-
Lasers in Medical Science Oct 2021Although the standard treatment for periodontal disease is based on scaling and root planing (SRP), the use of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) has been studied... (Review)
Review
Although the standard treatment for periodontal disease is based on scaling and root planing (SRP), the use of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) has been studied as a complement to obtain better clinical results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of aPDT as adjuncts to SRP, compared with SRP alone, on clinical parameters of chronic periodontal patients. Only randomized controlled trials with at least 3-month follow-ups, of SRP alone and in association with aPDT, were included. The MEDLINE (PubMed), Google Scholar, and LILACS databases were searched for articles published up to July 2020. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted for clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing pocket depth (PPD) change after treatment. Of 141 potentially relevant papers, 22 were included. The association between SRP and aPDT promoted a significant CAL gain and PPD reduction. Periodontal treatment was partially improved by aPDT, and a favorable effect of indocyanine green-mediated aPDT was observed, and high concentrations of phenothiazine chloride presented clinical improvement as well.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents; Chronic Periodontitis; Combined Modality Therapy; Dental Scaling; Humans; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Root Planing
PubMed: 33438165
DOI: 10.1007/s10103-020-03238-1 -
PloS One 2015Hypotensive state is frequently observed in several critical conditions. If an adequate mean arterial pressure is not promptly restored, insufficient tissue perfusion... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Hypotensive state is frequently observed in several critical conditions. If an adequate mean arterial pressure is not promptly restored, insufficient tissue perfusion and organ dysfunction may develop. Fluids and catecholamines are the cornerstone of critical hypotensive states management. Catecholamines side effects such as increased myocardial oxygen consumption and development of arrhythmias are well known. Thus, in recent years, interest in catecholamine-sparing agents such as vasopressin, terlipressin and methylene blue has increased; however, few randomized trials, mostly with small sample sizes, have been performed. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials to investigate the effect of non-catecholaminergic vasopressors on mortality.
METHODS
PubMed, BioMed Central and Embase were searched (update December 31st, 2014) by two independent investigators. Inclusion criteria were: random allocation to treatment, at least one group receiving a non-catecholaminergic vasopressor, patients with or at risk for vasodilatory shock. Exclusion criteria were: crossover studies, pediatric population, non-human studies, studies published as abstract only, lack of data on mortality. Studied drugs were vasopressin, terlipressin and methylene blue. Primary endpoint was mortality at the longest follow-up available.
RESULTS
A total of 1,608 patients from 20 studies were included in our analysis. The studied settings were sepsis (10/20 studies [50%]), cardiac surgery (7/20 [35%]), vasodilatory shock due to any cause (2/20 [19%]), and acute traumatic injury (1/20 [5%]). Overall, pooled estimates showed that treatment with non-catecholaminergic agents improves survival (278/810 [34.3%] versus 309/798 [38.7%], risk ratio = 0.88, 95% confidence interval = 0.79 to 0.98, p = 0.02). None of the drugs was associated with significant reduction in mortality when analyzed independently. Results were not confirmed when analyzing studies with a low risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
Catecholamine-sparing agents in patients with or at risk for vasodilatory shock may improve survival. Further researches on this topic are needed to confirm the finding.
Topics: Databases, Factual; Humans; Lypressin; Methylene Blue; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sepsis; Shock; Terlipressin; Vasoconstrictor Agents; Vasopressins
PubMed: 26558621
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142605 -
PloS One 2022Adhesion is a primary challenge following surgery, and the anti-adhesive effect of methylene blue (MB) has been investigated. This systematic review and meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Adhesion is a primary challenge following surgery, and the anti-adhesive effect of methylene blue (MB) has been investigated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of MB on postoperative adhesions in experimental studies. We initially searched OVID-MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar in February 2021, and then in May 2021. The anti-adhesive efficacy of MB was compared with that of the control (either placebo or nothing) after the surgical procedure. The primary and secondary outcomes were the macroscopic and microscopic adhesion scores, respectively. Traditional meta-analysis, meta-regression, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed to analyze the retrieved outcomes. We included 13 experimental studies of 367 rats (200 rats received MB and 167 rats received placebo or nothing). The macroscopic adhesion scores were significantly lower in the MB-administered group than in the control group (standardized mean difference, 2.313; 95% confidence interval, 1.104 to3.523; I2 = 94.0%, Tau = 2.059). Meta-regression analysis showed that macroscopic adhesion tended to decrease with an increase in MB dose. TSA demonstrated that the cumulative Z curve crossed both the conventional test and trial sequential monitoring boundary for the macroscopic adhesion score. MB had a beneficial effect on intraperitoneal adhesion following laparotomy, and adhesions decreased with increase in dose.
Topics: Animals; Laparotomy; Methylene Blue; Rats; Tissue Adhesions
PubMed: 35588404
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268178 -
Academic Emergency Medicine : Official... Sep 2022This review was designated to evaluate the efficacy of parenteral ketorolac in treating acute migraine headache. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
This review was designated to evaluate the efficacy of parenteral ketorolac in treating acute migraine headache.
METHODS
We searched databases Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline, and Google Scholar up to January 2021 and identified randomized controlled trials comparing ketorolac to any other medications in treating patients presenting with migraine headache.
RESULTS
Thirteen trials were included in our review, comprising 944 participants. We derived seven comparisons: ketorolac versus phenothiazines, metoclopramide, sumatriptan, dexamethasone, sodium valproate, caffeine, and diclofenac. There were no significant differences in the reduction of pain intensity at 1 h under the comparisons between ketorolac and phenothiazines (standard mean difference [SMD] = 0.09, p = 0.74) or metoclopramide (SMD = 0.02, p = 0.95). We also found no difference in the outcome recurrence of headache (ketorolac vs. phenothiazines (risk ratio [RR] =0.98, p = 0.97)], ability to return to work or usual activity (ketorolac vs. metoclopramide [RR = 0.64, p = 0.13]), need for rescue medication (ketorolac vs. phenothiazines [RR = 1.72, p = 0.27], ketorolac vs. metoclopramide [RR 2.20, p = 0.18]), and frequency of adverse effects (ketorolac vs. metoclopramide [RR = 1.07, p = 0.82]). Limited trials suggested that ketorolac offered better pain relief at 1 h compared to sumatriptan and dexamethasone; had lesser frequency of adverse effects than phenothiazines; and was superior to sodium valproate in terms of reduction of pain intensity at 1 h, need for rescue medication, and sustained headache freedom within 24 h.
CONCLUSIONS
Ketorolac may have similar efficacy to phenothiazines and metoclopramide in treating acute migraine headache. Ketorolac may also offer better pain control than sumatriptan, dexamethasone, and sodium valproate. However, given the lack of evidence due to inadequate number of trials available, future studies are warranted.
Topics: Caffeine; Dexamethasone; Diclofenac; Humans; Ketorolac; Metoclopramide; Migraine Disorders; Pain; Phenothiazines; Sumatriptan; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 35138658
DOI: 10.1111/acem.14457 -
Asian Cardiovascular & Thoracic Annals Oct 2021To evaluate the benefit of methylene blue as an adjunct treatment by assessing hemodynamic, morbidity rate, intensive care unit length of stay, and mortality rate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To evaluate the benefit of methylene blue as an adjunct treatment by assessing hemodynamic, morbidity rate, intensive care unit length of stay, and mortality rate outcomes in adult patients with vasoplegic syndrome.
METHODS
A systematic search through electronic databases including Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, and Medline for studies assessing the use of methylene blue in patients with vasoplegic syndrome compared to control treatments. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale tool was used for observational studies, and Jadad Scale was used for controlled trials to assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS
This systematic review included six studies for qualitative synthesis and five studies for quantitative synthesis. Pooled analysis revealed that mean arterial pressure, systemic vascular resistance, heart rate, and hospital stay were not statistically significant in methylene blue administration compared to control. However, administration of methylene blue in vasoplegic syndrome patients significantly reduces renal failure (OR = 0.25; 95% CI = 0.08-0.75), development of multiple organ failure (OR = 0.09; 95% CI = 0.02-0.51), and mortality rate (OR = 0.12; 95% CI = 0.03-0.46).
CONCLUSION
Adjunct administration of methylene blue for vasoplegic syndrome patients significantly reduces renal failure, multiple organ failure, and mortality.
Topics: Adult; Cardiopulmonary Bypass; Hemodynamics; Humans; Methylene Blue; Vascular Resistance; Vasoplegia
PubMed: 33653154
DOI: 10.1177/0218492321998523 -
Head & Neck May 2015The purpose of this study was to critically review the published evidence concerning adjunctive diagnostic techniques in the diagnosis of oral lesions of unknown... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this study was to critically review the published evidence concerning adjunctive diagnostic techniques in the diagnosis of oral lesions of unknown malignant potential.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature review with meta-analysis using PubMed to search for articles published from June 1993 through June 2013 to identify prospective studies evaluating any diagnostic method, with tissue biopsy confirmation, in clinically evident oral lesions of unknown malignant potential. Aggregate weighted totals and SEs for true, false-positive, false-negative, and inadequate results were calculated and compared among subgroups.
RESULTS
Forty-eight articles satisfying inclusion criteria were identified. Twenty-five were included in quantitative synthesis.
CONCLUSION
Oral cytology holds higher diagnostic value than specialist's oral examination, which holds higher value than in vivo toluidine blue staining. This study does not support the use of computer-aided or liquid-based cytology. Future studies should be designed to test multiple methods in the same patient population to allow direct comparison among various techniques.
Topics: Biopsy, Needle; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Cell Transformation, Neoplastic; Cytodiagnosis; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Immunohistochemistry; Male; Mouth Neoplasms; Physical Examination; Precancerous Conditions; Sensitivity and Specificity; Staining and Labeling; Tandem Mass Spectrometry; Tolonium Chloride
PubMed: 24596227
DOI: 10.1002/hed.23667 -
Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy Apr 2024This study aimed to assess the influence of methylene blue (MB)-mediated adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) when compared to conventional mechanical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Efficacy of methylene blue-mediated antimicrobial photodynamic therapy on clinical and radiographic outcomes among patients with periodontal diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to assess the influence of methylene blue (MB)-mediated adjunctive antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) when compared to conventional mechanical debridement (MD) alone on periodontal clinical and radiographic outcomes among periodontitis patients.
METHODS
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were incorporated by conducting an electronic search in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed for articles published in English up to August 2023 to address the following focused question based on the PICO format: "Whether the application of MB-mediated aPDT as an adjunctive to MD (Intervention) leads to improved periodontal clinical and/or radiographic outcomes (Outcome) among participants with and without periodontal diseases (Population) as compared to MD alone (Conparison)". The risk of bias (RoB) of the included studies was assessed using the modified Jadad scale. A meta-analysis was conducted, and it included the presentation of the standard mean difference (SMD) along with a 95 % confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
In total, 11 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The meta-analysis demonstrated statistically significant improvements in periodontal plaque index (SMD: -0.72 % [95 % CI: -0.99 % to -0.45 %]; p<0.00001), probing depth (SMD: -0.38 % [95 % CI: -0.57 % to -0.19 %; p<0.00001), and bleeding on probing (SMD: -0.44 % [95 % CI: -0.68 % to -0.20 %]; p = 0.0003) scores at the final follow-up visit after the application of MB-mediated aPDT in comparison with MD alone. Nevertheless, there was no statistically significant difference was observed in periodontal clinical attachment level values (SMD: -0.01 % [95 % CI: -0.21 % to 0.19 %]; p = 0.95) between the control group and the experimental group. Six studies achieved a low RoB, five were rated as having medium RoB, while no study received a high RoB.
CONCLUSION
MB-mediated aPDT, when used as an adjunct to conventional MD contributes to the improvement of periodontal clinical outcomes including PI, PD, and BOP in patients with periodontitis.
Topics: Methylene Blue; Humans; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Periodontal Diseases
PubMed: 38316339
DOI: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2024.104000 -
Clinical Otolaryngology : Official... Jan 2021The accuracy of toluidine blue (TB) and chemiluminescence for diagnosing oral cancer and pre-cancer was evaluated. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
The accuracy of toluidine blue (TB) and chemiluminescence for diagnosing oral cancer and pre-cancer was evaluated.
METHODS
Two authors (working independently) comprehensively reviewed six databases (PubMed, Cochrane database, Embase, Web of Science, SCOPUS and Google Scholar) from their dates of inception until March 2020. Oral mucosal disorder, as detected by TB, was compared with that detected by chemiluminescence. True-positive, true-negative, false-positive and false-negative data were extracted for each study. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (ver. 2). The extent of interrater agreement was also assessed.
RESULTS
Twenty-nine prospective and retrospective studies were included. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of TB was 7.017 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.544; 10.836). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.766. The correlation between the sensitivity and the false-positive rate was 0.196, indicating the absence of heterogeneity. TB exhibited moderate interrater reliability (0.6777; 95% CI, 0.43; 0.7455). Compared with chemiluminescence, as used in nine studies, TB had a lower sensitivity (0.659 vs 0.841), but a higher specificity (0.809 vs 0.345), negative predictive value (0.766 vs 0.690) and DOR (10.565 vs 5.203). Compared with clinical examination, as used in four studies, TB method had a higher sensitivity (0.891 vs 0.891), specificity (0.739 vs 0.634), negative predictive value (0.920 vs 0.714) and DOR (28.491 vs 8.526). Subgroup analysis showed that screening for severe dysplasia or more severe disease was significantly more sensitive, but less specific, than screening for all dysplasias.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the diagnostic accuracy of TB in the diagnostic work-up of oral cancer and pre-cancer was higher than that of clinical examination, it was not high enough for TB to reliably be used alone. Instead, it should be combined with chemiluminescence or other diagnostic tools.
Topics: Coloring Agents; Early Detection of Cancer; Humans; Luminescent Measurements; Mouth Neoplasms; Predictive Value of Tests; Tolonium Chloride
PubMed: 32741142
DOI: 10.1111/coa.13613 -
Pediatric Critical Care Medicine : a... Jun 2020Shock refractory to fluid and catecholamine therapy has significant morbidity and mortality in children. The use of methylene blue to treat refractory shock in children...
OBJECTIVES
Shock refractory to fluid and catecholamine therapy has significant morbidity and mortality in children. The use of methylene blue to treat refractory shock in children is not well described. We aim to collect and summarize the literature and define physicians' practice patterns regarding the use of methylene blue to treat shock in children.
DESIGN
We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane for studies involving the use of methylene blue for catecholamine-refractory shock from database inception to 2019. Collected studies were analyzed qualitatively. To describe practice patterns of methylene blue use, we electronically distributed a survey to U.S.-based pediatric critical care physicians. We assessed physician knowledge and experience with methylene blue. Survey responses were quantitatively and qualitatively evaluated.
SETTING
Pediatric critical and cardiac care units.
PATIENTS OR SUBJECTS
Patients less than or equal to 25 years old with refractory shock treated with methylene blue.
INTERVENTIONS
None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
One-thousand two-hundred ninety-three abstracts met search criteria, 139 articles underwent full-text review, and 24 studies were included. Studies investigated refractory shock induced by a variety of etiologies and found that methylene blue was generally safe and increased mean arterial blood pressure. There is overall lack of studies, low number of study patients, and low quality of studies identified. Our survey had a 22.5% response rate, representing 125 institutions. Similar proportions of physicians reported using (40%) or never even considering (43%) methylene blue for shock. The most common reasons for not using methylene blue were unfamiliarity with this drug, its proper dosing, and lack of evidentiary support.
CONCLUSIONS
Methylene blue appears safe and may benefit children with refractory shock. There is a stark divide in familiarity and practice patterns regarding its use among physicians. Studies to formally assess safety and efficacy of methylene blue in treating pediatric shock are warranted.
Topics: Adult; Catecholamines; Child; Humans; Methylene Blue; Shock; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 32453920
DOI: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000002295 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2015Cannabis has a long history of medicinal use. Cannabis-based medications (cannabinoids) are based on its active element, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cannabis has a long history of medicinal use. Cannabis-based medications (cannabinoids) are based on its active element, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and have been approved for medical purposes. Cannabinoids may be a useful therapeutic option for people with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting that respond poorly to commonly used anti-emetic agents (anti-sickness drugs). However, unpleasant adverse effects may limit their widespread use.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of cannabis-based medications for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in adults with cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified studies by searching the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and LILACS from inception to January 2015. We also searched reference lists of reviews and included studies. We did not restrict the search by language of publication.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a cannabis-based medication with either placebo or with a conventional anti-emetic in adults receiving chemotherapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently conducted eligibility and risk of bias assessment, and extracted data. We grouped studies based on control groups for meta-analyses conducted using random effects. We expressed efficacy and tolerability outcomes as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 23 RCTs. Most were of cross-over design, on adults undergoing a variety of chemotherapeutic regimens ranging from moderate to high emetic potential for a variety of cancers. The majority of the studies were at risk of bias due to either lack of allocation concealment or attrition. Trials were conducted between 1975 and 1991. No trials involved comparison with newer anti-emetic drugs such as ondansetron. Comparison with placebo People had more chance of reporting complete absence of vomiting (3 trials; 168 participants; RR 5.7; 95% CI 2.6 to 12.6; low quality evidence) and complete absence of nausea and vomiting (3 trials; 288 participants; RR 2.9; 95% CI 1.8 to 4.7; moderate quality evidence) when they received cannabinoids compared with placebo. The percentage of variability in effect estimates that was due to heterogeneity rather than chance was not important (I(2) = 0% in both analyses).People had more chance of withdrawing due to an adverse event (2 trials; 276 participants; RR 6.9; 95% CI 1.96 to 24; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence) and less chance of withdrawing due to lack of efficacy when they received cannabinoids, compared with placebo (1 trial; 228 participants; RR 0.05; 95% CI 0.0 to 0.89; low quality evidence). In addition, people had more chance of 'feeling high' when they received cannabinoids compared with placebo (3 trials; 137 participants; RR 31; 95% CI 6.4 to 152; I(2) = 0%).People reported a preference for cannabinoids rather than placebo (2 trials; 256 participants; RR 4.8; 95% CI 1.7 to 13; low quality evidence). Comparison with other anti-emetics There was no evidence of a difference between cannabinoids and prochlorperazine in the proportion of participants reporting no nausea (5 trials; 258 participants; RR 1.5; 95% CI 0.67 to 3.2; I(2) = 63%; low quality evidence), no vomiting (4 trials; 209 participants; RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.44; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence), or complete absence of nausea and vomiting (4 trials; 414 participants; RR 2.0; 95% CI 0.74 to 5.4; I(2) = 60%; low quality evidence). Sensitivity analysis where the two parallel group trials were pooled after removal of the five cross-over trials showed no difference (RR 1.1; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.7) with no heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%).People had more chance of withdrawing due to an adverse event (5 trials; 664 participants; RR 3.9; 95% CI 1.3 to 12; I(2) = 17%; low quality evidence), due to lack of efficacy (1 trial; 42 participants; RR 3.5; 95% CI 1.4 to 8.9; very low quality evidence) and for any reason (1 trial; 42 participants; RR 3.5; 95% CI 1.4 to 8.9; low quality evidence) when they received cannabinoids compared with prochlorperazine.People had more chance of reporting dizziness (7 trials; 675 participants; RR 2.4; 95% CI 1.8 to 3.1; I(2) = 12%), dysphoria (3 trials; 192 participants; RR 7.2; 95% CI 1.3 to 39; I(2) = 0%), euphoria (2 trials; 280 participants; RR 18; 95% CI 2.4 to 133; I(2) = 0%), 'feeling high' (4 trials; 389 participants; RR 6.2; 95% CI 3.5 to 11; I(2) = 0%) and sedation (8 trials; 947 participants; RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.2 to 1.8; I(2) = 31%), with significantly more participants reporting the incidence of these adverse events with cannabinoids compared with prochlorperazine.People reported a preference for cannabinoids rather than prochlorperazine (7 trials; 695 participants; RR 3.3; 95% CI 2.2 to 4.8; I(2) = 51%; low quality evidence).In comparisons with metoclopramide, domperidone and chlorpromazine, there was weaker evidence, based on fewer trials and participants, for higher incidence of dizziness with cannabinoids.Two trials with 141 participants compared an anti-emetic drug alone with a cannabinoid added to the anti-emetic drug. There was no evidence of differences between groups; however, the majority of the analyses were based on one small trial with few events. Quality of the evidence The trials were generally at low to moderate risk of bias in terms of how they were designed and do not reflect current chemotherapy and anti-emetic treatment regimens. Furthermore, the quality of evidence arising from meta-analyses was graded as low for the majority of the outcomes analysed, indicating that we are not very confident in our ability to say how well the medications worked. Further research is likely to have an important impact on the results.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Cannabis-based medications may be useful for treating refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. However, methodological limitations of the trials limit our conclusions and further research reflecting current chemotherapy regimens and newer anti-emetic drugs is likely to modify these conclusions.
Topics: Adult; Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Cannabinoids; Chlorpromazine; Dizziness; Domperidone; Euphoria; Humans; Metoclopramide; Nausea; Neoplasms; Prochlorperazine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vomiting
PubMed: 26561338
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009464.pub2