-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2018Dornase alfa is currently used as a mucolytic to treat pulmonary disease (the major cause of morbidity and mortality) in cystic fibrosis. It reduces mucus viscosity in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dornase alfa is currently used as a mucolytic to treat pulmonary disease (the major cause of morbidity and mortality) in cystic fibrosis. It reduces mucus viscosity in the lungs, promoting improved clearance of secretions. This is an update of a previously published review.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether the use of dornase alfa in cystic fibrosis is associated with improved mortality and morbidity compared to placebo or other medications that improve airway clearance, and to identify any adverse events associated with its use.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and abstracts from conferences. Date of the most recent search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Register: 23 April 2018.Clinicaltrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were also searched to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. Date of most recent search: 07 June 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing dornase alfa to placebo, standard therapy or other medications that improve airway clearance.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Authors independently assessed trials against the inclusion criteria; two authors carried out analysis of methodological quality and data extraction. GRADE was used to assess the level of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
The searches identified 69 trials, of which 19 (2565 participants) met our inclusion criteria. Fifteen trials compared dornase alfa to placebo or no dornase alfa (2447 participants); two compared daily dornase to hypertonic saline (32 participants); one compared daily dornase alfa to hypertonic saline and alternate day dornase alfa (48 participants); one compared dornase alfa to mannitol and the combination of both drugs (38 participants). Trial duration varied from six days to three years.Dornase alfa compared to placebo or no treatmentDornase alfa improved forced expiratory volume at one second at one month (four trials, 248 participants), three months (one trial, 320 participants; moderate-quality evidence), six months (one trial, 647 participants; high-quality evidence) and two years (one trial, 410 participants). Limited low-quality evidence showed no difference between groups for changes in quality of life. There was a decrease in pulmonary exacerbations with dornase alfa in trials of up to two years (moderate-quality evidence). One trial that examined the cost of care, including the cost of dornase alfa, found that the cost savings from dornase alfa offset 18% to 38% of the medication costs.Dornase alfa: daily versus alternate dayOne cross-over trial (43 children) found no differences between treatment regimens for lung function, quality of life or pulmonary exacerbations (low-quality evidence).Dornase alfa compared to other medications that improve airway clearanceResults for these comparisons were mixed. One trial (43 children) showed a greater improvement in forced expiratory volume at one second for dornase alfa compared to hypertonic saline (low-quality evidence), and one trial (23 participants) reported no difference in lung function between dornase alfa and mannitol or dornase alfa and dornase alfa plus mannitol (low-quality evidence). One trial (23 participants) found a difference in quality of life favouring dornase alfa when compared to dornase alfa plus mannitol (low-quality evidence); other comparisons found no difference in this outcome (low-quality evidence). No trials in any comparison reported any difference between groups in the number of pulmonary exacerbations (low-quality evidence).When all comparisons are assessed, dornase alfa did not cause significantly more adverse effects than other treatments, except voice alteration and rash.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is evidence to show that, compared with placebo, therapy with dornase alfa improves lung function in people with cystic fibrosis in trials lasting from one month to two years. There was a decrease in pulmonary exacerbations in trials of six months or longer. Voice alteration and rash appear to be the only adverse events reported with increased frequency in randomised controlled trials. There is not enough evidence to firmly conclude if dornase alfa is superior to other hyperosmolar agents in improving lung function.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Child, Preschool; Cystic Fibrosis; Deoxyribonuclease I; Expectorants; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Infant; Mannitol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recombinant Proteins; Saline Solution, Hypertonic; Vital Capacity
PubMed: 30187450
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001127.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2018Several agents are used to clear secretions from the airways of people with cystic fibrosis. Mannitol increases mucociliary clearance, but its exact mechanism of action... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Several agents are used to clear secretions from the airways of people with cystic fibrosis. Mannitol increases mucociliary clearance, but its exact mechanism of action is unknown. The dry powder formulation of mannitol may be more convenient and easier to use compared with established agents which require delivery via a nebuliser. Phase III trials of inhaled dry powder mannitol for the treatment of cystic fibrosis have been completed and it is now available in Australia and some countries in Europe. This is an update of a previous review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether inhaled dry powder mannitol is well tolerated, whether it improves the quality of life and respiratory function in people with cystic fibrosis and which adverse events are associated with the treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic databases, handsearching relevant journals and abstracts from conferences.Date of last search: 28 September 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled studies comparing mannitol with placebo, active inhaled comparators (for example, hypertonic saline or dornase alfa) or with no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, carried out data extraction and assessed the risk of bias in included studies. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Six studies (reported in 50 publications) were included with a total of 784 participants.Duration of treatment in the included studies ranged from 12 days to six months, with open-label treatment for an additional six months in two of the studies. Five studies compared mannitol with control (a very low dose of mannitol or non-respirable mannitol) and the final study compared mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa. Two large studies had a similar parallel design and provided data for 600 participants, which could be pooled where data for a particular outcome and time point were available. The remaining studies had much smaller sample sizes (ranging from 22 to 95) and data could not be pooled due to differences in design, interventions and population.Pooled evidence from the two large parallel studies was judged to be of low to moderate quality and from the smaller studies was judged to be of low to very low quality. In all studies, there was an initial test to see if participants tolerated mannitol, with only those who could tolerate the drug being randomised; therefore, the study results are not applicable to the cystic fibrosis population as a whole.While the published papers did not provide all the data required for our analysis, additional unpublished data were provided by the drug's manufacturer and the author of one of the studies.Pooling the large parallel studies comparing mannitol to control, up to and including six months, lung function (forced expiratory volume at one second) measured in both mL and % predicted was significantly improved in the mannitol group compared to the control group (moderate-quality evidence). Beneficial results were observed in these studies in adults and in both concomitant dornase alfa users and non-users in these studies. In the smaller studies, statistically significant improvements in lung function were also observed in the mannitol groups compared to the non-respirable mannitol groups; however, we judged this evidence to be of low to very low quality.For the comparisons of mannitol and control, we found no consistent differences in health-related quality of life in any of the domains except for burden of treatment, which was less for mannitol up to four months in the two pooled studies of a similar design; this difference was not maintained at six months. It should be noted that the tool used to measure health-related quality of life was not designed to assess mucolytics and pooling of the age-appropriate tools (as done in some of the included studies) may not be valid so results were judged to be low to very low quality and should be interpreted with caution. Cough, haemoptysis, bronchospasm, pharyngolaryngeal pain and post-tussive vomiting were the most commonly reported side effects in both treatment groups. Where rates of adverse events could be compared, statistically no significant differences were found between mannitol and control groups; although some of these events may have clinical relevance for people with CF.For the comparisons of mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa, very low-quality evidence from a 12-week cross-over study of 28 participants showed no statistically significant differences in the recorded domains of health-related quality of life or measures of lung function. Cough was the most common side effect in the mannitol alone arm but there was no occurrence of cough in the dornase alfa alone arm and the most commonly reported reason of withdrawal from the mannitol plus dornase alfa arm was pulmonary exacerbations.In terms of secondary outcomes of the review (pulmonary exacerbations, hospitalisations, symptoms, sputum microbiology), evidence provided by the included studies was more limited. For all comparisons, no consistent statistically significant and clinically meaningful differences were observed between mannitol and control treatments (including dornase alfa).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is moderate-quality evidence to show that treatment with mannitol over a six-month period is associated with an improvement in some measures of lung function in people with cystic fibrosis compared to control. There is low to very low-quality evidence suggesting no difference in quality of life for participants taking mannitol compared to control. This review provides very low-quality evidence suggesting no difference in lung function or quality of life comparing mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa.The clinical implications from this review suggest that mannitol could be considered as a treatment in cystic fibrosis; but further research is required in order to establish who may benefit most and whether this benefit is sustained in the longer term. Furthermore, studies comparing its efficacy against other (established) mucolytic therapies need to be undertaken before it can be considered for mainstream practice.
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Adult; Child; Cystic Fibrosis; Deoxyribonuclease I; Humans; Mannitol; Mucociliary Clearance; Powders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recombinant Proteins; Respiratory Function Tests
PubMed: 29424930
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008649.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2021Dornase alfa is currently used as a mucolytic to treat pulmonary disease (the major cause of morbidity and mortality) in cystic fibrosis. It reduces mucus viscosity in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Dornase alfa is currently used as a mucolytic to treat pulmonary disease (the major cause of morbidity and mortality) in cystic fibrosis. It reduces mucus viscosity in the lungs, promoting improved clearance of secretions. This is an update of a previously published review.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether the use of dornase alfa in cystic fibrosis is associated with improved mortality and morbidity compared to placebo or other medications that improve airway clearance, and to identify any adverse events associated with its use.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and abstracts from conferences. Date of the most recent search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Register: 12 October 2020. Clinicaltrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were also searched to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. Date of most recent search: 08 February 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing dornase alfa to placebo, standard therapy or other medications that improve airway clearance.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Authors independently assessed trials against the inclusion criteria; two authors carried out analysis of methodological quality and data extraction. GRADE was used to assess the level of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
The searches identified 74 trials, of which 19 (2565 participants) met our inclusion criteria. 15 trials compared dornase alfa to placebo or no dornase alfa (2447 participants); two compared daily dornase to hypertonic saline (32 participants); one compared daily dornase alfa to hypertonic saline and alternate day dornase alfa (48 participants); one compared dornase alfa to mannitol and the combination of both drugs (38 participants). Trial duration varied from six days to three years. Dornase alfa compared to placebo or no treatment Dornase alfa probably improved forced expiratory volume at one second (FEV) at one month (four trials, 248 participants), three months (one trial, 320 participants; moderate-quality evidence), six months (one trial, 647 participants; high-quality evidence) and two years (one trial, 410 participants). Limited low-quality evidence showed treatment may make little or no difference in quality of life. Dornase alfa probably reduced the number of pulmonary exacerbations in trials of up to two years (moderate-quality evidence). One trial that examined the cost of care, including the cost of dornase alfa, found that the cost savings from dornase alfa offset 18% to 38% of the medication costs. Dornase alfa: daily versus alternate day One cross-over trial (43 children) found little or no difference between treatment regimens for lung function, quality of life or pulmonary exacerbations (low-quality evidence). Dornase alfa compared to other medications that improve airway clearance Results for these comparisons were mixed. One trial (43 children) showed dornase alfa may lead to a greater improvement in FEV compared to hypertonic saline (low-quality evidence), and one trial (23 participants) reported little or no differences in lung function between dornase alfa and mannitol or dornase alfa and dornase alfa plus mannitol (low-quality evidence). One trial (23 participants) found dornase alfa may improve quality of life compared to dornase alfa plus mannitol (low-quality evidence); other comparisons found little or no difference in this outcome (low-quality evidence). No trials in any comparison reported any difference between groups in the number of pulmonary exacerbations (low-quality evidence). When all comparisons are assessed, dornase alfa did not cause significantly more adverse effects than other treatments, except voice alteration and rash.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is evidence to show that, compared with placebo, therapy with dornase alfa may improve lung function in people with cystic fibrosis in trials lasting from one month to two years. There was a decrease in pulmonary exacerbations in trials of six months or longer, probably due to treatment. Voice alteration and rash appear to be the only adverse events reported with increased frequency in randomised controlled trials. There is not enough evidence to firmly conclude if dornase alfa is superior to other hyperosmolar agents in improving lung function.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Cystic Fibrosis; Deoxyribonuclease I; Disease Progression; Expectorants; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Infant; Mannitol; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recombinant Proteins; Saline Solution, Hypertonic; Vital Capacity
PubMed: 33735508
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001127.pub5 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2021Cisplatin, a chemotherapeutic drug, is widely used for the treatment of various malignant tumors with good effects. However, cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity is a major...
INTRODUCTION
Cisplatin, a chemotherapeutic drug, is widely used for the treatment of various malignant tumors with good effects. However, cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity is a major dose-limiting factor and a significant adverse event. Mannitol is used to reduce cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity, which is controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a hydration regimen containing mannitol against cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity through a meta-analysis.
METHODS
Potential records from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials that met the inclusion criteria were included from inception to May 2021. Cochrane Collaboration tools were used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Jadad's and NOS scores were applied to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and case-control studies. A random-effects model or fixed-effects model was used depending on the heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate the potential study characteristics. The pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were evaluated.
RESULTS
Four RCTs and seven case-control studies involving 4168 patients were included. Pooled results showed that mannitol use could reduce the incidence of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity (OR = 0.66, 95% CI [0.45-0.97], = 0.03), especially reducing grade 3 nephrotoxicity events according to CTCAE 4.0 (OR = 0.37,95% CI [0.16-0.84]). Moreover, mannitol use was not significantly associated with creatinine clearance, serum creatine, and electrolyte disturbance (). Gastrointestinal cancer (OR = 0.36, 95% CI [0.15-0.83], = 0.02) and urinary tract cancer (OR = 0.32,95% CI [0.14-0.73], = 0.007) may be more sensitive to mannitol, although the test for overall effect was significantly different (OR = 0.66, 95% CI [0.49-0.89], = 0.007). For patients with diabetes and hypertension, mannitol may worsen renal function (OR = 1.80, 95% CI [1.18-2.72], = 0.006; OR = 2.19, 95% CI [1.50, 3.19], < 0.0001, respectively). Mannitol may have a better protective effect when doses of mannitol were ≥ 25 g (OR = 0.58, 95% CI [0.39-0.88], = 0.01) and doses of cisplatin < 75 mg/m (OR = 0.59, 95% CI [0.36-0.94], = 0.03). It revealed that mannitol use was likely to cause nausea or vomiting (OR = 1.86, 95% CI [1.20-2.89], = 0.006).
CONCLUSION
Current evidence revealed that mannitol was an effective and safe drug to reduce cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity events, especially Grade 3 events. However, it may cause more nausea/vomiting events and deteriorate renal function in patients with diabetes or hypertension. We also found that mannitol had the best effect when mannitol was ≥ 25 g in total or cisplatin was < 75 mg/m. Meanwhile, mannitol may have a better effect on gastrointestinal and urinary tract cancers.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
crd. york. ac. uk/PROSPERO, CRD 42021253990.
PubMed: 34976843
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.804685 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023Hypertonic saline enhances mucociliary clearance and may lessen the destructive inflammatory process in the airways. This is an update of a previously published review. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hypertonic saline enhances mucociliary clearance and may lessen the destructive inflammatory process in the airways. This is an update of a previously published review.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate efficacy and tolerability of nebulised hypertonic saline treatment in people with cystic fibrosis (CF) compared to placebo or other treatments that enhance mucociliary clearance.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched ongoing trials databases. Most recent search: 25 April 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials assessing hypertonic saline compared to placebo or other mucolytic therapy, for any duration or dose regimen in people with CF (any age or disease severity).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently reviewed all identified trials and data, and assessed trial quality. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. For cross-over trials we stipulated a one-week washout period. We planned to use results from a paired analysis in the review, but this was only possible in one trial. For other cross-over trials, we chose to treat the trials as if they were parallel.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 24 trials (1318 participants, aged one month to 56 years); we excluded 29 trials, two trials are ongoing and six are awaiting classification. We judged 15 of the 24 included trials to have a high risk of bias due to participants' ability to discern the taste of the solutions. Hypertonic saline 3% to 7% versus placebo (stable disease) We are uncertain whether the regular use of nebulised hypertonic saline in stable lung disease leads to an improvement in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV) % predicted at four weeks, (mean difference (MD) 3.30%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 5.89; 4 trials, 246 participants; very low-certainty evidence). In preschool children we found no difference in lung clearance index (LCI) at four weeks, but a small improvement after 48 weeks of treatment with hypertonic saline compared to isotonic saline (MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.00 to -0.19; 2 trials, 192 participants). We are also uncertain whether hypertonic saline made a difference to mucociliary clearance, pulmonary exacerbations or adverse events compared to placebo. Hypertonic saline versus control (acute exacerbation) Two trials compared hypertonic saline to control, but only one provided data. There may be little or no difference in lung function measured by FEV % predicted after hypertonic saline compared to isotonic saline (MD 5.10%, 95% CI -14.67 to 24.87; 1 trial, 130 participants). Neither trial reported any deaths or measures of sputum clearance. There were no serious adverse events. Hypertonic saline versus rhDNase Three trials compared a similar dose of hypertonic saline to recombinant deoxyribonuclease (rhDNase); two trials (61 participants) provided data for inclusion in the review. We are uncertain whether there was an effect of hypertonic saline on FEV % predicted after three weeks (MD 1.60%, 95% CI -7.96 to 11.16; 1 trial, 14 participants; very low-certainty evidence). At three months, rhDNase may lead to a greater increase in FEV % predicted than hypertonic saline (5 mL twice daily) at 12 weeks in participants with moderate to severe lung disease (MD 8.00%, 95% CI 2.00 to 14.00; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether adverse events differed between the two treatments. No deaths were reported. Hypertonic saline versus amiloride One trial (12 participants) compared hypertonic saline to amiloride but did not report on most of our outcomes. The trial found that there was no difference between treatments in measures of sputum clearance (very low-certainty evidence). Hypertonic saline compared with sodium-2-mercaptoethane sulphonate (Mistabron®) One trial (29 participants) compared hypertonic saline to sodium-2-mercaptoethane sulphonate. The trial did not measure our primary outcomes. There was no difference between treatments in any measures of sputum clearance, courses of antibiotics or adverse events (very low-certainty evidence). Hypertonic saline versus mannitol One trial (12 participants) compared hypertonic saline to mannitol, but did not report lung function at relevant time points for this review; there were no differences in sputum clearance, but mannitol was reported to be more 'irritating' (very low-certainty evidence). Hypertonic saline versus xylitol Two trials compared hypertonic saline to xylitol, but we are uncertain whether there is any difference in FEV % predicted or median time to exacerbation between groups (very low-certainty evidence). No other outcomes were reported in the review. Hypertonic saline 7% versus hypertonic saline 3% We are uncertain whether there was an improvement in FEV % predicted after treatment with 7% hypertonic saline compared with 3% (very low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are very uncertain if regular use of nebulised hypertonic saline by adults and children over the age of 12 years with CF results in an improvement in lung function after four weeks (three trials; very low-certainty evidence); there was no difference seen at 48 weeks (one trial; low-certainty evidence). Hypertonic saline improved LCI modestly in children under the age of six years. Evidence from one small cross-over trial in children indicates that rhDNase may lead to better lung function than hypertonic saline at three months; qualifying this, we highlight that while the study did demonstrate that the improvement in FEV was greater with daily rhDNase, there were no differences seen in any of the secondary outcomes. Hypertonic saline does appear to be an effective adjunct to physiotherapy during acute exacerbations of lung disease in adults. However, for the outcomes assessed, the certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to low at best, according to the GRADE criteria. The role of hypertonic saline in conjunction with cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator therapy now needs to be considered, and future research needs to focus on this aspect.
Topics: Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Administration, Inhalation; Amiloride; Cystic Fibrosis; Mannitol; Saline Solution, Hypertonic; Sodium; Xylitol; Infant; Adolescent; Young Adult; Middle Aged
PubMed: 37319354
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001506.pub5 -
Cureus Jan 2024Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is occasionally an inevitable side effect of neuraxial anesthesia, which can happen after spinal anesthesia or if an accidental dural... (Review)
Review
Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is occasionally an inevitable side effect of neuraxial anesthesia, which can happen after spinal anesthesia or if an accidental dural puncture (ADP) happens during epidural anesthesia. The treatment and prevention options for PDPH differ widely from one institution to another. The management of PDPH is heterogeneous in many institutions because of the absence of clear guidelines and protocols for the management of PDPH. This study aimed to summarize all articles published during the past decade that discussed the treatment or prevention of PDPH. From 2013 to 2023, 345 publications were filtered for all treatment and prevention approaches used for PDPH patients. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines were followed for conducting this systematic review, and 38 articles were included for analysis and review. Existing data come from small randomized clinical trials and retrospective or prospective cohort studies. This review supports the effect of oral pregabalin and intravenous aminophylline in both treatment and prevention. Intravenous mannitol, intravenous hydrocortisone, triple prophylactic regimen, and neostigmine plus atropine combination showed effective and beneficial outcomes. On the other hand, neither neuraxial morphine nor epidural dexamethasone showed promising results. Consequently, the use of neuraxial morphine or epidural dexamethasone for the prevention of PDPH remains questionable. Regarding the posture of the patient and its consequences on the incidence of the headache, lateral decubitus is better than a sitting position, and a prone position is better than a supine position. Smaller non-cutting needles play a role in avoiding PDPH. Minimally invasive nerve blocks, including sphenopalatine ganglion or greater occipital nerves, are satisfyingly effective. Epidural blood patches remain the more invasive but the gold standard and ultimate solution in patients resisting medical therapy. This study highlights the need for larger research to define the best approach to prevent and treat PDPH.
PubMed: 38361721
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.52330 -
Transplantation Proceedings Sep 2021The effect of mannitol usage during kidney donation and kidney transplantation is still unclear. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The effect of mannitol usage during kidney donation and kidney transplantation is still unclear. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to research the difference in graft function between kidney grafts treated with and without mannitol.
METHODS
A literature search was performed in 5 databases and included 8 eligible studies out of 3570 references, which were included up to July 12, 2021. Relevant outcomes for analysis were graft survival, rejection, acute renal failure, delayed graft function, renal failure, creatinine clearance, diuresis, and serum creatinine.
RESULTS
Eight studies were identified, 1 study examining the effect of mannitol during kidney donation and 7 studies during kidney transplantation, of which 6 eligible for meta-analysis. A total of 1143 patients were included in these studies. The following outcome measures demonstrated significant differences in favor of mannitol usage compared with a control group: acute renal failure (risk ratio [RR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-0.79; P < .01]) and delayed graft function (RR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.08-0.77; P = 0.02 and RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.51-0.94; P = 0.94). Differences in other outcome parameters were not significant.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis suggested that the use of mannitol during kidney transplantation leads to lower incidence of acute renal failure and delayed graft function. For all other outcomes, no significant difference was found. Further research should be conducted on the use of mannitol during donor nephrectomy because of the limited availability of studies. Finally, for interpretation of the outcomes, the quality of the evidence should be taken into consideration and we emphasize the need for more up-to-date research.
Topics: Graft Rejection; Graft Survival; Humans; Kidney; Kidney Transplantation; Mannitol
PubMed: 34412911
DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2021.07.001 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Several agents are used to clear secretions from the airways of people with cystic fibrosis. Mannitol increases mucociliary clearance, but its exact mechanism of action... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Several agents are used to clear secretions from the airways of people with cystic fibrosis. Mannitol increases mucociliary clearance, but its exact mechanism of action is unknown. The dry powder formulation of mannitol may be more convenient and easier to use compared with established agents which require delivery via a nebuliser. Phase III trials of inhaled dry powder mannitol for the treatment of cystic fibrosis have been completed and it is now available in Australia and some countries in Europe. This is an update of a previous review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether inhaled dry powder mannitol is well tolerated, whether it improves the quality of life and respiratory function in people with cystic fibrosis and which adverse events are associated with the treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic databases, handsearching relevant journals and abstracts from conferences. Date of last search: 12 December 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled studies comparing mannitol with placebo, active inhaled comparators (for example, hypertonic saline or dornase alfa) or with no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, carried out data extraction and assessed the risk of bias in included studies. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Six studies (reported in 36 unique publications) were included with a total of 784 participants. Duration of treatment in the included studies ranged from 12 days to six months, with open-label treatment for an additional six months in two of the studies. Five studies compared mannitol with control (a very low dose of mannitol or non-respirable mannitol) and the final study compared mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa. Two large studies had a similar parallel design and provided data for 600 participants, which could be pooled where data for a particular outcome and time point were available. The remaining studies had much smaller sample sizes (ranging from 22 to 95) and data could not be pooled due to differences in design, interventions and population. Pooled evidence from the two large parallel studies was judged to be of low to moderate quality and from the smaller studies was judged to be of low to very low quality. In all studies, there was an initial test to see if participants tolerated mannitol, with only those who could tolerate the drug being randomised; therefore, the study results are not applicable to the cystic fibrosis population as a whole. While the published papers did not provide all the data required for our analysis, additional unpublished data were provided by the drug's manufacturer and the author of one of the studies. Pooling the large parallel studies comparing mannitol to control, up to and including six months, lung function (forced expiratory volume at one second) measured in both mL and % predicted was significantly improved in the mannitol group compared to the control group (moderate-quality evidence). Beneficial results were observed in these studies in adults and in both concomitant dornase alfa users and non-users in these studies. In the smaller studies, statistically significant improvements in lung function were also observed in the mannitol groups compared to the non-respirable mannitol groups; however, we judged this evidence to be of low to very low quality. For the comparisons of mannitol and control, we found no consistent differences in health-related quality of life in any of the domains except for burden of treatment, which was less for mannitol up to four months in the two pooled studies of a similar design; this difference was not maintained at six months. It should be noted that the tool used to measure health-related quality of life was not designed to assess mucolytics and pooling of the age-appropriate tools (as done in some of the included studies) may not be valid so results were judged to be low to very low quality and should be interpreted with caution. Cough, haemoptysis, bronchospasm, pharyngolaryngeal pain and post-tussive vomiting were the most commonly reported side effects in both treatment groups. Where rates of adverse events could be compared, statistically no significant differences were found between mannitol and control groups; although some of these events may have clinical relevance for people with CF. For the comparisons of mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa, very low-quality evidence from a 12-week cross-over study of 28 participants showed no statistically significant differences in the recorded domains of health-related quality of life or measures of lung function. Cough was the most common side effect in the mannitol alone arm but there was no occurrence of cough in the dornase alfa alone arm and the most commonly reported reason of withdrawal from the mannitol plus dornase alfa arm was pulmonary exacerbations. In terms of secondary outcomes of the review (pulmonary exacerbations, hospitalisations, symptoms, sputum microbiology), evidence provided by the included studies was more limited. For all comparisons, no consistent statistically significant and clinically meaningful differences were observed between mannitol and control treatments (including dornase alfa).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is moderate-quality evidence to show that treatment with mannitol over a six-month period is associated with an improvement in some measures of lung function in people with cystic fibrosis compared to control. There is low to very low-quality evidence suggesting no difference in quality of life for participants taking mannitol compared to control. This review provides very low-quality evidence suggesting no difference in lung function or quality of life comparing mannitol to dornase alfa alone and to mannitol plus dornase alfa. The clinical implications from this review suggest that mannitol could be considered as a treatment in cystic fibrosis; but further research is required in order to establish who may benefit most and whether this benefit is sustained in the longer term. Furthermore, studies comparing its efficacy against other (established) mucolytic therapies need to be undertaken before it can be considered for mainstream practice.
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Adult; Child; Cystic Fibrosis; Deoxyribonuclease I; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Mannitol; Mucociliary Clearance; Powders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recombinant Proteins; Respiratory Function Tests; Vital Capacity
PubMed: 32358807
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008649.pub4 -
Surgical Neurology International 2022Hypertonic saline (HS) and mannitol are hyperosmolar agents that are usually used to reduce intracranial pressure (ICP) and provide a satisfactory brain relaxation. The... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hypertonic saline (HS) and mannitol are hyperosmolar agents that are usually used to reduce intracranial pressure (ICP) and provide a satisfactory brain relaxation. The aim of the study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of HS and mannitol on brain relaxation intraoperatively in patient undergoing craniotomies for supra-tentorial brain tumors.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials. We included randomized control trials that compared equiosmolar HS and mannitol in supratentorial tumors craniotomies and reported at least one of the following outcomes: degree of brain relaxation, ICP, central venous pressure, mean arterial pressure, perioperative fluid input, urine output, Na+ levels, and K+ levels. We searched Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase using MESH terms and keywords. The bibliographic references of included studies and trial registries were also searched.
RESULTS
Seven articles were included. The degree brain of relaxation was comparable across the two groups with slight tendency toward HS (RR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.99-1.29; = 0.08). Mannitol was associated with significantly higher urine output (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -1.33, 95% CI -1.56--1.10; < 0.001). Na levels were higher in HS group (SMD = 1.47, 95% CI 0.86-2.09; < 0.001). Mannitol was associated with non-significant decrease in CVP and increase fluid input (SMD = 0.42, 95% CI 0.00-0.85 and SMD = -0.18, 95% CI -0.37-0.02, respectively).
CONCLUSION
Both HS and mannitol are associated with satisfactory brain relaxation with a non-statistically significant tendency for HS to achieve better relaxation scores with mannitol resulting in higher urine output while HS with higher Na levels.
PubMed: 35509546
DOI: 10.25259/SNI_136_2022 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Dornase alfa is currently used as a mucolytic to treat pulmonary disease (the major cause of morbidity and mortality) in cystic fibrosis. It reduces mucus viscosity in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dornase alfa is currently used as a mucolytic to treat pulmonary disease (the major cause of morbidity and mortality) in cystic fibrosis. It reduces mucus viscosity in the lungs, promoting improved clearance of secretions. This is an update of a previously published review.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether the use of dornase alfa in cystic fibrosis is associated with improved mortality and morbidity compared to placebo or other medications that improve airway clearance, and to identify any adverse events associated with its use.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearching relevant journals and abstracts from conferences. Date of the most recent search of the Group's Cystic Fibrosis Register: 30 November 2015.Clinicaltrials.gov was also searched to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. Date of most recent search: 28 November 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing dornase alfa to placebo, standard therapy or other medications that improve airway clearance.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Authors independently assessed trials against the inclusion criteria; two authors carried out analysis of methodological quality and data extraction.
MAIN RESULTS
The searches identified 54 trials, of which 19 (including a total of 2565 participants) met our inclusion criteria. Three additional papers examined the healthcare cost from one of the clinical trials. Fifteen trials compared dornase alfa to placebo or no dornase alfa treatment (2447 participants); two compared daily dornase to hypertonic saline (32 participants); one compared daily dornase alfa with hypertonic saline and alternate day dornase alfa (48 participants); one compared dornase alfa to mannitol and the combination of both drugs (38 participants). Trial duration varied from six days to three years.Compared to placebo, forced expiratory volume at one second improved in the intervention groups, with significant differences at one, three, six months and two years. There was also a significant improvement in lung clearance index at one month. There was a decrease in pulmonary exacerbations compared to placebo in trials of longer duration. The quality of the evidence from placebo-controlled trials was moderate to high for outcomes of lung function and pulmonary exacerbations. Limited, low quality evidence was available for changes in quality of life from baseline. One trial that examined the cost of care, including the cost of dornase alfa, found that the cost savings from dornase alfa offset 18% to 38% of the medication costs.The results for trials comparing dornase alfa to other medications that improve airway clearance (hypertonic saline or mannitol) were mixed, with one trial showing a greater improvement in forced expiratory volume at one second for dornase alfa compared to hypertonic saline, and three trials finding no difference between medications. In the only trial to assess the combination of dornase alfa with another medication compared to dornase alone, there was no benefit seen with the combination of dornase alfa and mannitol. Evidence of dornase alfa compared to other medications was limited and the open-label design of the trials may have induced bias, therefore the quality of the evidence was judged to be low.Dornase alfa did not cause significantly more adverse effects, except voice alteration and rash.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is evidence to show that, compared with placebo, therapy with dornase alfa improves lung function in people with cystic fibrosis in trials lasting one month to two years. There was a decrease in pulmonary exacerbations in trials of six months or longer. Voice alteration and rash appear to be the only adverse events reported with increased frequency in randomised controlled trials. There is not enough evidence to firmly conclude if dornase alfa is superior to hyperosmolar agents in improving lung function.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Child, Preschool; Cystic Fibrosis; Deoxyribonuclease I; Expectorants; Humans; Infant; Mannitol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recombinant Proteins; Saline Solution, Hypertonic
PubMed: 27043279
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001127.pub3