Search

Importance: It is uncertain whether hormone therapy should be used for the primary prevention of chronic conditions such as heart disease, osteoporosis, or some types of cancers.Objective: To update evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force on the benefits and harms of hormone therapy in reducing risks for chronic conditions.Data Sources: PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and trial registries from January 1, 2016, through October 12, 2021; surveillance through July 2022.Study Selection: English-language randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies of fair or good quality.Data Extraction and Synthesis: Dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality; meta-analyses when at least 3 similar studies were available.Main Outcomes and Measures: Morbidity and mortality related to chronic conditions; health-related quality of life.Results: Twenty trials (N = 39 145) and 3 cohort studies (N = 1 155 410) were included. Participants using estrogen only compared with placebo had significantly lower risks for diabetes over 7.1 years (1050 vs 903 cases; 134 fewer [95% CI, 18-237]) and fractures over 7.2 years (1024 vs 1413 cases; 388 fewer [95% CI, 277-489]) per 10 000 persons. Risks per 10 000 persons were statistically significantly increased for gallbladder disease over 7.1 years (1113 vs 737 cases; 377 more [95% CI, 234-540]), stroke over 7.2 years (318 vs 239 cases; 79 more [95% CI, 15-159]), venous thromboembolism over 7.2 years (258 vs 181 cases; 77 more [95% CI, 19-153]), and urinary incontinence over 1 year (2331 vs 1446 cases; 885 more [95% CI, 659-1135]). Participants using estrogen plus progestin compared with placebo experienced significantly lower risks, per 10 000 persons, for colorectal cancer over 5.6 years (59 vs 93 cases; 34 fewer [95% CI, 9-51]), diabetes over 5.6 years (403 vs 482 cases; 78 fewer [95% CI, 15-133]), and fractures over 5 years (864 vs 1094 cases; 230 fewer [95% CI, 66-372]). Risks, per 10 000 persons, were significantly increased for invasive breast cancer (242 vs 191 cases; 51 more [95% CI, 6-106]), gallbladder disease (723 vs 463 cases; 260 more [95% CI, 169-364]), stroke (187 vs 135 cases; 52 more [95% CI, 12-104]), and venous thromboembolism (246 vs 126 cases; 120 more [95% CI, 68-185]) over 5.6 years; probable dementia (179 vs 91 cases; 88 more [95% CI, 15-212]) over 4.0 years; and urinary incontinence (1707 vs 1145 cases; 562 more [95% CI, 412-726]) over 1 year.Conclusions and Relevance: Use of hormone therapy in postmenopausal persons for the primary prevention of chronic conditions was associated with some benefits but also with an increased risk of harms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A study was conducted to systematically review the best evidence available about maternal outcomes of routine vs restrictive use of episiotomy. The result showed that evidence does not support maternal benefits traditionally ascribed to routine episiotomy and the outcomes with episiotomy is considered worse.

Importance: Childhood hypertension can result in adverse outcomes during adulthood; identifying and treating primary and secondary childhood hypertension may reduce such risks.Objective: To update the evidence on screening and treatment of hypertension in childhood and adolescence for the US Preventive Services Task Force.Data Sources: PubMed, Cochrane Library, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, EMBASE, and trial registries through September 3, 2019; bibliographies from retrieved articles, experts, and surveillance of the literature through October 6, 2020.Study Selection: Fair- or good-quality English-language studies evaluating diagnostic accuracy of blood pressure screening; cohort studies assessing the association of hypertension in childhood and adolescence with blood pressure or other intermediate outcomes in adulthood; randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or meta-analyses of pharmacological and lifestyle interventions.Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently assessed titles/abstracts and full-text articles, extracted data, and assessed study quality; the evidence was synthesized qualitatively.Main Outcomes and Measures: Sensitivity, specificity, and measures of association between childhood and adulthood blood pressure; reduction of childhood blood pressure; adverse effects of treatments.Results: Forty-two studies from 43 publications were included (N>12 400). No studies evaluated the benefits or harms of screening and the effect of treating childhood hypertension on outcomes in adulthood. One study reported a sensitivity of 0.82 and a specificity of 0.70 for 2 office-based blood pressure measurements. Twenty observational studies suggested a significant association between childhood hypertension and abnormal blood pressure in adulthood (odds ratios, 1.1-4.5; risk ratios, 1.45-3.60; hazard ratios, 2.8-3.2). Thirteen placebo-controlled RCTs and 1 meta-analysis assessed reductions in systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure from pharmacological treatments. Pooled reductions of SBP were -4.38 mm Hg (95% CI, -7.27 to -2.16) for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and -3.07 mm Hg (95% CI, -4.99 to -1.44) for angiotensin receptor blockers. Candesartan reduced SBP by -6.56 mm Hg (P < .001; n = 240). β-Blockers, calcium channel blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists did not achieve significant reductions over 2 to 4 weeks. SBP was significantly reduced by exercise over 8 months (-4.9 mm Hg, P ≤ .05; n = 69), by dietary approaches to stop hypertension over 3 months (-2.2 mm Hg, P < .01; n = 57), and by a combination of drug treatment and lifestyle interventions over 6 months (-7.6 mm Hg; P < .001; n = 95). Low-salt diet did not achieve reductions of blood pressure.Conclusions and Relevance: Observational studies indicate an association between hypertension in childhood and hypertension in adulthood. However, the evidence is inconclusive whether the diagnostic accuracy of blood pressure measurements is adequate for screening asymptomatic children and adolescents in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Postmenopausal status coincides with increased risks for chronic conditions such as heart disease, osteoporosis, cognitive impairment, or some types of cancers. Previously, hormone therapy was used for the primary prevention of these chronic conditions.Objective: To update evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force on the benefits and harms of hormone therapy in reducing risks for chronic conditions.Data Sources: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and trial registries from June 1, 2011, through August 1, 2016. Surveillance for new evidence in targeted publications was conducted through July 1, 2017.Study Selection: English-language randomized clinical trials reporting health outcomes.Data Extraction and Synthesis: Dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality; meta-analyses when at least 3 similar studies were available.Main Outcomes and Measures: Beneficial or harmful changes in risks for various chronic conditions.Results: Eighteen trials (n = 40 058; range, 142-16 608; mean age, 53-79 years) were included. Women using estrogen-only therapy compared with placebo had significantly lower risks, per 10 000 person-years, for diabetes (-19 cases [95% CI, -34 to -3]) and fractures (-53 cases [95% CI, -69 to -39]). Risks were statistically significantly increased, per 10 000 person-years, for gallbladder disease (30 more cases [95% CI, 16 to 48]), stroke (11 more cases [95% CI, 2 to 23]), venous thromboembolism (11 more cases [95% CI, 3 to 22]), and urinary incontinence (1261 more cases [95% CI, 880 to 1689]). Women using estrogen plus progestin compared with placebo experienced significantly lower risks, per 10 000 person-years, for colorectal cancer (-6 cases [95% CI, -9 to -1]), diabetes (-14 cases [95% CI, -24 to -3), and fractures (-44 cases [95% CI, -71 to -13). Risks, per 10 000 person-years, were significantly increased for invasive breast cancer (9 more cases [95% CI, 1 to 19]), probable dementia (22 more cases [95% CI, 4 to 53]), gallbladder disease (21 more cases [95% CI, 10 to 34]), stroke (9 more cases [95% CI, 2 to 19]), urinary incontinence (876 more cases [95% CI, 606 to 1168]), and venous thromboembolism (21 more cases [95% CI, 12 to 33]).Conclusions and Relevance: Hormone therapy for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in menopausal women is associated with some beneficial effects but also with a substantial increase of risks for harms. The available evidence regarding benefits and harms of early initiation of hormone therapy is inconclusive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An important aspect of risk-of-bias assessment is that risk of bias can vary by outcome. This explains why we rated outcomes from some ancillary studies of the WHI as low risk of bias, as Anderson notes. Comment & Response B In Reply b Regarding our systematic review on hormone therapy for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons,[1] Dr Anderson and Dr Chlebowski and Mr Aragaki express concern about our assessment of the methodological quality of the WHI, which we rated as fair quality or moderate risk of bias.[[2]] Bias, in general terms, is a systematic error in study design, conduct, or analysis that can overestimate or underestimate the true intervention effect.[4] However, quantifying bias and assessing the extent of the impact of bias on study results are usually impossible. [Extracted from the article]