Yu X, Xu R, Zhang Z, Yang Y, Deng F. A meta-analysis indicating extra-short implants (≤ 6 mm) as an alternative to longer implants (≥ 8 mm) with bone augmentation. Scientific reports. 2021 Apr 14;11(1):1-27.
The research was supported by the Science and Technology Major Project of Guangdong Province (2017B090912004).
Systematic review.

EXTRA-SHORT IMPLANTS MAY BE A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO LONGER IMPLANTS WITH BONE AUGMENTATION IN ATROPHIC MAXILLARY AND MANDIBULAR RIDGES.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread worldwide. Integrated Chinese and Western medicine have had some successes in treating COVID-19.
This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of three traditional Chinese medicine drugs and three herbal formulas (3-drugs-3-formulas) in patients with COVID-19.
Relevant studies were identified from 12 electronic databases searched from their establishment to April 7, 2022.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and cohort studies that evaluated the effects of 3-drugs-3-formulas for COVID-19. The treatment group was treated with one of the 3-drugs-3-formulas plus conventional treatment. The control group was treated with conventional treatment.
Two evaluators screened and selected literature independently, then extracted basic information and assessed risk of bias. The treatment outcome measures were duration of main symptoms, hospitalization time, aggravation rate and mortality. RevMan 5.4 was used to analyze the pooled results reported as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous data and risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI for dichotomous data.
Forty-one studies with a total of 13,260 participants were identified. Our analysis suggests that compared with conventional treatment, the combination of 3-drugs-3-formulas might shorten duration of fever (MD = -1.39; 95% CI: -2.19 to -0.59; P < 0.05), cough (MD = -1.57; 95% CI: -2.16 to -0.98; P < 0.05) and fatigue (MD = -1.36; 95% CI: -2.21 to -0.51; P < 0.05), decrease length of hospital stay (MD = -2.62; 95% CI -3.52 to -1.72; P < 0.05), the time for nucleic acid conversion (MD = -2.92; 95% CI: -4.26 to -1.59; P < 0.05), aggravation rate (RR = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.64; P < 0.05) and mortality (RR = 0.34; 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.62; P < 0.05), and increase the recovery rate of chest computerized tomography manifestations (RR = 1.22; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.3; P < 0.05) and total effectiveness (RR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.42; P < 0.05).
The 3-drugs-3-formulas can play an active role in treating all stages of COVID-19. No severe adverse events related to 3-drugs-3-formulas were observed. Hence, 3-drugs-3-formulas combined with conventional therapies have effective therapeutic value for COVID-19 patients. Further long-term high-quality studies are essential to demonstrate the clinical benefits of each formula. Please cite this article as: You LZ, Dai QQ, Zhong XY, Yu DD, Cui HR, Kong YF, Zhao MZ, Zhang XY, Xu QQ, Guan ZY, Wei XX, Zhang XC, Han SJ, Liu WJ, Chen Z, Zhang XY, Zhao C, Jin YH, Shang HC. Clinical evidence of three traditional Chinese medicine drugs and three herbal formulas for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Chinese population. J Integr Med. 2023; 21(5): 441-454.

Clinical evidence of three traditional Chinese medicine drugs and three herbal formulas for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Chinese population.

We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies on the association between occupational exposure to glyphosate and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and multiple myeloma (MM).
We conducted a systematic search of the literature, and identified 18 relevant publications, from which we extracted results from seven non-overlapping studies of NHL and three of MM. We performed random-effects meta-analyses for ever-exposure to glyphosate, dose-response, and risk of specific NHL subtypes.
The meta-relative risk (RR) of NHL was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-1.21), that of MM was 1.04 (95% CI 0.67-1.41). The meta-RR of NHL for highest category of exposure was 1.49 (95% CI 0.37-2.61; 3 studies). The meta-RR for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) was 1.31 (95% CI 0.93-1.75); that for follicular lymphoma was 0.82 (95% CI 0.93-1.70), and that for chronic lymphocytic leukemia was 0.85 (95% CI 0.20-1.49). There was indication of publication bias for studies on NHL.
Our meta-analysis provided no overall evidence of an increased risk for both NHL and MM in subjects occupationally exposed to glyphosate. In secondary analyses we detected a small increase in risk for the category with highest level of exposure as well as for DLBCL. The evidence of publication bias suggests caution in the interpretation of the results.
Sono state condotte una revisione sistematica e una meta-analisi degli studi epidemiologici sull’associazione tra esposizione professionale a glifosato e rischio di linfoma non Hodgkin (NHL) e mieloma multiplo (MM).
È stata effettuata una ricerca sistematica della letteratura che ha portato all’identificazione di 18 pubblicazioni rilevanti, da cui sono stati estratti i risultati di sette studi indipendenti sul NHL e tre sul MM. È stata effettuata una meta-analisi con modello ad effetti casuali per esposizione a glifosato, inclusi i risultati su dose-risposta e su sottotipi specifici di NHL.
Il rischio relativo (RR) della meta-analisi per NHL è risultato pari a 1,03 (intervallo di confidenza al 95% [CI] 0,86-1,21), e quello per MM pari a 1,04 (IC al 95% 0,67-1,41). Il RR per NHL nella più alta categoria di esposizione è risultato pari a 1,49 (IC 95% 0,37-2,61; 3 studi). Il RR per linfoma diffuso a grandi cellule B (DLBCL) è risultato pari a 1,31 (IC 95% 0,93-1,75); quello per il linfoma follicolare pari a 0,82 (IC 95% 0,93-1,70) e quello per la leucemia linfatica cronica pari a 0,85 (IC 95% 0,20-1,49). Si è riscontrata un’indicazione di bias di pubblicazione negli studi su NHL.
In generale, questa meta-analisi non ha fornito la prova di un aumento del rischio sia per NHL che per MM in soggetti esposti professionalmente a glifosato. In analisi secondarie è stato evidenziato un leggero aumento del rischio per la categoria con il più alto livello di esposizione e per DLBCL. L’evidenza di un bias di pubblicazione suggerisce cautela nell’interpretazione dei risultati.

Papers