Background Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a global leading cause of morbidity, with residual inflammation contributing to recurrent events. Colchicine has been proposed as an adjunct therapy, but its efficacy remains uncertain. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) data comparing colchicine versus placebo in ACS. Risk ratio (RR) and mean difference with 95% CIs were computed for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively. Primary outcomes were adverse cardiovascular events (ACEs), mortality and safety. Random-effects models were used for pooled estimates. Results Seventeen RCTs comprising 14 794 patients were included, of whom 7390 (50%) were randomised to colchicine. The mean patient age across the studies ranged from 54 to 63 years, in a follow-up period ranging from 5 days to 12 months. Colchicine reduced the incidence of recurrent ACS (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.92; p=0.03; I²=55%) and unstable angina (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.63; p<0.01; I²=0%). No meaningful differences were observed in all-cause mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.14; I²=12%), cardiovascular death (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.30; I²=0%) or ACE (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.01; p=0.05; I²=58%). Subgroup analyses suggested a dose-dependent effect, with 0.5 mg/day potentially reducing ACE (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.88; I²=41%), but higher doses increasing gastrointestinal symptoms. Conclusion Low-dose colchicine may reduce recurrent ischaemic events in ACS, but evidence remains uncertain due to heterogeneity and limited long-term data. Safety and efficacy in women and optimal dosing require further investigation. Trial registration number CRD42024627348.

Burn injuries often require surgery, posing challenges due to significant intraoperative blood loss and transfusion risks. Tranexamic Acid (TXA), an antifibrinolytic agent, stabilizes clots and reduces fibrinolysis, with proven efficacy in various surgical settings. However, the benefits in burn patients are yet to be established. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) comparing TXA versus control in burned patients. Risk Ratios (RR) and Mean Differences (MD) with 95% CIs were computed for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively. The primary endpoint of interest was blood loss. Statistical analyses were performed using RStudio software (version 4.2.2). The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Four RCTs comprising 204 patients were included, with 102 (50%) assigned to the TXA group. The mean patient age across studies ranged from 32.15 to 39.70 years. TXA significantly reduced total blood loss (MD = -183.93 mL; 95% CI: -278.44 to -89.42; p < 0.01), need for packed red blood cell transfusions (RR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.66; p < 0.01), while also improving hematocrit (MD = 3.49%; 95% CI: 1.58 to 5.41; p < 0.01) and hemoglobin levels (MD = 0.87 g.dL^-1; 95% CI: 0.35 to 1.39; p < 0.01). In patients with burns, TXA was associated with reduced blood loss and packed cell transfusions. However, certainty is limited by the small number and heterogeneity of available trials REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID: CRD420251000356. Registered on 07 March 2025.

Introduction: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is effective in treating hepatitis B virus, (HBV) but has been associated with nephrotoxicity. In contrast, tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF) has emerged as a safer alternative, reducing kidney exposure while maintaining antiviral efficacy. This meta-analysis evaluates improvements in kidney function following the switch from TDF to TAF. Methods: Our study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024565358) and included 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1,179 patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We compared renal function before and after switching to TAF. Results: Significant improvements in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were observed, indicating enhanced kidney function post-switch. The findings confirm that TAF has a superior renal safety profile compared to TDF, particularly in long-term treatments. Conclusion: The clinical relevance of TAF for HBV patients with CKD aligns with current guideline shifts favoring TAF. Despite limitations such as high heterogeneity, this study supports TAF as a safer management strategy for HBV patients with CKD, demonstrating improved kidney outcomes and reduced nephrotoxicity risks. These findings support its broader use in clinical practice and highlight the need for further research on long-term renal outcomes.