-
Global Spine Journal Sep 2017Systematic review and meta-analysis. (Review)
Review
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review to assess the comparative effectiveness and safety of high-dose methylprednisolone sodium succinate (MPSS) versus no pharmacological treatment in patients with traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI).
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in PubMed and the Cochrane Collaboration Library for literature published between January 1956 and June 17, 2015. Included studies were critically appraised, and Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation methods were used to determine the overall quality of evidence for primary outcomes. Previous systematic reviews on this topic were collated and evaluated using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews scoring system.
RESULTS
The search yielded 723 citations, 13 of which satisfied inclusion criteria. Among these, 6 were primary research articles and 7 were previous systematic reviews. Based on the included research articles, there was moderate evidence that the 24-hour NASCIS II (National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Studies) MPSS regimen has no impact on long-term neurological recovery when all postinjury time points are considered. However, there is also moderate evidence that subjects receiving the same MPSS regimen within 8 hours of injury achieve an additional 3.2 points (95% confidence interval = 0.10 to 6.33; = .04) of motor recovery compared with patients receiving placebo or no treatment.
CONCLUSION
Although safe to administer, a 24-hour NASCIS II MPSS regimen, when all postinjury time points are considered, has no impact on indices of long-term neurological recovery. When commenced within 8 hours of injury, however, a high-dose 24-hour regimen of MPSS confers a small positive benefit on long-term motor recovery and should be considered a treatment option for patients with SCI.
PubMed: 29164020
DOI: 10.1177/2192568217706366 -
Clinical Endocrinology Nov 2017The outcomes of patients with metastatic phaeochromocytoma (PHEO) and paraganglioma (PGL) are unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of baseline... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
The outcomes of patients with metastatic phaeochromocytoma (PHEO) and paraganglioma (PGL) are unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of baseline characteristics and mortality rates of patients with metastatic PHEO and PGL (PPGL).
DESIGN
Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, and references of key articles were searched from inception to 2016.
PATIENTS
Studies comprised ≥20 patients with metastatic PPGL and reported baseline characteristics and follow-up data.
MEASUREMENTS
Reviewers extracted standardized data and assessed risk of bias using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa tool. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool event rates across studies.
RESULTS
Twenty retrospective noncomparative studies reported on 1338 patients with metastatic PHEO (685/1296, 52.9%) and PGL (611/1296, 47.1%), diagnosed at a mean age of 43.9 ± 5.2 years. Mean follow-up was 6.3 ± 3.2 years. Of 532 patients with reported data, 40.4% had synchronous metastases. Five-year (7 studies, n = 738) and 10-year (2 studies, n = 55) mortality rates for patients with metastatic PPGL were 37% (95% CI, 24%-51%) and 29% (95% CI, 17%-42%), respectively. Higher mortality was associated with male sex (RR 1.50; 95% CI, 1.11-2.02) and synchronous metastases (RR 2.43; 95% CI, 1.01-5.85).
CONCLUSIONS
Available low-quality evidence from heterogeneous studies suggests low mortality rates of patients with metastatic PPGL. Male sex and synchronous metastases correlated with increased mortality. The outcomes of patients with metastatic PPGL have been inadequately assessed, indicating the need for carefully planned prospective studies.
Topics: Adrenal Gland Neoplasms; Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mortality; Neoplasm Metastasis; Paraganglioma; Pheochromocytoma; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28746746
DOI: 10.1111/cen.13434 -
The Journal of Urology Nov 2023Ureteral stents are commonly used for the treatment of ureteral obstruction, most often urolithiasis. Their use may be associated with significant bothersome symptoms... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Ureteral stents are commonly used for the treatment of ureteral obstruction, most often urolithiasis. Their use may be associated with significant bothersome symptoms and discomfort. Prior studies have examined the effects of various medication regimens on ureteral stent symptoms. This study utilized Bayesian network meta-analysis to analyze all available evidence on the pharmacological management of ureteral stent-related symptoms.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In December 2022 a systematic review was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines on randomized prospective studies on pharmacological management of ureteral stent-related symptoms reporting outcomes using the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire score on urinary symptoms and pain. The data were analyzed in Review Manager 5.3 and R Studio where a Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. Treatments were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking curve and mean difference vs placebo with 95% credible intervals.
RESULTS
A total of 26 studies were analyzed. These were used to build networks which were modeled to run 100,000 Markov Chain Montecarlo simulations each. Drug-class analysis revealed the most effective class for each domain: for urinary symptoms, sexual performance, general health, and work performance-combined α-blocker and anticholinergic and phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors; for pain-combined anticholinergic and pregabalin. The following were the most effective drugs and dosages for specific symptoms: for urinary symptoms-combined silodosin 8 mg+solifenacin 10 mg; for pain-combined silodosin 8 mg+solifenacin 10 mg; for sexual performance-tadalafil 5 mg. Combined silodosin 8 mg+solifenacin 10 mg+tadalafil 5 mg has the best general health scores while solifenacin 10 mg had the best work experience scores.
CONCLUSIONS
This network meta-analysis demonstrated that the most effective drug therapy is different for each symptom domain. It is important to consider a patient's chief complaint and domains in order to ascertain the optimal medication regimen for each patient. Further iterations of this analysis can be strengthened by trials that directly compare more of these drugs instead of relying on indirect evidence.
Topics: Humans; Solifenacin Succinate; Tadalafil; Network Meta-Analysis; Prospective Studies; Bayes Theorem; Quality of Life; Ureter; Pain; Cholinergic Antagonists; Stents
PubMed: 37428119
DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000003616 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2015It has been suggested that the severity of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms is positively correlated with the level of circulating or stored toxic metals, and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
It has been suggested that the severity of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms is positively correlated with the level of circulating or stored toxic metals, and that excretion of these heavy metals, brought about by the use of pharmaceutical chelating agents, results in improved symptoms.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the potential benefits and adverse effects of pharmaceutical chelating agents (referred to as chelation therapy throughout this review) for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases on 6 November 2014: CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process, Embase,PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and 15 other databases, including three trials registers. In addition we checked references lists and contacted experts.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials of pharmaceutical chelating agents compared with placebo in individuals with ASD.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed them for risk of bias and extracted relevant data. We did not conduct a meta-analysis, as only one study was included.
MAIN RESULTS
We excluded nine studies because they were non-randomised trials or were withdrawn before enrolment.We included one study, which was conducted in two phases. During the first phase of the study, 77 children with ASD were randomly assigned to receive seven days of glutathione lotion or placebo lotion, followed by three days of oral dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA). Forty-nine children who were found to be high excreters of heavy metals during phase one continued on to phase two to receive three days of oral DMSA or placebo followed by 11 days off, with the cycle repeated up to six times. The second phase thus assessed the effectiveness of multiple doses of oral DMSA compared with placebo in children who were high excreters of heavy metals and who received a three-day course of oral DMSA. Overall, no evidence suggests that multiple rounds of oral DMSA had an effect on ASD symptoms.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review included data from only one study, which had methodological limitations. As such, no clinical trial evidence was found to suggest that pharmaceutical chelation is an effective intervention for ASD. Given prior reports of serious adverse events, such as hypocalcaemia, renal impairment and reported death, the risks of using chelation for ASD currently outweigh proven benefits. Before further trials are conducted, evidence that supports a causal link between heavy metals and autism and methods that ensure the safety of participants are needed.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Chelating Agents; Chelation Therapy; Child; Child Development Disorders, Pervasive; Child, Preschool; Female; Glutathione; Humans; Male; Metals, Heavy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Cream; Succimer
PubMed: 26106752
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010766 -
Journal of Proteome Research Jul 2017Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a complex disease posing diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Metabonomics may aid in the diagnosis of AAA, determination of... (Review)
Review
Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a complex disease posing diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Metabonomics may aid in the diagnosis of AAA, determination of individualized risk, discovery of therapeutic targets, and improve understanding of pathogenesis. A systematic review of the diversity and outcomes of existing AAA metabonomic research has been performed. Original research studies applying metabonomics to human aneurysmal disease are included. Seven relevant articles were identified: four studies were based on plasma/serum metabolite profiling, and three studies examined aneurysmal tissue. Aminomalonic acid, guanidinosuccinic acid, and glycerol emerge as potential plasma biomarkers of large aneurysm. Lipid profiling improves predictive models of aneurysm presence. Patterns of metabolite variation associated with AAA relate to carbohydrate and lipid metabolism. Perioperative perturbations in metabolites suggest differential systemic inflammatory responses to surgery, generating hypotheses for adjunctive perioperative therapy. Significant limitations include small study sizes, lack of correction for multiple testing false discovery rates, and single time-point sampling. Metabolic profiling carries the potential to identify biomarkers of AAA and elucidate pathways underlying aneurysmal disease. Statistically and methodologically robust studies are required for validation, addressing the hiatus in understanding mechanisms of aneurysm growth and developing effective treatment strategies.
Topics: Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Biomarkers; Disease Progression; Glycerol; Guanidines; Humans; Lipoxins; Malonates; Metabolome; Metabolomics; Prognosis; Succinates; Thromboxane B2
PubMed: 28287739
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.6b00894 -
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology Apr 2017Facial seborrheic dermatitis (SD), a chronic inflammatory skin condition, can impact quality of life, and relapses can be frequent. Three broad categories of agents are... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Facial seborrheic dermatitis (SD), a chronic inflammatory skin condition, can impact quality of life, and relapses can be frequent. Three broad categories of agents are used to treat SD: antifungal agents, keratolytics, and corticosteroids. Topical therapies are the first line of defense in treating this condition.
OBJECTIVE
Our objective was to critically review the published literature on topical treatments for facial SD.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane library databases for original clinical studies evaluating topical treatments for SD. We then conducted both a critical analysis of the selected studies by grading the evidence and a qualitative comparison of results among and within studies.
RESULTS
A total of 32 studies were eligible for inclusion, encompassing 18 topical treatments for facial SD. Pimecrolimus, the focus of seven of the 32 eligible studies, was the most commonly studied topical treatment.
CONCLUSION
Promiseb, desonide, mometasone furoate, and pimecrolimus were found to be effective topical treatments for facial SD, as they had the lowest recurrence rate, highest clearance rate, and the lowest severity scores (e.g., erythema, scaling, and pruritus), respectively. Ciclopirox olamine, ketoconazole, lithium (gluconate and succinate), and tacrolimus are also strongly recommended (level A recommendations) topical treatments for facial SD, as they are consistently effective across high-quality trials (randomized controlled trials).
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Antifungal Agents; Calcineurin Inhibitors; Ciclopirox; Dermatitis, Seborrheic; Dermatologic Agents; Desonide; Facial Dermatoses; Humans; Ketoconazole; Malassezia; Mometasone Furoate; Plant Preparations; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Pyridones; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tacrolimus; Treatment Outcome; Vitamins
PubMed: 27804089
DOI: 10.1007/s40257-016-0232-2 -
Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine... Apr 2015To evaluate systematically the clinical efficacy and safety of potassium dehydroandrographolide succinate injection (PDS) in treatment of infantile pneumonia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate systematically the clinical efficacy and safety of potassium dehydroandrographolide succinate injection (PDS) in treatment of infantile pneumonia.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of infantile pneumonia treated by PDS were searched in China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, China Science and Technology Journal Database, Wanfang Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, and Cochrane Library, from January 1979 to July 2013. Two reviewers independently retrieved the RCTs and extracted the information. The quality of included studies was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias, and a Meta-analysis was conducted with Review Manager 5.2 software.
RESULTS
A total of 9 studies with 1056 participants were included. The quality of the studies was generally no high, only one study mentioned the random method. The Meta-analysis indicated that PDS was significantly superior to the conventional therapy in the total effective rate [relative risk (RR) = 1.21, 95% CI (1.14, 1.27), P < 0.000 01], the time of temperature recovery [mean difference (MD) = -1.43, 95% CI (-1.75, -1.11), P < 0.000 01], rale disappeared and cough relieving [MD = -1.44, 95% CI (-1.93, -0.90), P < 0.000 01]. Six adverse drug reactions from five studies mainly represented rash and diarrhea, and no serious ADRs were reported.
CONCLUSION
Based on this systematic review, PDS was proved effective and relatively safe in treatment of infantile pneumonia. However the articles enrolled in the study were not high in quality, studies with higher quality should be conducted for assessment of efficacy and safety of PDS in treatment of infantile pneumonia.
Topics: Diterpenes; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Newborn, Diseases; Phytotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Succinic Acid
PubMed: 25975044
DOI: 10.1016/s0254-6272(15)30019-4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Acute bacterial meningitis is a bacterial infection of the membranes that surround and protect the brain, known as the meninges. The primary therapy for bacterial... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute bacterial meningitis is a bacterial infection of the membranes that surround and protect the brain, known as the meninges. The primary therapy for bacterial meningitis is antibiotics and corticosteroids. Although these therapies significantly improve outcomes, bacterial meningitis still has a high risk of death and a high risk of neurological sequelae in survivors. New adjuvant therapies are needed to further reduce the risk of death and neurological sequelae in bacterial meningitis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of non-corticosteroid adjuvant pharmacological therapies for mortality, hearing loss, and other neurological sequelae in people with acute bacterial meningitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and LILACS databases and ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP trials registers up to 30 September 2021, together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any pharmacological adjuvant therapy for acute bacterial meningitis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed and extracted data on methods, participants, interventions, and outcomes. We assessed risk of bias of studies with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We presented results using risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) when meta-analysis was possible. All other results are presented in a narrative synthesis.
MAIN RESULTS
We found that five different adjuvant therapies have been tested in RCTs for bacterial meningitis. These include paracetamol (3 studies, 1274 participants who were children); immunoglobulins (2 studies, 49 participants; one study included children, and the other adults); heparin (1 study, 15 participants who were adults); pentoxifylline (1 study, 57 participants who were children); and a mixture of succinic acid, inosine, nicotinamide, and riboflavin mononucleotide (1 study, 30 participants who were children). Paracetamol may make little or no difference to mortality (paracetamol 35.2% versus placebo 37.4%, 95% CI 30.3% to 40.8%; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.09; 3 studies, 1274 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence); hearing loss (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.34; 2 studies, 901 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence); neurological sequelae other than hearing loss (RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.50; 3 studies, 1274 participants; I² = 60%; low certainty evidence); and severe hearing loss (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.36; 2 studies, 901 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence). Paracetamol may lead to slightly more short-term neurological sequelae other than hearing loss (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.81; 2 studies, 1096 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence) and slightly more long-term neurological sequelae other than hearing loss (RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.34 to 4.04; 2 studies, 901 participants; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence). No adverse events were reported in either group in any of the paracetamol studies (very low certainty evidence). Two paracetamol studies had a low risk of bias in most domains, and one had low or unclear risk of bias in all domains. We judged the certainty of evidence to be low for mortality due to limitations in study design (unclear risk of bias in at least one domain and imprecision (high level of uncertainty in absolute effects), and low for all other outcomes due to limitations in study design (unclear risk of bias in at least one domain), and imprecision (low sample size and few events) or inconsistency in effect estimates (heterogeneity). We were not able to perform meta-analysis for any of the other adjuvant therapies due to the limited number of included studies. It is uncertain whether immunoglobulins, heparin, or pentoxifylline improves mortality outcomes due to the very low certainty of the evidence. Zero adverse events were reported for immunoglobulins (very low certainty evidence), and allergic reactions occurred at a rate of 3.3% in participants receiving a mixture of succinic acid, inosine, nicotinamide, and riboflavin mononucleotide (intervention group) (very low certainty evidence). None of our other outcomes (hearing loss, neurological sequelae other than hearing loss, severe hearing loss, and short-term or long-term neurological sequelae other than hearing loss) were reported in these studies, and all of these studies were judged to have a high risk of bias. All reported outcomes for all included adjuvant therapies, other than paracetamol, were graded as very low certainty of evidence due to limitations in study design (unclear or high risk of bias in at least four domains) and imprecision (extremely low sample size and few events).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Few adjuvant therapies for bacterial meningitis have been tested in RCTs. Paracetamol may make little or no difference to mortality, with a high level of uncertainty in the absolute effects (low certainty evidence). Paracetamol may make little or no difference to hearing loss, neurological sequelae other than hearing loss, and severe hearing loss (all low certainty evidence). Paracetamol may lead to slightly more short-term and long-term neurological sequelae other than hearing loss (both outcomes low certainty evidence). There is insufficient evidence to determine whether any of the adjuvant therapies included in this review (paracetamol, immunoglobulins, heparin, pentoxifylline, or a mixture of succinic acid, inosine, nicotinamide, and riboflavin mononucleotide) are beneficial or detrimental in acute bacterial meningitis.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Hearing Loss; Humans; Meningitis, Bacterial
PubMed: 34813078
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013437.pub2 -
Head & Neck Jul 2024Head and neck paragangliomas (HNPs) have been associated with gene mutations in the succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) complex, but the clinical significance remains unclear.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Head and neck paragangliomas (HNPs) have been associated with gene mutations in the succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) complex, but the clinical significance remains unclear. We sought to explore the demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment methods, and outcomes of SDH-mutated HNPs.
METHODS
Databases were systematically searched. Pooled event ratio and relative 95% confidence intervals were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. Meta-regression was performed. Cochran's Q test and I test assessed heterogeneity. Funnel plot and Egger's regression test assessed publication bias.
RESULTS
Forty-two studies with 8849 patients were included. Meta-regression revealed a significant correlation between multifocality and SDHD mutations (0.03 ± 0.006, p < 0.0001) and between distant metastases and SDHB mutations (0.06 ± 0.023, p = 0.008). There was no correlation between sex, age, tumor size, or familial occurrences and SDH-related mutations.
CONCLUSION
Multifocality of HNPs correlates with the SDHD mutational subtype, and metastases correlate with the SDHB subtype. Knowledge of HNP phenotypes associated with SDH-related mutations has the potential to influence the management approach to such HNPs.
Topics: Humans; Succinate Dehydrogenase; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Paraganglioma; Mutation; Female; Male
PubMed: 38273766
DOI: 10.1002/hed.27652 -
Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine... Oct 2016To assess the effect and safety of Shengxuening (SXN), extract from excrement of bombyxin, in the treatment of renal anemia, compared to ferrous succinate and ferrous... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effect and safety of Shengxuening (SXN), extract from excrement of bombyxin, in the treatment of renal anemia, compared to ferrous succinate and ferrous sulfate.
METHODS
According to the participant, intervention, comparison, outcomes, study design (PICOS) principles, we searched the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Chinese Evidence-Based Medicine Database, Wanfang Database (From establishment to December 2014). Two reviewers selected articles independently according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality of included studies was assessed by using the Cochrane Handbook. All statistical analyses were conducted by using Revman (vision 5.2) software.
RESULTS
A total of 14 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were enrolled in the review. The results revealed that, when compared with blank group, SXN significantly improved the hemoglobin (P >) levels [MD = 6.29, 95% CI (1.65-10.94), P < 0.0008] and albumin (ALB) [MD = 10.98, 95% CI (6.97-14.99), P < 0.00001]. In addition, SXN could significantly increase the P > levels [MD = 10.98, 95% CI (6.97, 14.99), P < 0.00001]. Compared with other oral medicine SXN could improve the P > levels effectively [MD = 8.49, 95% CI (2.40, 14.58), P = 0.006]. And the subgroups analysis shown that compared with ferrous-sulfate there were significant differences [MD = 17.4, 95% CI (15.06, 19.73), P < 0.000 01] and the result of ferrous-succinate had significant differences [MD = 5.34, 95% CI (2.12, 8.56), P = 0.001] too. Compared with Intravenous iron groups, there were statistical differences [MD = - 5.04, 95% CI (- 9.59, - 0.50), P = 0.03]. In the safety analysis, the rate of adverse reactions in SXN groups and control groups were 19.3% and 3.7%, respectively (P < 0.000 01). Due to our studies were of poor methodological quality, and the sample size were small, the results were influenced by bias.
CONCLUSION
Our findings suggest that the SXN had better effect and was safer in the treatment of RA than ferrous succinate and ferrous sulfate.
Topics: Anemia; Animals; Bombyx; China; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Humans; Neuropeptides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 29932629
DOI: 10.1016/s0254-6272(16)30077-2