BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses are on top of the evidence-based medicine pyramid, yet many of them are not completed after they are begun. Many factors impacting the publication of meta-analysis works have been discussed, and their association with publication likelihood has been investigated. These factors include the type of systematic review, journal metrics, h-index of the corresponding author, country of the corresponding author, funding sources, and duration of publication. In our current review, we aim to investigate these various factors and their impact on the likelihood of publication. A comprehensive review of 397 registered protocols retrieved from five databases was performed to investigate the different factors that might affect the likelihood of publication. These factors include the type of systematic review, journal metrics, h-index of the corresponding author, country of the corresponding author, funding sources, and duration of publication. RESULTS: We found that corresponding authors in developed countries and English-speaking countries had higher likelihoods of publication: 206/320 (p = 0.018) and 158/236 (p = 0.006), respectively. Factors affecting publications are the countries of corresponding author (p = 0.033), whether they are from developed countries (OR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.2-3.1, p = 0.016), from English-speaking countries (OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.2-2.7, p = 0.005), update status of the protocol (OR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.0-2.6, p = 0.033), and external funding (OR: 1.7, 95% CI: 1.1-2.7, p = 0.025). Multivariable regression retains three variables as significant predictors for the publication of a systematic review: whether it is the corresponding author from developed countries (p = 0.013), update status of the protocol (p = 0.014), and external funding (p = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Being on top of the evidence hierarchy, systematic review and meta-analysis are the keys to informed clinical decision-making. Updating protocol status and external funding are significant influences on their publications. More attentions should be paid to the methodological quality of this type of publication.

BACKGROUND: Asthma and atopic dermatitis (AD) are chronic allergic conditions, along with allergic rhinitis and food allergy and cause high morbidity and mortality both in children and adults. This study aims to evaluate the global, regional, national, and temporal trends of the burden of asthma and AD from 1990 to 2019 and analyze their associations with geographic, demographic, social, and clinical factors. METHODS: Using data from the Global Burden of Diseases (GBD), Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019, we assessed the age-standardized prevalence, incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) of both asthma and AD from 1990 to 2019, stratified by geographic region, age, sex, and socio-demographic index (SDI). DALYs were calculated as the sum of years lived with disability and years of life lost to premature mortality. Additionally, the disease burden of asthma attributable to high body mass index, occupational asthmagens, and smoking was described. RESULTS: In 2019, there were a total of 262 million [95% uncertainty interval (UI): 224-309 million] cases of asthma and 171 million [95% UI: 165-178 million] total cases of AD globally; age-standardized prevalence rates were 3416 [95% UI: 2899-4066] and 2277 [95% UI: 2192-2369] per 100,000 population for asthma and AD, respectively, a 24.1% [95% UI: -27.2 to -20.8] decrease for asthma and a 4.3% [95% UI: 3.8-4.8] decrease for AD compared to baseline in 1990. Both asthma and AD had similar trends according to age, with age-specific prevalence rates peaking at age 5-9 years and rising again in adulthood. The prevalence and incidence of asthma and AD were both higher for individuals with higher SDI; however, mortality and DALYs rates of individuals with asthma had a reverse trend, with higher mortality and DALYs rates in those in the lower SDI quintiles. Of the three risk factors, high body mass index contributed to the highest DALYs and deaths due to asthma, accounting for a total of 3.65 million [95% UI: 2.14-5.60 million] asthma DALYs and 75,377 [95% UI: 40,615-122,841] asthma deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma and AD continue to cause significant morbidity worldwide, having increased in total prevalence and incidence cases worldwide, but having decreased in age-standardized prevalence rates from 1990 to 2019. Although both are more frequent at younger ages and more prevalent in high-SDI countries, each condition has distinct temporal and regional characteristics. Understanding the temporospatial trends in the disease burden of asthma and AD could guide future policies and interventions to better manage these diseases worldwide and achieve equity in prevention, diagnosis, and treatment.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is one of the leading causes of death and disability worldwide, and affects people regardless of country, age group, or sex. Using the most recent evidentiary and analytical framework from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD), we produced location-specific, age-specific, and sex-specific estimates of diabetes prevalence and burden from 1990 to 2021, the proportion of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in 2021, the proportion of the type 2 diabetes burden attributable to selected risk factors, and projections of diabetes prevalence through 2050. METHODS: Estimates of diabetes prevalence and burden were computed in 204 countries and territories, across 25 age groups, for males and females separately and combined; these estimates comprised lost years of healthy life, measured in disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs; defined as the sum of years of life lost [YLLs] and years lived with disability [YLDs]). We used the Cause of Death Ensemble model (CODEm) approach to estimate deaths due to diabetes, incorporating 25 666 location-years of data from vital registration and verbal autopsy reports in separate total (including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes) and type-specific models. Other forms of diabetes, including gestational and monogenic diabetes, were not explicitly modelled. Total and type 1 diabetes prevalence was estimated by use of a Bayesian meta-regression modelling tool, DisMod-MR 2.1, to analyse 1527 location-years of data from the scientific literature, survey microdata, and insurance claims; type 2 diabetes estimates were computed by subtracting type 1 diabetes from total estimates. Mortality and prevalence estimates, along with standard life expectancy and disability weights, were used to calculate YLLs, YLDs, and DALYs. When appropriate, we extrapolated estimates to a hypothetical population with a standardised age structure to allow comparison in populations with different age structures. We used the comparative risk assessment framework to estimate the risk-attributable type 2 diabetes burden for 16 risk factors falling under risk categories including environmental and occupational factors, tobacco use, high alcohol use, high body-mass index (BMI), dietary factors, and low physical activity. Using a regression framework, we forecast type 1 and type 2 diabetes prevalence through 2050 with Socio-demographic Index (SDI) and high BMI as predictors, respectively. FINDINGS: In 2021, there were 529 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 500-564) people living with diabetes worldwide, and the global age-standardised total diabetes prevalence was 6·1% (5·8-6·5). At the super-region level, the highest age-standardised rates were observed in north Africa and the Middle East (9·3% [8·7-9·9]) and, at the regional level, in Oceania (12·3% [11·5-13·0]). Nationally, Qatar had the world's highest age-specific prevalence of diabetes, at 76·1% (73·1-79·5) in individuals aged 75-79 years. Total diabetes prevalence-especially among older adults-primarily reflects type 2 diabetes, which in 2021 accounted for 96·0% (95·1-96·8) of diabetes cases and 95·4% (94·9-95·9) of diabetes DALYs worldwide. In 2021, 52·2% (25·5-71·8) of global type 2 diabetes DALYs were attributable to high BMI. The contribution of high BMI to type 2 diabetes DALYs rose by 24·3% (18·5-30·4) worldwide between 1990 and 2021. By 2050, more than 1·31 billion (1·22-1·39) people are projected to have diabetes, with expected age-standardised total diabetes prevalence rates greater than 10% in two super-regions: 16·8% (16·1-17·6) in north Africa and the Middle East and 11·3% (10·8-11·9) in Latin America and Caribbean. By 2050, 89 (43·6%) of 204 countries and territories will have an age-standardised rate greater than 10%. INTERPRETATION: Diabetes remains a substantial public health issue. Type 2 diabetes, which makes up the bulk of diabetes cases, is largely preventable and, in some cases, potentially reversible if identified and managed early in the disease course. However, all evidence indicates that diabetes prevalence is increasing worldwide, primarily due to a rise in obesity caused by multiple factors. Preventing and controlling type 2 diabetes remains an ongoing challenge. It is essential to better understand disparities in risk factor profiles and diabetes burden across populations, to inform strategies to successfully control diabetes risk factors within the context of multiple and complex drivers. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

BACKGROUND: Although meningitis is largely preventable, it still causes hundreds of thousands of deaths globally each year. WHO set ambitious goals to reduce meningitis cases by 2030, and assessing trends in the global meningitis burden can help track progress and identify gaps in achieving these goals. Using data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, we aimed to assess incident cases and deaths due to acute infectious meningitis by aetiology and age from 1990 to 2019, for 204 countries and territories. METHODS: We modelled meningitis mortality using vital registration, verbal autopsy, sample-based vital registration, and mortality surveillance data. Meningitis morbidity was modelled with a Bayesian compartmental model, using data from the published literature identified by a systematic review, as well as surveillance data, inpatient hospital admissions, health insurance claims, and cause-specific meningitis mortality estimates. For aetiology estimation, data from multiple causes of death, vital registration, hospital discharge, microbial laboratory, and literature studies were analysed by use of a network analysis model to estimate the proportion of meningitis deaths and cases attributable to the following aetiologies: Neisseria meningitidis, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, group B Streptococcus, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus, viruses, and a residual other pathogen category. FINDINGS: In 2019, there were an estimated 236 000 deaths (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 204 000-277 000) and 2·51 million (2·11-2·99) incident cases due to meningitis globally. The burden was greatest in children younger than 5 years, with 112 000 deaths (87 400-145 000) and 1·28 million incident cases (0·947-1·71) in 2019. Age-standardised mortality rates decreased from 7·5 (6·6-8·4) per 100 000 population in 1990 to 3·3 (2·8-3·9) per 100 000 population in 2019. The highest proportion of total all-age meningitis deaths in 2019 was attributable to S pneumoniae (18·1% [17·1-19·2]), followed by N meningitidis (13·6% [12·7-14·4]) and K pneumoniae (12·2% [10·2-14·3]). Between 1990 and 2019, H influenzae showed the largest reduction in the number of deaths among children younger than 5 years (76·5% [69·5-81·8]), followed by N meningitidis (72·3% [64·4-78·5]) and viruses (58·2% [47·1-67·3]). INTERPRETATION: Substantial progress has been made in reducing meningitis mortality over the past three decades. However, more meningitis-related deaths might be prevented by quickly scaling up immunisation and expanding access to health services. Further reduction in the global meningitis burden should be possible through low-cost multivalent vaccines, increased access to accurate and rapid diagnostic assays, enhanced surveillance, and early treatment. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

BACKGROUND: The causes for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are diverse and the incidence trends of IMIDs from specific causes are rarely studied. The study aims to investigate the pattern and trend of IMIDs from 1990 to 2019. METHODS: We collected detailed information on six major causes of IMIDs, including asthma, inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, and atopic dermatitis, between 1990 and 2019, derived from the Global Burden of Disease study in 2019. The average annual percent change (AAPC) in number of incidents and age standardized incidence rate (ASR) on IMIDs, by sex, age, region, and causes, were calculated to quantify the temporal trends. FINDINGS: In 2019, rheumatoid arthritis, atopic dermatitis, asthma, multiple sclerosis, psoriasis, inflammatory bowel disease accounted 1.59%, 36.17%, 54.71%, 0.09%, 6.84%, 0.60% of overall new IMIDs cases, respectively. The ASR of IMIDs showed substantial regional and global variation with the highest in High SDI region, High-income North America, and United States of America. Throughout human lifespan, the age distribution of incident cases from six IMIDs was quite different. Globally, incident cases of IMIDs increased with an AAPC of 0.68 and the ASR decreased with an AAPC of -0.34 from 1990 to 2019. The incident cases increased across six IMIDs, the ASR of rheumatoid arthritis increased (0.21, 95% CI 0.18, 0.25), while the ASR of asthma (AAPC = -0.41), inflammatory bowel disease (AAPC = -0.72), multiple sclerosis (AAPC = -0.26), psoriasis (AAPC = -0.77), and atopic dermatitis (AAPC = -0.15) decreased. The ASR of overall and six individual IMID increased with SDI at regional and global level. Countries with higher ASR in 1990 experienced a more rapid decrease in ASR. INTERPRETATION: The incidence patterns of IMIDs varied considerably across the world. Innovative prevention and integrative management strategy are urgently needed to mitigate the increasing ASR of rheumatoid arthritis and upsurging new cases of other five IMIDs, respectively. FUNDING: The Global Burden of Disease Study is funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The project funded by Scientific Research Fund of Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences & Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital (2022QN38).

BACKGROUND: The global burden of lower respiratory infections (LRIs) and corresponding risk factors in children older than 5 years and adults has not been studied as comprehensively as it has been in children younger than 5 years. We assessed the burden and trends of LRIs and risk factors across all age groups by sex, for 204 countries and territories. METHODS: In this analysis of data for the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, we used clinician-diagnosed pneumonia or bronchiolitis as our case definition for LRIs. We included International Classification of Diseases 9th edition codes 079.6, 466-469, 470.0, 480-482.8, 483.0-483.9, 484.1-484.2, 484.6-484.7, and 487-489 and International Classification of Diseases 10th edition codes A48.1, A70, B97.4-B97.6, J09-J15.8, J16-J16.9, J20-J21.9, J91.0, P23.0-P23.4, and U04-U04.9. We used the Cause of Death Ensemble modelling strategy to analyse 23 109 site-years of vital registration data, 825 site-years of sample vital registration data, 1766 site-years of verbal autopsy data, and 681 site-years of mortality surveillance data. We used DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression tool, to analyse age-sex-specific incidence and prevalence data identified via systematic reviews of the literature, population-based survey data, and claims and inpatient data. Additionally, we estimated age-sex-specific LRI mortality that is attributable to the independent effects of 14 risk factors. FINDINGS: Globally, in 2019, we estimated that there were 257 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 240-275) LRI incident episodes in males and 232 million (217-248) in females. In the same year, LRIs accounted for 1·30 million (95% UI 1·18-1·42) male deaths and 1·20 million (1·07-1·33) female deaths. Age-standardised incidence and mortality rates were 1·17 times (95% UI 1·16-1·18) and 1·31 times (95% UI 1·23-1·41) greater in males than in females in 2019. Between 1990 and 2019, LRI incidence and mortality rates declined at different rates across age groups and an increase in LRI episodes and deaths was estimated among all adult age groups, with males aged 70 years and older having the highest increase in LRI episodes (126·0% [95% UI 121·4-131·1]) and deaths (100·0% [83·4-115·9]). During the same period, LRI episodes and deaths in children younger than 15 years were estimated to have decreased, and the greatest decline was observed for LRI deaths in males younger than 5 years (-70·7% [-77·2 to -61·8]). The leading risk factors for LRI mortality varied across age groups and sex. More than half of global LRI deaths in children younger than 5 years were attributable to child wasting (population attributable fraction [PAF] 53·0% [95% UI 37·7-61·8] in males and 56·4% [40·7-65·1] in females), and more than a quarter of LRI deaths among those aged 5-14 years were attributable to household air pollution (PAF 26·0% [95% UI 16·6-35·5] for males and PAF 25·8% [16·3-35·4] for females). PAFs of male LRI deaths attributed to smoking were 20·4% (95% UI 15·4-25·2) in those aged 15-49 years, 30·5% (24·1-36·9) in those aged 50-69 years, and 21·9% (16·8-27·3) in those aged 70 years and older. PAFs of female LRI deaths attributed to household air pollution were 21·1% (95% UI 14·5-27·9) in those aged 15-49 years and 18·2% (12·5-24·5) in those aged 50-69 years. For females aged 70 years and older, the leading risk factor, ambient particulate matter, was responsible for 11·7% (95% UI 8·2-15·8) of LRI deaths. INTERPRETATION: The patterns and progress in reducing the burden of LRIs and key risk factors for mortality varied across age groups and sexes. The progress seen in children younger than 5 years was clearly a result of targeted interventions, such as vaccination and reduction of exposure to risk factors. Similar interventions for other age groups could contribute to the achievement of multiple Sustainable Development Goals targets, including promoting wellbeing at all ages and reducing health inequalities. Interventions, including addressing risk factors such as child wasting, smoking, ambient particulate matter pollution, and household air pollution, would prevent deaths and reduce health disparities. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Arrhythmias in COVID-19 patients are associated with hypoxia, myocardial ischemia, cytokines, inflammation, electrolyte abnormalities, pro-arrhythmic or QT-prolonging medications, and underlying heart conditions such as severe congestive heart failure, inherited arrhythmia syndromes, or congenital heart conditions. In the pediatric population, multisystem inflammatory syndrome can lead to cardiac injury and arrhythmias. In addition, arrhythmias and cardiac arrests are most prevalent in the critically ill intensive care unit COVID-19 patient population. This review presents an overview of the association between COVID-19 and arrhythmias by detailing possible pathophysiological mechanisms, existing knowledge of pro-arrhythmic factors, and results from studies in adult and pediatric COVID-19 populations, and the clinical implications.

BACKGROUND: Combating viral hepatitis is part of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and WHO has put forth hepatitis B elimination targets in its Global Health Sector Strategy on Viral Hepatitis (WHO-GHSS) and Interim Guidance for Country Validation of Viral Hepatitis Elimination (WHO Interim Guidance). We estimated the global, regional, and national prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV), as well as mortality and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) due to HBV, as part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019. This included estimates for 194 WHO member states, for which we compared our estimates to WHO elimination targets. METHODS: The primary data sources were population-based serosurveys, claims and hospital discharges, cancer registries, vital registration systems, and published case series. We estimated chronic HBV infection and the burden of HBV-related diseases, defined as an aggregate of cirrhosis due to hepatitis B, liver cancer due to hepatitis B, and acute hepatitis B. We used DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian mixed-effects meta-regression tool, to estimate the prevalence of chronic HBV infection, cirrhosis, and aetiological proportions of cirrhosis. We used mortality-to-incidence ratios modelled with spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression to estimate the incidence of liver cancer. We used the Cause of Death Ensemble modelling (CODEm) model, a tool that selects models and covariates on the basis of out-of-sample performance, to estimate mortality due to cirrhosis, liver cancer, and acute hepatitis B. FINDINGS: In 2019, the estimated global, all-age prevalence of chronic HBV infection was 4·1% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·7 to 4·5), corresponding to 316 million (284 to 351) infected people. There was a 31·3% (29·0 to 33·9) decline in all-age prevalence between 1990 and 2019, with a more marked decline of 76·8% (76·2 to 77·5) in prevalence in children younger than 5 years. HBV-related diseases resulted in 555 000 global deaths (487 000 to 630 000) in 2019. The number of HBV-related deaths increased between 1990 and 2019 (by 5·9% [-5·6 to 19·2]) and between 2015 and 2019 (by 2·9% [-5·9 to 11·3]). By contrast, all-age and age-standardised death rates due to HBV-related diseases decreased during these periods. We compared estimates for 2019 in 194 WHO locations to WHO-GHSS 2020 targets, and found that four countries achieved a 10% reduction in deaths, 15 countries achieved a 30% reduction in new cases, and 147 countries achieved a 1% prevalence in children younger than 5 years. As of 2019, 68 of 194 countries had already achieved the 2030 target proposed in WHO Interim Guidance of an all-age HBV-related death rate of four per 100 000. INTERPRETATION: The prevalence of chronic HBV infection declined over time, particularly in children younger than 5 years, since the introduction of hepatitis B vaccination. HBV-related death rates also decreased, but HBV-related death counts increased as a result of population growth, ageing, and cohort effects. By 2019, many countries had met the interim seroprevalence target for children younger than 5 years, but few countries had met the WHO-GHSS interim targets for deaths and new cases. Progress according to all indicators must be accelerated to meet 2030 targets, and there are marked disparities in burden and progress across the world. HBV interventions, such as vaccination, testing, and treatment, must be strategically supported and scaled up to achieve elimination. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

SARS Coronavirus-2 is one of the most widespread viruses globally during the 21^st century, whose severity and ability to cause severe pneumonia and death vary. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of all studies that met our standardised criteria and then extracted data on the age, symptoms, and different treatments of Covid-19 patients and the prognosis of this disease during follow-up. Cases in this study were divided according to severity and death status and meta-analysed separately using raw mean and single proportion methods. We included 171 complete studies including 62,909 confirmed cases of Covid-19, of which 148 studies were meta-analysed. Symptoms clearly emerged in an escalating manner from mild-moderate symptoms, pneumonia, severe-critical to the group of non-survivors. Hypertension (Pooled proportion (PP): 0.48 [95% Confident interval (CI): 0.35–0.61]), diabetes (PP: 0.23 [95% CI: 0.16–0.33]) and smoking (PP: 0.12 [95% CI: 0.03–0.38]) were highest regarding pre-infection comorbidities in the non-survivor group. While acute respiratory distress syndrome (PP: 0.49 [95% CI: 0.29–0.78]), (PP: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.34–0.97]) remained one of the most common complications in the severe and death group respectively. Bilateral ground-glass opacification (PP: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.59–0.75]) was the most visible radiological image. The mortality rates estimated (PP: 0.11 [95% CI: 0.06–0.19]), (PP: 0.03 [95% CI: 0.01–0.05]), and (PP: 0.01 [95% CI: 0–0.3]) in severe-critical, pneumonia and mild-moderate groups respectively. This study can serve as a high evidence guideline for different clinical presentations of Covid-19, graded from mild to severe, and for special forms like pneumonia and death groups.

SARS Coronavirus-2 is one of the most widespread viruses globally during the 21(st) century, whose severity and ability to cause severe pneumonia and death vary. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of all studies that met our standardised criteria and then extracted data on the age, symptoms, and different treatments of Covid-19 patients and the prognosis of this disease during follow-up. Cases in this study were divided according to severity and death status and meta-analysed separately using raw mean and single proportion methods. We included 171 complete studies including 62,909 confirmed cases of Covid-19, of which 148 studies were meta-analysed. Symptoms clearly emerged in an escalating manner from mild-moderate symptoms, pneumonia, severe-critical to the group of non-survivors. Hypertension (Pooled proportion (PP): 0.48 [95% Confident interval (CI): 0.35-0.61]), diabetes (PP: 0.23 [95% CI: 0.16-0.33]) and smoking (PP: 0.12 [95% CI: 0.03-0.38]) were highest regarding pre-infection comorbidities in the non-survivor group. While acute respiratory distress syndrome (PP: 0.49 [95% CI: 0.29-0.78]), (PP: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.34-0.97]) remained one of the most common complications in the severe and death group respectively. Bilateral ground-glass opacification (PP: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.59-0.75]) was the most visible radiological image. The mortality rates estimated (PP: 0.11 [95% CI: 0.06-0.19]), (PP: 0.03 [95% CI: 0.01-0.05]), and (PP: 0.01 [95% CI: 0-0.3]) in severe-critical, pneumonia and mild-moderate groups respectively. This study can serve as a high evidence guideline for different clinical presentations of Covid-19, graded from mild to severe, and for special forms like pneumonia and death groups.

Diuretics have an essential role in the management of heart failure (HF). However, each drug has its own benefit and side effect. Side effects include fluid, electrolyte abnormalities, and acid-base disturbance. These adverse effects of diuretics predispose patients to serious cardiac arrhythmias and may increase the risk of arrhythmic mortality. Herein, we aim to summarize the relative efficacy and safety of all available diuretics used in the treatment of patients with HF. In June 2017, a systematic electronic database search was conducted in nine databases. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the different diuretics used in HF were included for meta-analysis. The protocol was registered in Prospero with CRD42018084819. Among the included 54 studies (10,740 patients), 34 RCTs were eligible for quantitative network meta-analysis (NMA) and traditional meta-analysis while the other 20 studies were qualitatively analyzed. Our results showed that azosemide and torasemide caused a significant reduction in brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) level. Torasemide also caused a significant decrease in collagen volume fraction (CVF) and edema. No significant difference between the agents concerning glomerular filtration rate (GFR), water extraction, and sodium excretion was demonstrated. Regarding side effects, no significant difference among diuretics was observed in terms of hospital readmission and mortality rates. Diuretics are the main treatment of hypervolemia in HF patients. The choice of appropriate diuretic is essential for successful management and is mainly guided by patient clinical situations and the presence of other co-morbidities.

AIM: Diuretics are a cornerstone in treatment of heart failure (HF). Torasemide is a loop diuretic with a potential advantage over other diuretics. We aim to meta-analyse and compare the effect of torasemide with furosemide in HF patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search using 12 databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing furosemide and torasemide in HF patients were included and meta-analysed. We assessed the risk of bias using Cochrane Collaboration's tool. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016046112). RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs with 1598 patients were included. There was a significant difference between torasemide 20 mg and furosemide 40 mg in increasing the urine volume (standard difference of the mean (SDM) [95% confidence interval] = -0.78 [-1.52 to -0.053], P = .036). Torasemide 10 mg and 10 to 20 mg have a significant effect on potassium excretion in comparison with furosemide 25 to 40 mg (P = .018 and .023, respectively). In general, torasemide and furosemide have no significant difference in mortality, edema improvement, weight loss, heart rate, and reducing systolic/diastolic blood pressure. However, oral torasemide has a significant lower hospital stay P < .001 and superior effect in improving ejection fraction P = .029. CONCLUSION: Although not all results are statistically significant, torasemide has potential advantages on multiple aspects of HF management when compared with furosemide. More studies are needed to clarify these effects.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery are at risk for peri-operative major cardiac events (PMCEs). The most common risk assessment tool is Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI). N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) measured peri-operatively has prognostic information but the implication is uncertain. This study aimed to determine the accuracy of combining NT-proBNP and RCRI in predicting the PMCE in major non-cardiac surgery. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study to include non-cardiac surgical patients with moderate or high risk. PMCE included myocardial infarction, pulmonary edema, severe cardiac arrhythmias, and cardiac death occurring within 30 days post-operatively. Logistic regression models and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine the discriminative ability of NT-proBNP alone or incorporation with RCRI or its components in predicting PMCE. RESULTS: A total of 366 patients was included in the study with 48 PMCEs. When predicting PMCE, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) (95%-CI) of NT-proBNP alone and NT-proBNP incorporated with RCRI were 0.875 (0.819-0.932) and 0.882 (0.827-0.937), respectively. When incorporating NT-proBNP with the RCRI's components, the best four chosen models had the AUCs between 0.879 and 0.891. All these AUCs were not significantly different with the AUC of NT-proBNP alone. CONCLUSIONS: Higher preoperative NT-proBNP level leads to the increased risk of PMCE in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Compared to NT-proBNP alone, the combination of NT-proBNP with the RCRI and other factors does not improve the accuracy in predicting PMCE. Future large studies are required to build a more accurate risk score.