Repository logo
  • English
  • Srpski (lat)
  • Српски
Log In
Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Kakia, Aloysious (55330532000)"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Results Per Page
  • Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Publication
    A systematic review of the efficacy and safety of intrapericardial fibrinolysis in patients with pericardial effusion
    (2018)
    Wiyeh, Alison B. (57196222987)
    ;
    Ochodo, Eleanor A. (54417705400)
    ;
    Wiysonge, Charles S. (6507441509)
    ;
    Kakia, Aloysious (55330532000)
    ;
    Awotedu, Abolade A. (6603902655)
    ;
    Ristic, Arsen (7003835406)
    ;
    Mayosi, Bongani M. (35381365100)
    Pericardial effusion is the abnormal accumulation of fluid in the pericardial space. The complications of pericardial effusion can either be acute (e.g., cardiac tamponade) or chronic (e.g., constrictive pericarditis). We have conducted a systematic review of the scientific literature to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intrapericardial fibrinolysis in preventing complications of pericardial effusion. We searched for both published and unpublished studies. 29 studies, with a total of 109 patients were included in this review; 17 case reports, 11 case series, and one randomised controlled trial (RCT). All included studies had a high risk of bias. The most common causes of pericardial effusion were Staphylococcus aureus (12 studies with 23 cases) and Mycobacterium tuberculosis (2 studies with 19 cases). The most common fibrinolytic agents used were streptokinase (15 studies) and urokinase (5 studies). Intrapericardial fibrinolysis prevented complications in 94 (86.2%) patients. Non-fatal procedure-related complications were reported 21 (19.2%) patients. No patient died following intrapericardial fibrinolysis. There is very low certainty of the efficiency and safety of intrapericardial fibrinolysis in preventing the complications of pericardial effusion. High quality RCTs are required to address this question. © 2017 The Authors
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Publication
    The efficacy and safety of complete pericardial drainage by means of intrapericardial fibrinolysis for the prevention of complications of pericardial effusion: A systematic review protocol
    (2016)
    Kakia, Aloysious (55330532000)
    ;
    Wiysonge, Charles S. (6507441509)
    ;
    Ochodo, Eleanor A. (54417705400)
    ;
    Awotedu, Abolade A. (6603902655)
    ;
    Ristic, Arsen D. (7003835406)
    ;
    Mayosi, Bongani M. (35381365100)
    Introduction: Intrapericardial fibrinolysis has been proposed as a means of preventing complications of pericardial effusion such as cardiac tamponade, persistent and recurrent pericardial effusion, and pericardial constriction. There is a need to understand the efficacy and safety of this procedure because it shows promise. Methods and analysis: We aim to assess the effects of intrapericardial fibrinolysis in the treatment of pericardial effusion. We will search PubMed, the Cochrane Library, African Journals online, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Trip database, Clinical trials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for studies that evaluate the efficacy and/or safety of complete pericardial fluid drainage by intrapericardial fibrinolysis irrespective of study design, geographical location, language, age of participants, aetiology of pericarditis or types of fibrinolytics. Two authors will do the search independently, screen the search outputs for potentially eligible studies and assess whether the studies meet the inclusion criteria. Discrepancies between the two authors will be resolved through discussion and arbitration by a third author. Data from the selected studies shall be extracted using a standardised data collection form which will be piloted before use. The methodological quality of studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tools for assessing risk of bias for experimental studies and non-randomised studies, respectively. The primary meta-analysis will use random effects models due to expected interstudy heterogeneity. Dichotomous data will be analysed using relative risk and continuous with data mean differences, both with 95% CIs. Ethics and dissemination: Approval by an ethics committee is not required for this study as it is a protocol for a systematic review of published studies. The results will be disseminated through a conference presentation and peer-reviewed publication. Review registration number: PROSPERO, CRD42014015238.

Built with DSpace-CRIS software - Extension maintained and optimized by 4Science

  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback