-
Digestive Diseases and Sciences May 2020Type 1 hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a fatal complication of cirrhosis. Treatments trend toward HRS reversal, but few show clear mortality benefit. We sought to quantify... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Type 1 hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a fatal complication of cirrhosis. Treatments trend toward HRS reversal, but few show clear mortality benefit. We sought to quantify the progress-or lack thereof-in improving outcomes of type 1 HRS over time.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing type 1 HRS outcomes including (a) overall survival (liver transplant-free survival if reported) and (b) HRS reversal. Each study arm was analyzed separately to look at changes in outcomes over time. RCTs published comparing medical treatments for type 1 HRS were searched using several databases through July 31, 2019.
RESULTS
Fourteen RCTs (28 arms) involving 778 participants enrolled between 2002 and 2018 were included. Twelve RCTs measured HRS reversal. In conjunction with albumin (or plasma expander), the most common medications used were terlipressin (13 arms), antibiotics (7), norepinephrine (6), dopamine (4), and midodrine/octreotide (3). Pooled survival rate was 34.6% (95% CI 26.4-43.8), and pooled HRS reversal rate was 42.8% (95% CI 34.2-51.9). Regression analyzing the incremental effect of the year the RCT was initiated showed that more recent studies were not associated with improved survival (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94-1.11, p = 0.66) or HRS reversal rates (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96-1.11, p = 0.41). There was no survival improvement when RCTs with endpoints assessed ≤ or > 1 month were analyzed separately with respective OR of 1.07 (95% CI 0.95-1.20, p = 0.26) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.85-1.12, p = 0.70).
CONCLUSION
Outcomes have not improved for patients with type 1 HRS since 2002. There is a need to improve prevention and treatment of type 1 HRS.
Topics: Adult; Albumins; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Dopamine; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Hepatorenal Syndrome; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Midodrine; Norepinephrine; Octreotide; Plasma Substitutes; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Regression Analysis; Survival Rate; Terlipressin; Treatment Outcome; Vasoconstrictor Agents; Young Adult
PubMed: 31571102
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-019-05858-2 -
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology Apr 2018Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a serious complication of advanced chronic liver disease. Different pharmacological therapies have variable efficacy. We performed a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a serious complication of advanced chronic liver disease. Different pharmacological therapies have variable efficacy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of various drugs in the treatment of HRS.
STUDY
Randomized controlled trials comparing active drug with placebo or comparing 2 different drugs were included in this analysis. Primary study outcome was reversal of HRS. Secondary outcomes were HRS relapse and patient survival. Subgroup analysis was performed on patients with type 1 HRS.
RESULTS
Thirteen randomized controlled trial were eligible for analysis. Terlipressin plus albumin was more efficacious than placebo plus albumin (odds ratio=4.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.72-12.93; P=0.003) or midodrine plus albumin and octreotide (odds ratio=5.94; 95% confidence interval, 1.69-20.85; P=0.005), for HRS reversal. However, no significant difference was noted comparing terlipressin plus albumin versus noradrenaline plus albumin, octreotide plus albumin versus placebo plus albumin or noradrenaline plus albumin versus midodrine plus albumin and octreotide. None of the comparisons showed difference on HRS relapse or patient survival. Subgroup analysis revealed that terlipressin was more effective than placebo for type 1 HRS reversal, but no significant differences were noted between any other comparisons, and none of the comparisons showed difference on HRS relapse or patient survival.
CONCLUSIONS
Intravenous infusion of terlipressin is the most effective medical therapy for reversing HRS. Intravenous infusion of noradrenaline is an acceptable alternative. Studies are needed as basis for developing pharmacological strategies to reduce relapse of HRS and improve patient survival.
Topics: Albumins; Drug Therapy, Combination; Hepatorenal Syndrome; Humans; Infusions, Intravenous; Midodrine; Octreotide; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Terlipressin; Vasoconstrictor Agents
PubMed: 28991106
DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000913 -
American Journal of TherapeuticsOrthostatic hypotension (OH) is a potentially debilitating condition caused by dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system, which is essential for the physiologic...
BACKGROUND
Orthostatic hypotension (OH) is a potentially debilitating condition caused by dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system, which is essential for the physiologic response to orthostatic posture. In addition to OH, autonomic dysfunction may also be associated with the development of concurrent supine hypertension (SH).
AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY
This paradoxical effect speaks to the complexity of the pathogenesis of autonomic disease and greatly complicates management of these patients. Clinicians are faced with a dilemma because aggressive treatment of orthostatic intolerance can worsen supine hypertension and attempts to control supine hypertension can worsen orthostatic intolerance.
DATA SOURCES
Systematic review of the published literature.
PREVENTION OF SUPINE HYPERTENSION
Patients should aim to avoid known stressors, perform physical maneuvers (eg, slowly getting up from bed, sleeping with head of bed elevated), manage underlying related conditions (eg, diabetes mellitus), and exercise.
MANAGEMENT OF SUPINE HYPERTENSION
With failure of conservative management, patients may advance to pharmacologic therapy. It is important to understand the underlying suspected etiology of the syndrome of supine hypertension and OH (SH-OH) to select promising pharmacologic agents. This article reviews medical treatment options to work toward achieving a better quality of life for patients afflicted with this disease. Although clonidine and beta-blockers can be used to treat hypertension without causing significant hypotension, midodrine, pyridostigmine, and droxidopa may be helpful in preventing OH.
CONCLUSION
The etiology and severity of autonomic dysfunction vary widely between patients, suggesting a need for an individualized treatment approach. Achieving perfect blood pressure control is not a realistic goal. Rather, treatment should be aimed at improving the patient's quality of life and decreasing their risk of injury and organ damage.
Topics: Droxidopa; Humans; Hypertension; Hypotension, Orthostatic; Midodrine; Quality of Life
PubMed: 31524637
DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000001054 -
American Journal of Therapeutics May 2023
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Humans; Midodrine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Shock; Vasoconstrictor Agents
PubMed: 37278709
DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000001610 -
American Journal of Therapeutics
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Humans; Midodrine; Syncope, Vasovagal
PubMed: 35703495
DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000001513 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019Hepatorenal syndrome is defined as renal failure in people with cirrhosis in the absence of other causes. In addition to supportive treatment such as albumin to restore...
BACKGROUND
Hepatorenal syndrome is defined as renal failure in people with cirrhosis in the absence of other causes. In addition to supportive treatment such as albumin to restore fluid balance, the other potential treatments include systemic vasoconstrictor drugs (such as vasopressin analogues or noradrenaline), renal vasodilator drugs (such as dopamine), transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and liver support with molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS). There is uncertainty over the best treatment regimen for hepatorenal syndrome.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the benefits and harms of different treatments for hepatorenal syndrome in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trial registers until December 2018 to identify randomised clinical trials on hepatorenal syndrome in people with cirrhosis.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in adults with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently identified eligible trials and collected data. The outcomes for this review included mortality, serious adverse events, any adverse events, resolution of hepatorenal syndrome, liver transplantation, and other decompensation events. We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio (OR), rate ratio, hazard ratio (HR), and mean difference (MD) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 25 trials (1263 participants; 12 interventions) in the review. Twenty-three trials (1185 participants) were included in one or more outcomes. All the trials were at high risk of bias, and all the evidence was of low or very low certainty. The trials included participants with liver cirrhosis of varied aetiologies as well as a mixture of type I hepatorenal syndrome only, type II hepatorenal syndrome only, or people with both type I and type II hepatorenal syndrome. Participant age ranged from 42 to 60 years, and the proportion of females ranged from 5.8% to 61.5% in the trials that reported this information. The follow-up in the trials ranged from one week to six months. Overall, 59% of participants died during this period and about 35% of participants recovered from hepatorenal syndrome. The most common interventions compared were albumin plus terlipressin, albumin plus noradrenaline, and albumin alone.There was no evidence of a difference in mortality (22 trials; 1153 participants) at maximal follow-up between the different interventions. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. There was no evidence of differences in the proportion of people with serious adverse events (three trials; 428 participants), number of participants with serious adverse events per participant (two trials; 166 participants), proportion of participants with any adverse events (four trials; 402 participants), the proportion of people who underwent liver transplantation at maximal follow-up (four trials; 342 participants), or other features of decompensation at maximal follow-up (one trial; 466 participants). Five trials (293 participants) reported number of any adverse events, and five trials (219 participants) reported treatment costs. Albumin plus noradrenaline had fewer numbers of adverse events per participant (rate ratio 0.51, 95% CrI 0.28 to 0.87). Eighteen trials (1047 participants) reported recovery from hepatorenal syndrome (as per definition of hepatorenal syndrome). In terms of recovery from hepatorenal syndrome, in the direct comparisons, albumin plus midodrine plus octreotide and albumin plus octreotide had lower recovery from hepatorenal syndrome than albumin plus terlipressin (HR 0.04; 95% CrI 0.00 to 0.25 and HR 0.26, 95% CrI 0.07 to 0.80 respectively). There was no evidence of differences between the groups in any of the other direct comparisons. In the network meta-analysis, albumin and albumin plus midodrine plus octreotide had lower recovery from hepatorenal syndrome compared with albumin plus terlipressin.
FUNDING
two trials were funded by pharmaceutical companies; five trials were funded by parties who had no vested interest in the results of the trial; and 18 trials did not report the source of funding.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on very low-certainty evidence, there is no evidence of benefit or harm of any of the interventions for hepatorenal syndrome with regards to the following outcomes: all-cause mortality, serious adverse events (proportion), number of serious adverse events per participant, any adverse events (proportion), liver transplantation, or other decompensation events. Low-certainty evidence suggests that albumin plus noradrenaline had fewer 'any adverse events per participant' than albumin plus terlipressin. Low- or very low-certainty evidence also found that albumin plus midodrine plus octreotide and albumin alone had lower recovery from hepatorenal syndrome compared with albumin plus terlipressin.Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered; employ blinding, avoid post-randomisation dropouts or planned cross-overs (or perform an intention-to-treat analysis); and report clinically important outcomes such as mortality, health-related quality of life, adverse events, and recovery from hepatorenal syndrome. Albumin plus noradrenaline and albumin plus terlipressin appear to be the interventions that should be compared in future trials.
Topics: Adult; Bayes Theorem; Female; Hepatorenal Syndrome; Humans; Liver Cirrhosis; Liver Transplantation; Male; Middle Aged; Network Meta-Analysis; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vasoconstrictor Agents
PubMed: 31513287
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013103.pub2 -
Journal of Neurotrauma May 2024Cognitive impairment is a common complication following spinal cord injury (SCI) and imposes a significant negative impact on adjustment, functional independence,... (Review)
Review
Cognitive impairment is a common complication following spinal cord injury (SCI) and imposes a significant negative impact on adjustment, functional independence, physical and mental health, and quality of life. It is unclear whether interventions for cognitive impairment following SCI are effective. A systematic review of controlled trials was performed to evaluate the effect of interventions on cognitive functions in adults with SCI using search engines: Embase, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science up to December 2023. Two reviewers independently screened the articles, and study findings were synthesized and summarized. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Eight moderate-quality studies were found that investigated the effects of physical exercise/activity-based therapy plus cognitive training or intermittent hypoxia, diet modification and dietary supplements, tibial nerve or cortical stimulation, and drug therapy on cognitive function in SCI. Physical exercise/activity-based therapy plus cognitive training showed most promise for improving cognitive functions, while drug therapy, diet modification, and dietary supplements showed potential for improving cognitive function. However, about half of the participants experienced heightened instability in blood pressure following the administration of midodrine, and one participant reported gastrointestinal side effects after taking omega-3 fatty acids. There was no evidence of improvement in cognitive function for stimulation techniques. The current review highlights the scarcity of research investigating the effectiveness of interventions that target cognitive function after SCI. Further, the effects of these eight studies are uncertain due to concerns about the quality of designs and small sample sizes utilized in the trials, as well as the employment of insensitive neurocognitive tests when applied to adults with SCI. This review highlights a significant gap in knowledge related to SCI cognitive rehabilitation.
PubMed: 38623777
DOI: 10.1089/neu.2024.0032 -
Open Heart Jun 2024Neurocardiogenic syncope is a common condition with significant associated psychological and physical morbidity. The effectiveness of therapeutic options for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Neurocardiogenic syncope is a common condition with significant associated psychological and physical morbidity. The effectiveness of therapeutic options for neurocardiogenic syncope beyond placebo remains uncertain.
METHODS
The primary endpoint was the risk ratio (RR) of spontaneously recurring syncope following any therapeutic intervention. We also examined the effect of blinding on treatment efficacy. We identified all randomised trials which evaluated the effect of any pharmacological, device-based or supportive intervention on patients with a history of syncope. A systematic search was conducted on Medline, Embase, PubMed databases and Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials from 1950 to 25 April 2023. Event rates, their RRs and 95% CIs were calculated, and a random-effects meta-analysis was conducted for each intervention. Data analysis was performed in R using RStudio.
RESULTS
We identified 47 eligible trials randomising 3518 patients. Blinded trials assessing syncope recurrence were neutral for beta blockers, fludrocortisone and conventional dual-chamber pacing but were favourable for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.63, p<0.001), midodrine (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.94, p=0.016) and closed-loop stimulation (CLS) pacing (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.35, p<0.001). Unblinded trials reported significant benefits for all therapy categories other than beta blockers and consistently showed larger benefits than blinded trials.
CONCLUSIONS
Under blinded conditions, SSRIs, midodrine and CLS pacing significantly reduced syncope recurrence. Future trials for syncope should be blinded to avoid overestimating treatment effects.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022330148.
Topics: Humans; Syncope, Vasovagal; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Recurrence
PubMed: 38890128
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2024-002669