Murad, Mohammad H

BACKGROUND As the use of injectable skin fillers increase in popularity, an increase in the reported adverse events is expected. OBJECTIVE This systematic review supports the development of American Society for Dermatologic Surgery practice guideline on the management of adverse events of skin fillers. METHODS AND MATERIALS Several databases for studies on risk factors or treatments of injection-related visual compromise (IRVC), skin necrosis, inflammatory events, and nodules were searched. Meta-analysis was conducted when feasible. RESULTS The review included 182 studies. However, IRVC was very rare (1–2/1,000,000 patients) but had poor prognosis with improvement in 19% of cases. Skin necrosis was more common (approximately 5/1,000) with better prognosis (up to 77% of cases showing improvement). Treatments of IRVC and skin necrosis primarily depend on hyaluronidase injections. Risk of skin necrosis, inflammatory events, and nodules may be lower with certain fillers, brands, injection techniques, and volume. Treatment of inflammatory events and nodules with antibiotics, corticosteroids, 5-FU, and hyaluronidase was associated with high response rate (75%–80%). Most of the studies were small and noncomparative, making the evidence certainty very low. CONCLUSION Practitioners must have adequate knowledge of anatomy, elicit history of skin filler use, and establish preemptive protocols that prepare the clinical practice to manage complications.

AbstractBackgroundDescriptions of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have focused on the nonpregnant adult population. This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics and perinatal outcomes of COVID-19 in pregnancy.MethodsWe searched databases from December 2019 to 30 April 2020. Eligible studies reported clinical characteristics, radiological findings, and/or laboratory testing of pregnant women during infection. Data were pooled across studies using a random-effects model.ResultsTwenty-four studies (136 women) were included. The most common symptoms were fever (62.9%) and cough (36.8%). Laboratory findings included elevated C-reactive protein (57%) and lymphocytopenia (50%). Ground-glass opacity was the most common radiological finding (81.7%). Preterm birth rate was 37.7% and cesarean delivery rate was 76%. There was 1 maternal death. There were 2 fetal COVID-19 cases.ConclusionsThe clinical picture in pregnant women with COVID-19 did not differ from the nonpregnant population; however, the rate of preterm birth and cesarean delivery are considerably higher than international averages.

To evaluate the effectiveness of an admixture of ketamine and propofol on peri-induction hemodynamics during airway manipulation, we searched electronic databases of randomized controlled trials from January 1, 2000, to October 17, 2018. Trial screening, selection, and data extraction were done independently by two reviewers with outcomes pooled across included trials using the random-effects model. We included 10 randomized trials (722 patients, mean age of 53.99 years, 39.96% female). American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status was reported in 9 trials with classes I and II representing the majority. Ketamine/propofol admixture was associated with a nonsignificant increase in heart rate (weighted mean difference, 3.36 beats per minute (95% CI, −0.88, 7.60), I2 = 88.6%), a statistically significant increase in systolic blood pressure (weighted mean difference, 9.67 mmHg (95% CI, 1.48, 17.86), I2 = 87.2%), a nonsignificant increase in diastolic blood pressure (weighted mean difference, 2.18 mmHg (95% CI, −2.82, 7.19), I2 = 73.1%), and a nonsignificant increase in mean arterial pressure (weighted mean difference, 3.28 mmHg (95% CI, −0.94, 7.49), I2 = 69.9%) compared to other agents. The risk of bias was high and the certainty of evidence was low. In conclusion, among patients undergoing airway manipulation and needing sedation, the use of a ketamine/propofol admixture may be associated with better hemodynamics compared to nonketamine/propofol sedation. This trial is registered with CRD42019125725.

Introduction The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of liver and spleen stiffness on magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) for detecting clinically significant portal hypertension. Methods A systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and the Grey Literature through to 15 August 2019 was performed. Original articles with >10 patients evaluating liver and/or spleen stiffness on MRE using a reference standard of portal hypertension defined as intractable ascites, esophageal varices, encephalopathy and/or death were included in analysis. Patient, clinical, MRI, and diagnostic performance was independently acquired by two reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed using a bivariate mixed-effects regression model. Results Fourteen studies were included with 12 studies evaluating liver stiffness and eight studies evaluating spleen stiffness. The pooled and weighted sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) values for liver stiffness on MRE were 83% [95% confidence interval (CI) 72–90%], 80% (95% CI 70–88%), and 88% (95% CI 85–91%), respectively. The pooled and weighted sensitivity, specificity, and AUC values for spleen stiffness on MRE were 79% (95% CI 61–90%), 90% (95% CI 80–95%), and 92% (95% CI 89–94%), respectively. The liver and spleen stiffness sensitivity and specificity values were comparable when evaluating for esophageal varices only at of 80% (95% CI 66–89%) and 76% (95% CI 62–86%) for liver stiffness, and 75% (95% CI 52–90%) and 89% (95% CI 70–96%) for spleen stiffness. Discussion Liver and spleen stiffness on MRE can serve as a supplemental noninvasive assessment tools for detecting clinically significant portal hypertension. Spleen stiffness may be more specific and accurate than liver stiffness for detecting portal hypertension.

ABSTRACT Aims Left atrial (LA) mechanical function may play a significant role in the development and progression of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate association of impaired LA function with outcomes in HFpEF. Methods and results Multiple databases were searched for original studies measuring different phases of LA function in HFpEF patients. Comparative LA function between HFpEF patients and healthy controls was assessed by pooling weighted mean differences (WMD). Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals were pooled to evaluate the prognostic utility of LA function. Twenty-two studies (2 trials, 20 observational) comprising 1974 HFpEF patients and 751 healthy controls were included. HFpEF patients had decreased LA reservoir [WMD = −12.21% (−15.47, −8.95); P < 0.001], LA conduit [WMD = −5.68% (−8.56, −2.79); P < 0.001], and pump [WMD = −11.07% (−14.81, −7.34); P < 0.001] emptying fractions compared with controls. LA reservoir [WMD = −13.38% (−16.07, −10.68); P < 0.001], conduit [WMD = −4.09% (−6.77, −1.42); P = 0.003], and pump [WMD = −3.53% (−4.47, −2.59); P < 0.001] strains were also significantly lower in HFpEF patients. Decreased LA reservoir strain [HR 1.24 (1.02, 1.50); P = 0.03] was significantly associated with risk of composite all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization. Conclusions Impaired LA function appears to have diagnostic and prognostic value in HFpEF, but whether indices of LA function truly refine discrimination for diagnosis or prognosis remains to be fully determined. Larger studies are needed to better evaluate associations between LA function and clinical outcomes and the role of LA function as a target for novel HFpEF therapies.

Summary Objective Surgery is a stressor that can be categorized by duration and severity and induces a systemic stress response that includes increased adrenal cortisol production. However, the precise impact of surgical stress on the cortisol response remains to be defined. Design We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis to assess the cortisol stress response induced by surgery and to stratify this response according to different parameters. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search in several databases from 1990 to 2016. Pairs of reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and evaluated the risk of bias. Cortisol concentrations were standardized, pooled in meta‐analysis and plotted over time. Results We included 71 studies reporting peri‐operative serum cortisol measurements in 2953 patients. The cortisol response differed substantially between moderately/highly invasive and minimally invasive surgical procedures. Minimally invasive procedures did not show a peri‐operative cortisol peak, whereas more invasive surgeries caused a cortisol surge that was more pronounced in older subjects, women and patients undergoing open surgery and general anaesthesia. The duration of the procedure and the use of etomidate for induction of anaesthesia did not affect the cortisol response. Conclusions The peri‐operative cortisol stress response is dynamic and influenced by patient‐specific, surgical and anaesthetic features. However, the available evidence is derived from highly heterogeneous studies, with only two of 71 studies measuring cortisol by mass spectrometry, which currently prevents a precise and reproducible definition of this response.