To investigate the effects of doxycycline pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis (doxy-PrEP/PEP) on bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including ongoing studies published until November 7, 2023. Our primary endpoint was the incidence of bacterial STIs measured as the number of visits with an STI per total number of visits. Random-effects model was used to estimate pooled effect sizes. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023478486. We identified six eligible studies containing data from seven articles and four conference abstracts, enrolling men who have sex with men (MSM), transgender women (TGW), and cisgender women (CGW). The pooled analysis of 1,766 participants with 602 newly diagnosed STIs showed a 56% decrease in the overall STI incidence using doxy-PrEP/PEP (RR = 0.44; 95% CI: 0.30-0.65; I² = 73%). For doxy-PEP, including MSM and TGW only, the RR observed for overall STI incidence was 0.40 (95% CI: 0.28-0.57; I² = 37%), 0.19 (95% CI: 0.08-0.44; I² = 39%) for chlamydia, 0.23 (0.14-0.36; I² = 0%) for syphilis and 0.55 (95% CI: 0.34-0.87; I² = 41%) for gonorrhea. No serious adverse events were reported in the studies. The certainty of evidence regarding the efficacy of doxy-PEP among MSM and TGW was graded as high. Doxy-PEP significantly reduces the number of new cases of chlamydia and syphilis and is potentially effective against gonorrhea, influenced by local resistance patterns. Thus, it is a promising tool in the prevention of bacterial STIs among MSM and TGW.

Background: Progressive atelectasis regularly occurs during general anaesthesia; hence, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is often applied. Individualised PEEP titration may reduce the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) and improve oxygenation as compared to fixed PEEP settings; however, evidence is lacking. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021282228). A systematic search in four databases (MEDLINE Via PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science) was performed on 14 October 2021 and updated on 26 April 2024. We searched for randomised controlled trials comparing the effects of individually titrated versus fixed PEEP strategies during abdominal surgeries. The primary endpoint was the incidence of PPCs. The secondary endpoints included the PaO₂/FiO₂ at the end of surgery, individually set PEEP value, vasopressor requirements, and respiratory mechanics. Results: We identified 30 trials (2602 patients). The incidence of PPCs was significantly lower among patients in the individualised group (RR = 0.70, CI: 0.58–0.84). A significantly higher PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio was found in the individualised group as compared to controls at the end of the surgery (MD = 55.99 mmHg, 95% CI: 31.78–80.21). Individual PEEP was significantly higher as compared to conventional settings (MD = 6.27 cm H₂O, CI: 4.30–8.23). Fewer patients in the control group needed vasopressor support; however, this result was non-significant. Lung-function-related outcomes showed better respiratory mechanics in the individualised group (Cstat: MD = 11.92 cm H₂O 95% CI: 6.40–17.45). Conclusions: Our results show that individually titrated PEEP results in fewer PPCs and better oxygenation in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

Background and Aims: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] have a more than two fold higher risk of venous thromboembolic events [VTE] than the general population. The aetiology is complex, and the role of medication is not precisely defined. We aimed to assess the effects of anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha [anti-TNFα] drugs and conventional anti-inflammatory therapy, namely corticosteroids [CS], immunomodulators [IM], and 5-aminosalicylates [5-ASA] on VTE in IBD. Methods: A systematic search was performed in five databases on November 22, 2022. We included studies reporting VTE in the distinct categories of medications, determined the proportions, and calculated the odds ratios [OR] with 95% confidence intervals [CI], using the random-effects model. The risk of bias was evaluated with the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Results: The quantitative analysis included 16 observational studies, with data from 91 322 IBD patients. Patients receiving anti-TNFα medication had significantly less VTE [proportion: 0.05, CI: 0.02–0.10], than patients treated with CS [proportion: 0.16, CI: 0.07–0.32], with OR = 0.42 [CI: 0.25–0.71]. IMs resulted in similar proportions of VTE compared with biologics [0.05, CI: 0.03–0.10], with OR = 0.94 [CI: 0.67–1.33]. The proportion of patients receiving 5-ASA having VTE was 0.09 [CI: 0.04–0.20], with OR = 1.00 [CI: 0.61–1.62]. Conclusions: Biologics should be preferred over corticosteroids in cases of severe flare-ups and multiple VTE risk factors, as they are associated with reduced odds of these complications. Further studies are needed to validate our data.

Background/Objectives: Calcified coronary lesions require plaque modification techniques for optimal stent apposition, of which rotational atherectomy (RA) is the most commonly used one. Challenging cases require the use of additional dedicated devices (such as modified balloons, MB); however, data available for evidence-based device selection are limited. The aim of this study is to determine the impact of the balloon-based technology used after successful RA treatment on outcomes. Methods: This study was carried out according to the PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, CENTRAL and Embase databases were systematically searched for eligible randomized and non-randomized studies. Results: A total of nine studies and 1024 patients were included in the analysis. Patients were treated with RA followed by either plain balloon angioplasty (RA + BA) or modified balloon (RA + MB) treatment prior to stent implantation. There was no significant difference in MACE (major adverse cardiovascular events; OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.21–1.34; p = 0.153), all-cause mortality (OR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.33–1.42; p = 0.265), and target lesion revascularization (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.27–1.55; p = 0.264) between the two groups. However, a sensitivity analysis demonstrated a significant decrease in MACE for patients with severely calcified lesions (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.25–0.70; p = 0.009) in the RA + MB group. The analyses of the safety outcomes of slow flow/no reflow (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.29–1.22; p = 0.128) and coronary artery perforation (OR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.70–1.99; p = 0.480) showed no difference between the two groups. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis suggests that the benefit of the more invasive RA + MB treatment is statistically significant for severely calcified lesions, but is not associated with additional procedural complications.