria for an evidence-based, trustworthy, and publicly transparent therapeutic EUA process for future pandemics.

AbstractObjectivesStudies on the association between metformin use and the risk of oesophageal cancer (OC) have generated controversial findings. This updated meta-analysis was conducted to reassess the effects of metformin on OC.MethodsA comprehensive search strategy was conducted to select relevant studies from origination to February 2021. Heterogeneity was evaluated through the Q test and I2 statistics. HRs and 95% CIs were pooled through either random-effect or fixed-effect models. Meta-regression, subgroup analyses, sensitivity analysis and publication bias diagnosis were also performed.ResultsSeven studies with 5 426 343 subjects were included. Metformin use was associated with reduced risk of OC (HR=0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.87, p&lt;0.001). Sensitivity analysis suggested that the results were relatively stable.ConclusionMetformin is associated with a reduced risk of OC. More well-designed studies are still needed to further elaborate on these associations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021237127.

Abstract We studied the performance of an algorithm combining multiplex polymerase chain reaction with phenotypic detection of extended-spectrum β-lactamases and carbapenemases directly from positive blood culture bottles in patients with gram-negative bacteremia and found good concordance with routine cultures. Such an algorithm may be a tool to improve time to optimal therapy in patients with gram-negative bacteremia.