Association between maternal e-cigarette use during pregnancy and low gestational weight gain

Associations between vaping during pregnancy and perinatal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite numerous studies linking prenatal vaping to adverse perinatal outcomes, a systematic assessment for critical comparison remains absent. To investigate these associations, we conducted a systematic search of studies assessing perinatal outcomes in mothers and/or neonates exposed to vaping during pregnancy compared to those in women without prenatal vaping exposure through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, and Google Scholar until July 5, 2024. We performed inverse-variance random-effects meta-analyses for maternal and neonatal outcomes of 23 studies with a total of 924,376 participants with 7552 reporting vaping-only use during pregnancy. Prenatal vaping was associated with 53 % higher odds of an adverse maternal outcome (OR: 1.53; 95 % CI: 1.27-1.85; I2 = 80 %), particularly with decreased breastfeeding (OR: 0.53; 95 % CI: 0.38-0.72; I2 = 45 %) and reduced prevalence of adequate prenatal care (OR: 0.69; 95 % CI: 0.56-0.86; I2 = 82 %). Prenatal vaping was also associated with a similarly 53 % higher odds of an adverse neonatal outcome (OR: 1.53; 95 % CI: 1.34-1.76; I2 = 45 %), such as low birth weight (OR: 1.56; 95 % CI: 1.28-1.93; I2: 15 %), preterm birth (OR: 1.49; 955 CI: 1.27-1.76; I2: 0 %), and small for gestational age (OR: 1.48; 955 CI: 1.16-1.89; I2: 70 %). This is the first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrating vaping during pregnancy as a risk factor for increased odds of both maternal and neonatal outcomes and underscores the urgency to address awareness and regulations of vaping and its potential harms to both humans and the environment. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023446266.

Lyme disease associated neurological and musculoskeletal symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and objective

Lyme disease, caused by Borrelia burgdorferi, presents major health challenges worldwide, leading to serious neurological and musculoskeletal issues that impact patients' lives and healthcare systems. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to determine the prevalence and link between Lyme disease and these complications, aiming to enhance clinical and public health approaches.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science up until April 01, 2024, to find studies reporting the prevalence and severity of neurological and musculoskeletal complications associated with Lyme disease. Screening and data extraction were conducted using Nested Knowledge software. Two independent reviewers performed the quality assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses were performed using R software v4.3, employing a random-effects model.

Results

Out of 3576 records, 17 studies were included, involving 3932 participants. These studies revealed significant prevalence of musculoskeletal symptoms (21.1%) and neurological disabilities (18%) among Lyme disease patients. The analysis showed a notable increase in risk for both complications in individuals with Lyme disease, with pooled Risk Ratios (RR) of 1.82 for musculoskeletal symptoms and 1.64 for neurological disabilities, indicating a significantly higher risk compared to control groups. Although heterogeneity across the studies was high, sensitivity analysis confirmed the consistency of our findings. Additionally, there was evidence of publication bias.

Conclusion

The study reveals significant neurological and musculoskeletal complications in Lyme disease patients, emphasizing the importance of early diagnosis, comprehensive treatment, and supportive care. The noted heterogeneity and potential publication bias highlight the need for transparent research and further study on long-term outcomes.

Mortality reduction with 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pneumococcal disease, caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, imposes a significant global health burden, particularly affecting vulnerable groups such as the elderly and immunocompromised. The 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) is designed to protect against 23 serotypes of Streptococcus pneumoniae. However, there is ongoing debate about its effectiveness in reducing all-cause mortality. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of PPV23 in reducing all-cause and pneumonia-related mortality among adults.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, focusing on studies that evaluated the mortality outcomes of adults vaccinated with PPV23 compared to non-vaccinated adults. Both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were included, while case reports, case series, and non-human studies were excluded. Data extraction and quality assessment were facilitated by Nested Knowledge software, using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs.

RESULTS

The search yielded 826 records, with 19 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The pooled analysis of four RCTs showed no significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR = 1.030; 95% CI: 0.945, 1.122). However, analysis of pneumonia-related mortality across various studies indicated a significant reduction (HR = 0.504; 95% CI: 0.316, 0.693). Moderate to high heterogeneity was noted in mortality studies, and a potential publication bias was identified.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that while PPV23 may not significantly reduce all-cause mortality, it is effective in reducing pneumonia-related mortality among adults, particularly in those at higher risk. These results support the continued use of PPV23 in targeted adult populations, emphasizing the need for more primary studies to explore its effectiveness across diverse groups.

Prevalence of dual use of combustible tobacco and E-cigarettes among pregnant smokers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As e-cigarettes gain popularity as potential tobacco cessation aids, concerns arise about their dual use with traditional cigarettes, especially among pregnant women, potentially subjecting both women and fetuses to heightened risks. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the overall prevalence of dual use of tobacco smoking and e-cigarette use in pregnant women.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted across databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane on October 20, 2023. The included studies reported the number of pregnant women and the count of those who were dual users. Quality assessment was undertaken using the JBI tool. The pooled prevalence of dual use was determined via a random-effects model. All statistical analyses were executed using R software, version 4.3.

PROSPERO

CRD42023486020.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were analyzed, encompassing 5,983,363 pregnant women. The meta-analysis indicated an overall prevalence of 4.6% (95% CI: 2.0-10.3) for dual users with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 100%). Subgroup analysis based on the country showed a prevalence of 4.9% (95% CI: 2.0 to 11.6) for USA and 8.1% (95% CI: 0.00 to 1.00) for UK. Meta-regression revealed reduction of prevalence of dual use from 2019 to 2023. A potential publication bias was indicated by the LFK index and the Doi plot.

CONCLUSION

The dual consumption of e-cigarettes and traditional tobacco in pregnant women is a significant health concern, with a notable prevalence. Given the established risks of tobacco smoking during pregnancy and the uncertainties surrounding e-cigarettes, more comprehensive research and public health interventions are urgently needed to address this issue.

Prevalence of human papilloma virus among cervical cancer patients in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer, predominantly caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV), is a major health challenge in India, with high morbidity and mortality rates. Given India's vast geographic and socio-economic diversity, understanding regional variations in HPV prevalence is crucial for developing targeted and effective public health interventions. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to elucidate the prevalence of HPV among cervical cancer patients in India.

METHODS

A literature search was executed across PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science up to December 07, 2023. Observational studies reporting HPV prevalence among cervical cancer patients in India are included. A Modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for quality assessment. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to determine pooled HPV prevalence, and heterogeneity was evaluated using the I² statistic. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to assess result stability and investigate heterogeneity sources. All statistical analyses were performed using R software version 4.3.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 17 studies with a total of 2529 cervical cancer cases, of which 1977 were HPV-positive. The pooled HPV prevalence was 85% (95% CI: 71-92%), with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 94%). Subgroup analysis by geographic zones showed notable differences: South (88%, 95% CI: 76-95%), North (73%, 95% CI: 1-100%), East (99%, 95% CI: 1-100%), Central (71%, 95% CI: 54-84%), and West (77%, 95% CI: 0-100%). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated the consistency of the results, and a reanalysis, excluding influential studies, yielded a prevalence of 82% (95% CI: 67-91%).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis reveals a high prevalence of HPV in cervical cancer patients in India, with significant regional variations. The observed heterogeneity highlights the complexity of HPV epidemiology in India and necessitates further research to explore underlying causes and regional characteristics. Future studies should aim to expand geographic representation and deepen understanding of the factors contributing to the variability in HPV prevalence.

Vaping during pregnancy: a systematic review of health outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Smoking during pregnancy is harmful to maternal and child health. Vaping is used for smoking cessation but evidence on health effects during pregnancy is scarce. We conducted a systematic review of health outcomes of vaping during pregnancy.

METHODS

We searched six databases for maternal/fetal/infant outcomes and vaping, including quantitative, English language, human studies of vaping during pregnancy, to November 10th, 2023. We assessed study quality with the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. We focused on comparisons of exclusive-vaping with non-use of nicotine and tobacco products and with smoking. Presentation is narrative as the studies were of insufficient quality to conduct meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We included 26 studies, with 765,527 women, with one randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing vaping and nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation, 23 cohort studies and two case-control studies. While the RCT met 4/5 quality criteria, the quality of the cohort studies and case-control studies was poor; none adequately assessed exposure to smoking and vaping. For studies comparing exclusive-vaping with 'non-use', more reported no increased risk for vaping (three studies) than reported increased risk for maternal pregnancy/postpartum outcomes (one study) and for fetal and infant outcomes (20 studies no increased risk, four increased risk), except for birth-weight and neurological outcomes where two studies each observed increased and no increased risk. When the RCT compared non-users with those not smoking but vaping or using NRT, irrespective of randomisation, they reported no evidence of risk for vaping/NRT. For studies comparing exclusive-vaping and exclusive-smoking, most studies provided evidence for a comparable risk for different outcomes. One maternal biomarker study revealed a lower risk for vaping. For small-for-gestational-age/mean-birth-centile equal numbers of studies found lower risk for vaping than for smoking as found similar risk for the two groups (two each).

CONCLUSIONS

While more studies found no evidence of increased risk of exclusive-vaping compared with non-use and evidence of comparable risk for exclusive-vaping and exclusive-smoking, the quality of the evidence limits conclusions. Without adequate assessment of exposure to vaping and smoking, findings cannot be attributed to behaviour as many who vape will have smoked and many who vape may do so at low levels.

STUDY REGISTRATION

https://osf.io/rfx4q/ .

Safety of e-cigarettes and nicotine patches as stop-smoking aids in pregnancy: Secondary analysis of the Pregnancy Trial of E-cigarettes and Patches (PREP) randomized controlled trial

AIMS

The aim of this study was to examine the safety of e-cigarettes (EC) and nicotine patches (NRT) when used to help pregnant smokers quit.

DESIGN

A recent trial of EC versus NRT reported safety outcomes in the randomized arms. We conducted a further analysis based on product use.

SETTING

Twenty-three hospitals in England and a stop-smoking service in Scotland took part.

PARTICIPANTS

The participants comprised 1140 pregnant smokers.

INTERVENTIONS

We compared women using and not using EC and NRT regularly during pregnancy.

MEASUREMENTS

Measurements included nicotine intake compared with baseline, birth weight, other pregnancy outcomes, adverse events, maternal respiratory symptoms and relapse in early abstainers.

FINDINGS

Use of EC was more common than use of NRT (47.3% vs 21.6%, P < 0.001). Women who stopped smoking (abstainers) and used EC at the end-of-pregnancy (EOP) reduced their salivary cotinine by 45% [49.3 ng/ml, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -79.8 to -10]. Only one abstainer used NRT at EOP. In dual users, cotinine increased by 19% (24 ng/ml, 95% CI = 3.5-68). In women reporting a reduction of at least 50% in cigarette consumption, cotinine levels increased by 10% in those using nicotine products and by 9% in those who did not. Birth weights in dual users and exclusive smokers were the same (3.1 kg). Birth weight in abstainers using either nicotine product was higher than in smokers [3.3 kg, standard deviation (SD) = 0.7] versus 3.1 kg, SD = 0.6; difference = 0.15 kg, 95% CI = 0.05-0.25) and not different from abstainers not using nicotine products (3.1 kg, SD = 0.8). Abstainers and smokers using nicotine products had no worse pregnancy outcomes or more adverse events than abstainers and smokers not using them. EC users reported more improvements than non-users in cough [adjusted relative risk (aRR) = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.37-0.93] and phlegm (aRR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.31-0.92), controlling for smoking status. EC or NRT use had no association with relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

Regular use of e-cigarettes or nicotine patches by pregnant smokers does not appear to be associated with any adverse outcomes.

Population-Based Disease Odds for E-Cigarettes and Dual Use versus Cigarettes

BACKGROUND: E-cigarettes are promoted as less harmful than cigarettes. There has not been a direct comparison of health effects of e-cigarettes or dual use (concurrently using e-cigarettes and cigarettes) with those of cigarettes in the general population. METHODS: Studies in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and PsychINFO published through October 1, 2023, were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis if five or more studies were identified with a disease outcome. We assessed risk of bias with Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Exposure and certainty with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations. Outcomes with fewer studies were summarized but not pooled. RESULTS: We identified 124 odds ratios (94 cross-sectional and 30 longitudinal) from 107 studies. Pooled odds ratios for current e-cigarette versus cigarette use were not different for cardiovascular disease (odds ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 1.14), stroke (0.73; 0.47 to 1.13), or metabolic dysfunction (0.99; 0.91 to 1.09) but were lower for asthma (0.84; 0.74 to 0.95), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (0.53; 0.38 to 0.74), and oral disease (0.87; 0.76 to 1.00). Pooled odds ratios for dual use versus cigarettes were increased for all outcomes (range, 1.20 to 1.41). Pooled odds ratios for e-cigarettes and dual use compared with nonuse of either product were increased (e-cigarette range, 1.24 to 1.47; dual use, 1.49 to 3.29). All included studies were assessed as having a low risk of bias. Results were generally not sensitive to study characteristics. Limited studies of other outcomes suggest that e-cigarette use is associated with additional diseases. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to reassess the assumption that e-cigarette use provides substantial harm reduction across all cigarette-caused diseases, particularly accounting for dual use.