The quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses assessing the treatment and management of male infertility

The use of immunotherapies for recurrent miscarriage: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis

Immunotherapies have been a treatment proposed for recurrent miscarriages (RMs). The use of immunotherapies remains not recommended in the management of couples with RM. This overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis (SRs-MAs) aims to identify and evaluate the quality of SRs-MAs that studied the effectiveness of immunotherapies in the treatment of RM patients. SRs-MAs were searched in PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science. SRs-MAs were analyzed using AMSTAR-2, PRISMA 2020, Risk of Bias in Systematic (ROBIS), and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tools to evaluate the methodological quality, reporting quality, risk of bias, and evidence quality of included SRs-MAs, respectively. This review included 20 SRs-MAs that evaluated the following immunotherapies: intravenous immunoglobulin (13 publications), lymphocyte immunotherapy (6 publications), corticosteroids (3 publications), and lipid emulsion (1 publication). SRs-MAs were rated as high methodological, moderate, and critically low quality in 14 (70 %), 1 (5 %), and 5 (25 %) SRs-MAs and high reporting, moderate, and low quality in 13 (65 %), 4 (20 %), and 3 (5 %) SRs-MAs, respectively. The overall risk of bias revealed a low risk of bias for three-quarters of the SRs-MAs. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis resulted in 23 outcomes, of which 4, 3, 5, and 11 results were of high, moderate, low, and very low quality, respectively. An improvement has been observed over the past few years in the quality of systematic reviews (SR)-MAs that have investigated the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin, lymphocyte immunotherapy, lipid emulsion therapy, and corticosteroids as a therapy for RM.

What is the impact of inflammasome mechanisms on male infertility?

BACKGROUND

Mechanisms to explain inflammation in male infertility of unknown cause are still being investigated. The inflammasome is a key regulator of innate immunity in the inflammatory response to infections. Our study aims to investigate the effects of varicocele on infertility, its relationship with antioxidant and inflammasome mechanisms, and how it could be guided in azoospermic or nonazoospermic patients.

METHODS

A cross-sectional cohort study was conducted at the department of urology in our university hospital. Eightyeight randomly selected men aged 20-45 admitted to our hospital because of infertility between September 2019 and July 2020 were included in the study. Patients were divided into four equal groups according to their clinical status, those with/without azoospermia and with/without varicocele. Blood and semen samples were taken from the patients. NOD-like receptor pyrin domain-containing 3 (NLRP3) and interleukin-1 beta (IL1β) and total antioxidant status (TAS), total oxidant status (TOS), and oxidative stress index (OSI) levels were measured in serum and semen, and the groups were compared statistically.

RESULTS

Serum and semen NLRP3, IL1β, TAS, TOS, and OSI values of the patients with varicocele or azoospermia were significantlyhigher than those without either varicocele or azoospermia (p < 0.05). The oxidative stress markers TAS, TOS, and OSI values were significantly higher in the other groups than those without azoospermia and varicocele (p < 0.05).

DISCUSSION

Inflammasome mechanisms, such as NLRP3 and IL1-β molecules, may provide additional benefit in evaluating the need and benefit of surgical or medical treatment in infertility with and without vascular pathology and with and without azoospermia.

A Critical Analysis of Reporting in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in the Peyronie's Disease Literature

BACKGROUND

Despite an increasing number of publications on Peyronie's disease (PD), evidence-based clinical decision-making remains challenging due to the small number of well-designed clinical trials.

AIM

To perform a critical analysis of reporting quality in PD systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA).

METHODS

Study protocol registration was performed on the Open Science Framework platform. In January 2021, a systematic electronic search of the Medline/PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Scopus, Joanne Briggs Institute, and Cochrane databases was performed. Search terms included "Peyronie's disease" and "systematic review OR meta-analysis OR meta-analysis." Eligibility criteria were English-language, relevance to PD and specification of "systematic review" or "meta-analysis" in the title or abstract. Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine levels of evidence were used to classify original studies reviewed within each publication. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBIS tool. Data were tabulated and reported as means with standard deviation, median with interquartile range and t-testing as appropriate. Strength of association between variables was calculated using Pearson correlation coefficient. Statistical analyses were performed on RStudio (version 1.4.1106).

OUTCOMES

Outcomes included review type, level of evidence, authorship, journal, publication date, "A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews" (AMSTAR-2) score and "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses" (PRISMA) score.

RESULTS

From 1974 to 2021, 340 articles were identified. After review, 17 full length articles were included. Thirteen were SR, 2 MA and 2 was combined. Significant heterogeneity was seen in evidence level of included studies. There was median 54% adherence to AMSTAR-2 criteria and 74% adherence to PRISMA criteria. Overall AMSTAR-2 confidence rating was Critically Low in 11 of 17 studies. Correlation analysis revealed very high positive association between AMSTAR 2 and PRISMA adherence (+0.95). ROBIS revealed "High" concern regarding methods used to collect data and appraise 12/17 studies (71%), and "High" concern regarding synthesis and findings in 8 of 17 studies (47%).

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Many SR include markedly heterogenous levels of evidence and fail to meet accepted methodological criteria for reporting.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

Main strengths include extensive literature review and analysis of standardized study reporting. One limitation is that aggregate scoring of AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA is not intended as primary method of quality assessment; however effect was minimized by reporting critical domains, overall quality assessments and specifics on globally poorly reported domains.

CONCLUSION

More high quality randomized controlled PD trials are necessary; SR and MA should focus on these studies alone. Bole R, Gottlich HC, Ziegelmann MJ, et al. A Critical Analysis of Reporting in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in the Peyronie's Disease Literature. J Sex Med 2022;19:629-640.