-
European Journal of Pain (London,... Jan 2016Many treatment modalities are used for itch treatment in daily medical practices without adequate evidence of their efficacy. The purpose of this study was to provide an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Many treatment modalities are used for itch treatment in daily medical practices without adequate evidence of their efficacy. The purpose of this study was to provide an evidence-based review of the literature as to the clinical benefits of systemic anti-itch treatments.
DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT
We performed a systematic review and, when appropriate, meta-analysis from available placebo-controlled randomized controlled trails (RCTs). A systematic search of the literature was performed using Pub Med, Cochrane Library and EMBASE. The primary outcome was the change in the itch score comparing the intervention group and placebo group. The meta-analysis method was used to calculate the pooled outcome of each treatment modality.
RESULTS
Twenty-six eligible RCTs were included. We found evidence for the effectiveness of: naltrexone (in cholestatic itch and atopic eczema), nalfurafine (in uraemic itch), gabapentin (in uraemic itch) and ursodeoxycholic acid (in intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy). The results of two RCTs with naltrexone in uremic itch are conflicting. On the other hand, we did not find any benefit from ondansetron (in cholestatic and uraemic itch), ergocalciferol (in uraemic itch), colesevelam (in cholestatic itch) or gabapentin (in cholestatic itch). The possible effectiveness of sertraline, paroxetine, cromolyn sodium, zinc sulphate, omega-3 fatty acid, montelukast, doxepin and rifampin need to be confirmed from future large studies, because the available evidence is insufficient.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings from this study suggest the effective therapeutic approaches for itch. The major limitations are that there are small numbers of available RCTs and methodological differences across studies.
Topics: Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Pruritus; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26416344
DOI: 10.1002/ejp.766 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2017Drugs can prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting, but their relative efficacies and side effects have not been compared within one systematic review. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Drugs can prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting, but their relative efficacies and side effects have not been compared within one systematic review.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to assess the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting by drugs and the development of any side effects.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2004), EMBASE (January 1985 to May 2004), CINAHL (1982 to May 2004), AMED (1985 to May 2004), SIGLE (to May 2004), ISI WOS (to May 2004), LILAC (to May 2004) and INGENTA bibliographies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials that compared a drug with placebo or another drug, or compared doses or timing of administration, that reported postoperative nausea or vomiting as an outcome.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted outcome data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 737 studies involving 103,237 people. Compared to placebo, eight drugs prevented postoperative nausea and vomiting: droperidol, metoclopramide, ondansetron, tropisetron, dolasetron, dexamethasone, cyclizine and granisetron. Publication bias makes evidence for differences among these drugs unreliable. The relative risks (RR) versus placebo varied between 0.60 and 0.80, depending upon the drug and outcome. Evidence for side effects was sparse: droperidol was sedative (RR 1.32) and headache was more common after ondansetron (RR 1.16).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Either nausea or vomiting is reported to affect, at most, 80 out of 100 people after surgery. If all 100 of these people are given one of the listed drugs, about 28 would benefit and 72 would not. Nausea and vomiting are usually less common and, therefore, drugs are less useful. For 100 people, of whom 30 would vomit or feel sick after surgery if given placebo, 10 people would benefit from a drug and 90 would not. Between one to five patients out of every 100 people may experience a mild side effect, such as sedation or headache, when given an antiemetic drug. Collaborative research should focus on determining whether antiemetic drugs cause more severe, probably rare, side effects. Further comparison of the antiemetic effect of one drug versus another is not a research priority.
Topics: Antiemetics; Humans; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28715610
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004125.pub3 -
Neuropsychopharmacology : Official... Mar 2022Ondansetron is a selective serotonin (5HT3) receptor antagonist that is under evaluation as an adjunctive treatment for schizophrenia, and a novel treatment for...
Ondansetron is a selective serotonin (5HT3) receptor antagonist that is under evaluation as an adjunctive treatment for schizophrenia, and a novel treatment for hallucinations in Parkinson's disease. Ondansetron reverses sensory gating deficits and improves visuoperceptual processing in animal models of psychosis, but it is unclear to what extent preclinical findings have been replicated in humans. We systematically reviewed human studies that evaluated the effects of ondansetron and other 5HT3 receptor antagonists on sensory gating deficits or sensory processing. Of 11 eligible studies, eight included patients with schizophrenia who were chronically stable on antipsychotic medication; five measured sensory gating using the P50 suppression response to a repeated auditory stimulus; others included tests of visuoperceptual function. Three studies in healthy participants included tests of visuoperceptual and sensorimotor function. A consistent and robust finding (five studies) was that ondansetron and tropisetron (5HT3 antagonist and α7-nicotinic receptor partial agonist) improved sensory gating in patients with schizophrenia. Tropisetron also improved sustained visual attention in non-smoking patients. There was inconsistent evidence of the effects of 5HT3 antagonists on other measures of sensory processing, but interpretation was limited by the small number of studies, methodological heterogeneity and the potential confounding effects of concomitant medication in patients. Despite these limitations, we found strong evidence that selective 5HT3 antagonists (with or without direct α7-nicotinic partial agonist effects) improved sensory gating. Future studies should investigate how this relates to potential improvement in neurocognitive symptoms in antipsychotic naive patients with prodromal or milder symptoms, in order to understand the clinical implications.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Humans; Perception; Schizophrenia; Sensory Gating; alpha7 Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor
PubMed: 35017671
DOI: 10.1038/s41386-021-01255-4 -
Drugs & Aging Dec 2023To reduce prescribing cascades occurring in clinical practice, healthcare providers require information on the prescribing cascades they can recognize and prevent. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
To reduce prescribing cascades occurring in clinical practice, healthcare providers require information on the prescribing cascades they can recognize and prevent.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aims to provide an overview of prescribing cascades, including dose-dependency information and recommendations that healthcare providers can use to prevent or reverse them.
METHODS
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was followed. Relevant literature was identified through searches in OVID MEDLINE, OVID Embase, OVID CINAHL, and Cochrane. Additionally, Web of Science and Scopus were consulted to analyze reference lists and citations. Publications in English were included if they analyzed the occurrence of prescribing cascades. Prescribing cascades were included if at least one study demonstrated a significant association and were excluded when the adverse drug reaction could not be confirmed in the Summary of Product Characteristics. Two reviewers independently extracted and grouped similar prescribing cascades. Descriptive summaries were provided regarding dose-dependency analyses and recommendations to prevent or reverse these prescribing cascades.
RESULTS
A total of 95 publications were included, resulting in 115 prescribing cascades with confirmed adverse drug reactions for which at least one significant association was found. For 52 of these prescribing cascades, information regarding dose dependency or recommendations to prevent or reverse prescribing cascades was found. Dose dependency was analyzed and confirmed for 12 prescribing cascades. For example, antipsychotics that may cause extrapyramidal syndrome followed by anti-parkinson drugs. Recommendations focused on dosage lowering, discontinuing medication, and medication switching. Explicit recommendations regarding alternative options were given for three prescribing cascades. One example was switching to ondansetron or granisetron when extrapyramidal syndrome is experienced using metoclopramide.
CONCLUSIONS
In total, 115 prescribing cascades were identified and an overview of 52 of them was generated for which recommendations to prevent or reverse them were provided. Nonetheless, information regarding alternative options for managing prescribing cascades was scarce.
Topics: Humans; Health Personnel; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37863868
DOI: 10.1007/s40266-023-01072-y -
PloS One 2015Gastroenteritis remains a leading cause of childhood morbidity. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Gastroenteritis remains a leading cause of childhood morbidity.
OBJECTIVE
Because prior reviews have focused on isolated symptoms and studies conducted in developing countries, this study focused on interventions commonly considered for use in developed countries. Intervention specific, patient-centered outcomes were selected.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, trial registries, grey literature, and scientific meetings.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials, conducted in developed countries, of children aged <18 years, with gastroenteritis, performed in emergency department or outpatient settings which evaluated oral rehydration therapy (ORT), antiemetics, probiotics or intravenous fluid administration rate.
DATA EXTRACTION
The study was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA guidelines. Data were independently extracted by multiple investigators. Analyses employed random effects models.
RESULTS
31 trials (4,444 patients) were included. ORT: Compared with intravenous rehydration, hospitalization (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.24, 2.71) and emergency department return visits (RR 0.86, 95%CI 0.39, 1.89) were similar. Antiemetics: Fewer children administered an antiemetic required intravenous rehydration (RR 0.40, 95%CI 0.26, 0.60) While the data could not be meta-analyzed, three studies reported that ondansetron administration does increase the frequency of diarrhea. Probiotics: No studies reported on the primary outcome, three studies evaluated hospitalization within 7 days (RR 0.87, 95%CI 0.25, 2.98). Rehydration: No difference in length of stay was identified for rapid vs. standard intravenous or nasogastric rehydration. A single study found that 5% dextrose in normal saline reduced hospitalizations compared with normal saline alone (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53, 0.92).
CONCLUSIONS
There is a paucity of patient-centered outcome evidence to support many interventions. Since ORT is a low-cost, non-invasive intervention, it should continue to be used. Routine probiotic use cannot be endorsed at this time in outpatient children with gastroenteritis. Despite some evidence that ondansetron administration increases diarrhea frequency, emergency department use leads to reductions in intravenous rehydration and hospitalization. No benefits were associated with ondansetron use following emergency department discharge.
Topics: Adolescent; Age Factors; Antiemetics; Child; Child, Preschool; Combined Modality Therapy; Developed Countries; Fluid Therapy; Gastroenteritis; Humans; Infant; Morbidity; Odds Ratio; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26075617
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128754 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022Hyperemesis gravidarum is a serious pregnancy complication that affects approximately 1% of pregnancies worldwide. To determine whether the use of ondansetron during...
Hyperemesis gravidarum is a serious pregnancy complication that affects approximately 1% of pregnancies worldwide. To determine whether the use of ondansetron during pregnancy is associated with abnormal pregnancy outcomes. PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Embase, CNKI, CBM, WANFANG, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for citations published in any language from inception to 15 December 2021. Eligible studies included any observational study. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as indicators to examine the association between ondansetron and abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Twenty articles from 1,558 citations were included. Our preliminary analysis showed that compared with the unexposed group, the use of ondansetron during pregnancy may be associated with an increased incidence of cardiac defects (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01-1.10), neural tube defects (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.05-1.18), and chest cleft (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.07-1.37). Further sensitivity analysis showed no significant association between ondansetron and cardiac defects (OR = 1.15,95% CI: 0.94-1.40) or neural tube defects (OR = 0.87,95% CI: 0.46-1.66). When controversial studies were eliminated, the results for the chest defects disappeared. Simultaneously, we found that the use of ondansetron was associated with a reduced incidence of miscarriage (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.31-0.89). Ondansetron was not associated with orofacial clefts (OR = 1.09,95% CI: 0.95-1.25), spinal limb defects (OR = 1.14,95% CI: 0.89-1.46), urinary tract deformities (OR = 1.06,95% CI: 0.97-1.15), any congenital malformations (OR = 1.03,95% CI: 0.98-1.09), stillbirth (OR = 0.97,95% CI: 0.83-1.15), preterm birth (OR = 1.22,95% CI: 0.80-1.85), neonatal asphyxia (OR = 1.05,95% CI: 0.72-1.54), or neonatal development (OR = 1.18,95% CI: 0.96-1.44) in our primary analysis. In our analysis, using ondansetron during pregnancy was not associated with abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Although our study did not find sufficient evidence of ondansetron and adverse pregnancy outcomes, future studies including the exposure period and dose of ondansetron, as well as controlling for disease status, may be useful to truly elucidate the potential risks and benefits of ondansetron.
PubMed: 36120333
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.951072 -
Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) Dec 2022Hypotension induced by spinal anaesthesia is a common clinical complication associated with multiple perioperative adverse events. We conducted a systemic review and... (Review)
Review
Hypotension induced by spinal anaesthesia is a common clinical complication associated with multiple perioperative adverse events. We conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis to confirm whether ondansetron could alleviate hypotension following spinal anaesthesia. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify eligible randomised controlled trials from their respective database inception dates to 30 September 2022. The primary outcome of the meta-analysis was the incidence of hypotension after spinal anaesthesia. The risk of bias in the included studies was evaluated using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2.0). Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation was applied to assess the level of certainty. A total of 25 studies were included in this research. The meta-analysis revealed that ondansetron significantly decreased the incidence of hypotension (RR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.53−0.80, p < 0.01, I2 = 64%) and bradycardia. In addition, patients treated with ondansetron had a reduced need for vasopressors administration. This study suggests that ondansetron may be recommended as a prophylaxis for hypotension and bradycardia following spinal anaesthesia; the level of evidence was moderate with a high level of heterogeneity.
PubMed: 36559039
DOI: 10.3390/ph15121588 -
Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia =... Dec 2015Palonosetron, a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA), has unique characteristics relative to first-generation 5-HT3RAs such as... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Palonosetron, a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA), has unique characteristics relative to first-generation 5-HT3RAs such as ondansetron. Nevertheless, it remains unclear if palonosetron is better than ondansetron for the prevention of nausea and vomiting during the first 24 hr after surgery and is thus the focus of this systematic review.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search of the MEDLINE®, EMBASE™, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science® databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that addressed a comparison of the prophylactic antiemetic efficacy between palonosetron and ondansetron within 24 hr after surgery. The primary outcomes were the proportion of participants who experienced postoperative nausea (PON), postoperative vomiting (POV), or both, in the early (0-6 hr) or late (6-24 hr) period. The pooled relative risks (RRs) were calculated along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
We identified nine RCTs that comprised 741 participants. Palonosetron was superior to ondansetron in the reduction of early PON [RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.71], late PON (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.77), and late POV (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.62), but not early POV (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.34).
CONCLUSION
Palonosetron provides more effective prophylaxis of early PON, late PON, and late POV compared with ondansetron. Future studies are required to investigate the role of palonosetron during 24-72 hr following surgery.
Topics: Antiemetics; Humans; Isoquinolines; Ondansetron; Palonosetron; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Quinuclidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 26296300
DOI: 10.1007/s12630-015-0457-1 -
Journal of Perianesthesia Nursing :... Feb 2022Evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron in preventing shivering after spinal anesthesia in cesarean delivery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron in preventing shivering after spinal anesthesia in cesarean delivery.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis METHODS: Following the PRISMA statement, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, Google scholar and other grey literature databases were searched for eligible studies.
FINDINGS
The overall incidence of shivering after spinal anesthesia in cesarean delivery is 32%, with 24% in patients who received ondansetron compared to 40% in the placebo group. A total of 19 trials consisting of 1399 patients were evaluated. Compared to placebo, ondansetron is effective in reducing the incidence of shivering (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.78; P = 0.003). The quality of evidence is low due to substantial heterogeneity, imprecision and suspected publication bias. Patients who received ondansetron are less likely to require rescue treatment for shivering (RR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.76; P = 0.009). Also, ondansetron is associated with a lower incidence of hypotension necessitating vasopressor treatment, and nausea and vomiting with no effects on the incidence of bradycardia.
CONCLUSION
Ondansetron is effective in mitigating shivering after spinal anesthesia in cesarean delivery.
Topics: Anesthesia, Spinal; Cesarean Section; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Ondansetron; Pregnancy; Shivering; Vomiting
PubMed: 34836765
DOI: 10.1016/j.jopan.2021.05.007 -
Journal of Psychiatric Research Jun 2019The serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT3) receptor has been implicated in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT3) receptor has been implicated in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examined the efficacy and safety of adjunctive ondansetron, a potent 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, in the treatment of schizophrenia. Only RCTs examining adjunctive ondansetron for schizophrenia were included. Standardized mean difference (SMD), risk ratio (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were analyzed using RevMan, Version 5.3. Study quality was evaluated with the Cochrane risk of bias and the Jadad scale. Data of 5 RCTs (n = 304) covering 149 patients on ondansetron (4-8 mg/day) and 155 patients on placebo were analyzed. Three RCTs reported "randomized allocation" with a specific description; the weighted Jadad score was 3.8. Adjunctive ondansetron outperformed placebo in the reduction of Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score [3 RCTs, n = 171; SMD: -1.06 (95%CI: -2.10, -0.02), p = 0.04, I = 85%], the negative [4 RCTs, n = 209; SMD: -0.96 (95%CI: -1.71, -0.22), p = 0.01, I = 80%], and general psychopathology symptom scores [3 RCTs, n = 171; SMD: -0.97 (95%CI: -1.91, -0.02), p = 0.04, I = 82%], but not in the positive (p = 0.05) and depressive symptom scores (p = 0.91). The difference in PANSS total score remained significant after excluding one outlying RCT [2 RCTs, n = 141; SMD: -0.50 (95%CI: -0.84, -0.16), P = 0.004, I = 0%]. Four RCTs examined the effect of ondansetron on cognition applying different instruments yielding conflicting findings. Ondansetron was superior over placebo in improving extrapyramidal symptoms, but no group differences were found in overall discontinuation rate and adverse drug reactions. In conclusion, adjunctive ondansetron appears to be efficacious and safe in improving negative symptoms and general psychopathology. The effect of ondansetron on cognitive impairment in schizophrenia needs to be further explored in large-scale RCTs.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Ondansetron; Schizophrenia; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30878789
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2019.02.024