-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2023Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic, relapsing disease of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract that is thought to be associated with a complex interplay between the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic, relapsing disease of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract that is thought to be associated with a complex interplay between the immune system, the GI tract lining, the environment, and the gut microbiome, leading to an abnormal inflammatory response in genetically susceptible individuals. An altered composition of the gut's native microbiota, known as dysbiosis, may have a major role in the pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn disease (CD), two subtypes of IBD. There is growing interest in the correction of this underlying dysbiosis using fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and safety profile of FMT for treatment of IBD in adults and children versus autologous FMT, placebo, standard medication, or no intervention.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two clinical trial registries, and the reference sections of published trials through 22 December 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials that studied adults and children with UC or CD. Eligible intervention arms used FMT, defined as the delivery of healthy donor stool containing gut microbiota to a recipient's GI tract, to treat UC or CD.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion. Our primary outcomes were: 1. induction of clinical remission, 2. maintenance of clinical remission, and 3. serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were: 4. any adverse events, 5. endoscopic remission, 6. quality of life, 7. clinical response, 8. endoscopic response, 9. withdrawals, 10. inflammatory markers, and 11. microbiome outcomes. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 studies with 550 participants. Three studies were conducted in Australia; two in Canada; and one in each of the following: China, the Czech Republic, France, India, the Netherlands, and the USA. One study was conducted in both Israel and Italy. FMT was administered in the form of capsules or suspensions and delivered by mouth, nasoduodenal tube, enema, or colonoscopy. One study delivered FMT by both oral capsules and colonoscopy. Six studies were at overall low risk of bias, while the others had either unclear or high risk of bias. Ten studies with 468 participants, of which nine studies focused on adults and one focused on children, reported induction of clinical remission in people with UC at longest follow-up (range 6 to 12 weeks) and showed that FMT may increase rates of induction of clinical remission in UC compared to control (risk ratio (RR) 1.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 2.84; low-certainty evidence). Five studies showed that FMT may increase rates of induction of endoscopic remission in UC at longest follow-up (range 8 to 12 weeks); however, the CIs around the summary estimate were wide and included a possible null effect (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.64 to 3.29; low-certainty evidence). Nine studies with 417 participants showed that FMT may result in little to no difference in rates of any adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.16; low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain about the risk of serious adverse events (RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.88 to 3.55; very low-certainty evidence) and improvement in quality of life (mean difference (MD) 15.34, 95% CI -3.84 to 34.52; very low-certainty evidence) when FMT was used to induce remission in UC. Two studies, of which one also contributed data for induction of remission in active UC, assessed maintenance of remission in people with controlled UC at longest follow-up (range 48 to 56 weeks). The evidence was very uncertain about the use of FMT for maintenance of clinical remission (RR 2.97, 95% CI 0.26 to 34.42; very low-certainty evidence) and endoscopic remission (RR 3.28, 95% CI 0.73 to 14.74; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence was also very uncertain about the risk of serious adverse events, risk of any adverse events, and improvement in quality of life when FMT was used to maintain remission in UC. None of the included studies assessed use of FMT for induction of remission in people with CD. One study with 21 participants reported data on FMT for maintenance of remission in people with CD. The evidence was very uncertain about the use of FMT for maintenance of clinical remission in CD at 24 weeks (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.36 to 4.14; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence was also very uncertain about the risk of serious or any adverse events when FMT was used to maintain remission in CD. None of the studies reported data on use of FMT for maintenance of endoscopic remission or improvement in quality of life in people with CD.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
FMT may increase the proportion of people with active UC who achieve clinical and endoscopic remission. The evidence was very uncertain about whether use of FMT in people with active UC impacted the risk of serious adverse events or improvement in quality of life. The evidence was also very uncertain about the use of FMT for maintenance of remission in people with UC, as well as induction and maintenance of remission in people with CD, and no conclusive statements could be made in this regard. Further studies are needed to address the beneficial effects and safety profile of FMT in adults and children with active UC and CD, as well as its potential to promote longer-term maintenance of remission in UC and CD.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Colitis, Ulcerative; Crohn Disease; Dysbiosis; Fecal Microbiota Transplantation; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Quality of Life; Remission Induction
PubMed: 37094824
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012774.pub3 -
Digestive and Liver Disease : Official... Feb 2023Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are chronic inflammatory disorders of the gut, including eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), gastritis (EoG), duodenitis... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases (EGIDs) are chronic inflammatory disorders of the gut, including eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), gastritis (EoG), duodenitis (EoD), gastroenteritis (EoGE), and colitis (EoC). Available treatments may be ineffective in some patients, and several clinical trials are investigating alternative treatments.
AIM
We performed a systematic review of clinical trials to illustrate EGIDs treatment research trends.
METHODS
We searched clinicaltrials.gov to identify studies investigating EGIDs treatment. For each trial we analysed relevant data, including therapeutic intervention, method of administration, study outcomes, and temporal trends.
RESULTS
For EoE, 66 studies were eligible: 26 testing topical corticosteroids (39.4%), 17 (25.8%) monoclonal antibodies, eight (12.1%) dietary measures, five (7.6%) immunomodulators, one (1.5%) esophageal dilation, and nine (13.6%) other medical treatment strategies. With regard to EoG, EoD, and EoGE, 10 studies were testing monoclonal antibodies (71.5%), one immunomodulators (7.1%), one dietary measures (7.1%), and two other treatments (14.3%). There were no trials for EoC. Ongoing studies on corticosteroids are focused on novel delivery systems, including viscous suspensions, orally disintegrating tablets, or capsules. Increased research on monoclonal antibodies was seen from 2018, with interleukin (IL)-4 receptor-α, IL-5 receptor-α, IL-5, IL-13, IL-15, and Siglec-8 as the targets.
CONCLUSION
Clinical trials on EGIDs are predominantly investigating corticosteroids or monoclonal antibodies. EGIDs therapeutic landscape will be trasnformed imminently.
Topics: Humans; Eosinophilic Esophagitis; Enteritis; Gastritis; Immunologic Factors; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Adrenal Cortex Hormones
PubMed: 35654734
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2022.05.004 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2019Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint is one of the most common shoulder injuries in a sport-active population. The question of whether surgery should be used... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint is one of the most common shoulder injuries in a sport-active population. The question of whether surgery should be used remains controversial. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2010.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of surgical versus conservative (non-surgical) interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocations in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (to June 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2019, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1946 to June 2019), Embase (1980 to June 2019), and LILACS (1982 to June 2019), trial registries, and reference lists of articles. There were no restrictions based on language or publication status.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised and quasi-randomised trials that compared surgical with conservative treatment of acromioclavicular dislocation in adults.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently performed study screening and selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction. We pooled data where appropriate and used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five randomised trials and one quasi-randomised trial. The included trials involved 357 mainly young adults, the majority of whom were male, with acute acromioclavicular dislocation. The strength of the findings in all studies was limited due to design features, invariably lack of blinding, that carry a high risk of bias. Fixation of the acromioclavicular joint using hook plates, tunnelled suspension devices, coracoclavicular screws, acromioclavicular pins, or (usually threaded) wires was compared with supporting the arm in a sling or similar device. After surgery, the arm was also supported in a sling or similar device in all trials. Where described in the trials, both groups had exercise-based rehabilitation. We downgraded the evidence for all outcomes at least two levels, invariably for serious risk of bias and serious imprecision.Low-quality evidence from two studies showed no evidence of a difference between groups in shoulder function at one year, assessed using the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH) (0 (best function) to 100 (worst function)): mean difference (MD) 0.73 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.70 to 4.16; 112 participants. These results were consistent with other measures of function at one-year or longer follow-up, including non-validated outcome scores reported by three studies. There is low-quality evidence that function at six weeks may be better after conservative treatment, indicating an earlier recovery. Very low-quality evidence from one trial found no difference between groups in participants reporting pain at one year: risk ratio (RR) 1.32, 95% CI 0.54 to 3.19; 79 participants. There is very low-quality evidence that surgery may not reduce the risk of treatment failure, usually resulting in non-routine secondary surgery: 14/168 versus 15/174; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.94; 342 participants, 6 studies. The main source of treatment failure was complications related to surgical implants in the surgery group and persistent symptoms, mainly discomfort, due to the acromioclavicular dislocation in the conservatively treated group.There is low-quality evidence from two studies that there may be little or no difference between groups in the return to former activities (sports or work) at one year: 57/67 versus 62/70; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.10; 137 participants, 2 studies. Low-quality but consistent evidence from four studies indicated an earlier recovery in conservatively treated participants compared with those treated with surgery. There is low-quality evidence of no clinically important difference between groups at one year in quality of life scores, measured using the 36-item or 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36 or SF-12) (0-to-100 scale, where 100 is best score), in either the physical component (MD -0.63, 95% CI -2.63 to 1.37; 122 participants, 2 studies) or mental component (MD 0.47 points, 95% CI -1.51 to 2.44; 122 participants). There is very low-quality and clinically heterogenous evidence of a greater risk of an adverse event after surgery: 45/168 versus 16/174; RR 2.82, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.82; 342 participants, 6 studies; I = 48%. Common adverse outcomes were hardware complications or discomfort (18.5%) and infection (8.7%) in the surgery group and persistent symptoms (7.1%), mainly discomfort, in the conservatively treated group. The majority of surgical complications occurred in older studies testing now-outdated devices known for their high risk of complications. The very low-quality evidence from one study (70 participants) means that we are uncertain whether there is a between-group difference in patient dissatisfaction with cosmetic results.It is notable that the evidence for function, return to former activities, and quality of life came from the two most recently conducted studies, which tested currently used devices and interventions in clearly defined participant populations that represented the commonly perceived population for which there is uncertainty over the use of surgery. There were insufficient data to conduct subgroup analysis relating to type of injury and whether surgery involved ligament reconstruction or not.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is low-quality evidence that surgical treatment has no additional benefits in terms of function, return to former activities, and quality of life at one year compared with conservative treatment. There is, however, low-quality evidence that people treated conservatively had improved function at six weeks compared with surgical management. There is very low-quality evidence of little difference between the two treatments in pain at one year, treatment failure usually resulting in secondary surgery, or patient satisfaction with cosmetic result. Although surgery may result in more people sustaining adverse events, this varied between the trials, being more common in techniques such as K-wire fixation that are rarely used today. There remains a need to consider the balance of risks between the individual outcomes: for example, surgical adverse events, including wound infection or dehiscence and hardware complication, against risk of adverse events that may be more commonly associated with conservative treatment such as persistent symptoms or discomfort, or both.There is a need for sufficiently powered, good-quality, well-reported randomised trials of currently used surgical interventions versus conservative treatment for well-defined injuries.
PubMed: 31604007
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007429.pub3 -
Frontiers in Surgery 2023Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a widespread condition affecting from 40% to 60% of women. Reconstructive vaginal surgeries are the most commonly performed procedures to... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a widespread condition affecting from 40% to 60% of women. Reconstructive vaginal surgeries are the most commonly performed procedures to treat POP. Among those, uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS), which is usually performed transvaginally, preserves pelvic statics and dynamics and appears to be an effective method. Laparoscopic USLS is a valid alternative to vaginal approach, and the aim of our review is to confirm its safety and feasibility and to compare clinical outcomes among the procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we systematically searched the PubMed and Scopus databases in December 2022. We made no restriction on the publication year nor on the country. Data about POP-Q recurrence rate (RR), intraoperative and postoperative complications (graded according to Clavien-Dindo classification), readmission rate, and reoperation rate were collected and analyzed. We used comparative studies for meta-analysis.
RESULTS
A total of nine studies fulfilled inclusion criteria: two articles were non-comparative retrospective observational studies, three more articles were comparative studies where laparoscopic USLS was confronted with other surgical techniques (only data of laparoscopic USLS were analyzed), and four were comparative retrospective cohort studies between laparoscopic and vaginal USLS procedures. The comparative studies were enrolled in meta-analysis. Patients were analyzed concerning perioperative risks and the risk of recurrence. The meta-analysis highlighted that there was no clear inferiority of one technique over the other.
DISCUSSION
Laparoscopic USLS is a technique with a low complication rate and low recurrence rate. Indeed, laparoscopic procedure allows better identification of anatomical landmarks and access to retroperitoneum. Moreover, efficacy over time and durability of Laparoscopic (LPS) USLS was also observed. However, these data should be weighed in light of the length of follow-up, which was in a very short range. Further, focused and prospective studies will be necessary to confirm this finding.
PubMed: 37351327
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1180060 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Aug 2018We aimed to systematically review the literature on apical pelvic organ prolapse surgery with uterine preservation compared with prolapse surgeries including... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to systematically review the literature on apical pelvic organ prolapse surgery with uterine preservation compared with prolapse surgeries including hysterectomy and provide evidence-based guidelines.
DATA SOURCES
The sources for our data were MEDLINE, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception to January 2017.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We accepted randomized and nonrandomized studies of uterine-preserving prolapse surgeries compared with those involving hysterectomy.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Studies were extracted for participant information, intervention, comparator, efficacy outcomes, and adverse events, and they were individually and collectively assessed for methodological quality. If 3 or more studies compared the same surgeries and reported the same outcome, a meta-analysis was performed.
RESULTS
We screened 4467 abstracts and identified 94 eligible studies, 53 comparing uterine preservation to hysterectomy in prolapse surgery. Evidence was of moderate quality overall. Compared with hysterectomy plus mesh sacrocolpopexy, uterine preservation with sacrohysteropexy reduces mesh exposure, operative time, blood loss, and surgical cost without differences in prolapse recurrence. Compared with vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral suspension, uterine preservation in the form of laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy improves the C point and vaginal length on the pelvic organ prolapse quantification exam, estimated blood loss, postoperative pain and functioning, and hospital stay, but open abdominal sacrohysteropexy worsens bothersome urinary symptoms, operative time, and quality of life. Transvaginal mesh hysteropexy (vs with hysterectomy) decreases mesh exposure, reoperation for mesh exposure, postoperative bleeding, and estimated blood loss and improves posterior pelvic organ prolapse quantification measurement. Transvaginal uterosacral or sacrospinous hysteropexy or the Manchester procedure compared with vaginal hysterectomy with native tissue suspension both showed improved operative time and estimated blood loss and no worsening of prolapse outcomes with uterine preservation. However, there is a significant lack of data on prolapse outcomes >3 years after surgery, the role of uterine preservation in obliterative procedures, and longer-term risk of uterine pathology after uterine preservation.
CONCLUSION
Uterine-preserving prolapse surgeries improve operating time, blood loss, and risk of mesh exposure compared with similar surgical routes with concomitant hysterectomy and do not significantly change short-term prolapse outcomes. Surgeons may offer uterine preservation as an option to appropriate women who desire this choice during apical prolapse repair.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Female; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; Humans; Hysterectomy; Hysterectomy, Vaginal; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Operative Time; Organ Sparing Treatments; Pain, Postoperative; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Quality of Life; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Recurrence; Reoperation; Surgical Mesh; Treatment Outcome; Vagina
PubMed: 29353031
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.01.018 -
Current Urology Reports May 2015Pelvic organ prolapse is a prevalent condition, with up to 12 % of women requiring surgery in their lifetime. This manuscript reviews the treatment options for apical... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
Pelvic organ prolapse is a prevalent condition, with up to 12 % of women requiring surgery in their lifetime. This manuscript reviews the treatment options for apical prolapse, specifically. Both conservative and surgical management options are acceptable and should be based on patient preferences. Pessaries are the most commonly used conservative management options. Guided pelvic floor muscle training is more beneficial than self-taught Kegel exercises, though may not be effective for high stage or apical prolapse. Surgical treatment options include abdominal and vaginal approaches, the latter of which can be performed open, laparoscopically, and robotically. A systematic review has demonstrated that sacrocolpopexy has better long-term success for treatment of apical prolapse than vaginal techniques, but vaginal surgery can be considered an acceptable alternative. Recent data has demonstrated equal efficacy between uterosacral ligament suspension and sacrospinous ligament suspension at 1 year. To date, two randomized controlled trials have demonstrated equal efficacy between robotic and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Though abdominal approaches may have increased long-term durability, when counseling their patients, surgeons should consider longer operating times and increased pain and cost with these procedures compared to vaginal surgery.
KEY POINTS
• Pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) with a physical therapist is the best approach to conservative management of apical prolapse [10]. • Pessaries should be managed with regular follow-up care to minimize complications [14•]. • Minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy appears as effective as the gold standard abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) [42•]. • Robotic assisted sacrocolpopexy (RASC) and laparoscopic assisted sacrocolpopexy (LASC) are equally effective and should be utilized by pelvic floor surgeons based on their skill level and expertise in laparoscopy [44, 45•]. • Uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) and sacrospinous ligament suspension (SSLS) are considered equally effective procedures and can be combined with a vaginal hysterectomy. • Obliterative procedures are effective but are considered definitive surgery [24••]. • The use of transvaginal mesh has been shown in some studies to be superior to native tissue repairs with regard to anatomic outcomes, but complication rates are higher. Transvaginal mesh should be reserved for surgeons with adequate training so that complications are minimized.
Topics: Disease Management; Female; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; Humans; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Surgery, Computer-Assisted
PubMed: 25874589
DOI: 10.1007/s11934-015-0498-6 -
BJOG : An International Journal of... Dec 2023Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension (LUSLS) is a technique to correct apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) by shortening the uterosacral ligaments with sutures. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension (LUSLS) is a technique to correct apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) by shortening the uterosacral ligaments with sutures.
OBJECTIVE
A systematic review with meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of LUSLS as treatment for apical POP.
SEARCH STRATEGY
PubMed and Cochrane search using 'pelvic organ prolapse', 'laparoscopy' and 'uterosacral', including synonyms.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All articles in English presenting outcome of an original series of women with LUSLS as treatment of apical POP. Case reports were excluded.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Study enrollment was performed by two reviewers. Our primary outcome measures were objective and subjective effectiveness of the procedure. Secondary outcome measures regarded complications and recurrence. Bias was assessed with the Newcastle Ottawa Scale.
MAIN RESULTS
Of 138 hits, 13 studies were included with 933 LUSLS patients. The average follow-up was 22 months. All were nonrandomised cohort studies. The pooled anatomic success rate is 90% for all LUSLS procedures (95% confidence interval [CI] 83.3-95.5). LUSLS with hysterectomy resulted in an anatomic success rate of 96.6% (95% CI 87.5-100) and LUSLS with uterus preservation 83.4% (95% CI 67.7-94.6). The pooled subjective cure rate was 90.5% (95% CI 81.9-96.5). The rate of major complications was 1%.
CONCLUSIONS
Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension (with or without uterus preservation) seems to be an effective and safe treatment for women with apical POP, but long-term prospective trials and randomised controlled trials are necessary to confirm these findings.
Topics: Female; Humans; Treatment Outcome; Prospective Studies; Uterus; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Ligaments; Laparoscopy; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 37271736
DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.17565 -
Obstetrics and Gynecology Jun 2021To systematically review objective and subjective success and complications of apical suspensions for symptomatic uterine or vaginal vault pelvic organ prolapse (POP). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review objective and subjective success and complications of apical suspensions for symptomatic uterine or vaginal vault pelvic organ prolapse (POP).
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and EMBASE (2002-2019) were searched using multiple terms for apical POP surgeries, including comparative studies in French and English.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
From 2,665 records, we included randomized controlled trials and comparative studies of interventions with or without hysterectomy, including abdominal apical reconstruction through open, laparoscopic, or robotic approaches and vaginal apical reconstructions. Repairs using transvaginal mesh, off-the-market products, procedures without apical suspension, and follow-up less than 6 months were excluded.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS
Relative risk (RR) was used to estimate the effect of surgical procedure on each outcome. For each outcome and comparison, a meta-analysis was conducted to pool the RRs when possible. Meta-regression and bias tests were performed when appropriate. The GRADE (Grades for Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system for quality rating and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) reporting were used. Sixty-two articles were included in the review (N=22,792) and 50 studies in the meta-analyses. There was heterogeneity in study quality, techniques used, and outcomes reported. Median follow-up was 1-5 years. Vaginal suspensions showed higher risk of overall and apical anatomic recurrence compared with sacrocolpopexy (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.22-2.74 and RR 2.70, 95% CI 1.33-5.50) (moderate), whereas minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy showed less overall and posterior anatomic recurrence compared with open sacrocolpopexy (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47-0.75 and RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.44-0.80, respectively) (low). Different vaginal approaches, and hysterectomy and suspension compared with hysteropexy had similar anatomic success. Subjective POP recurrence, reintervention for POP recurrence and complications were similar between most procedures.
CONCLUSION
Despite variations in anatomic outcomes, subjective outcomes and complications were similar for apical POP procedures at 1-5 years. Standardization of outcome reporting and comparative studies with longer follow-up are urgently needed.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, CRD42019133869.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Laparoscopy; Observational Studies as Topic; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Recurrence; Reoperation; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Sacrum; Surgical Mesh; Vagina
PubMed: 33957652
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004393 -
American Journal of Therapeutics 2020A good metabolic control before conception and throughout pregnancy with diabetes decreases the risk of short- and long-term adverse outcomes of the mothers and their...
BACKGROUND
A good metabolic control before conception and throughout pregnancy with diabetes decreases the risk of short- and long-term adverse outcomes of the mothers and their offsprings. Insulin treatment remains the gold standard treatment recommended for any type of diabetes. New technologies including new insulins and insulin analogues, continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion without and with sensors, the low-glucose predictive suspension function, and closed-loop systems that persistently and automatically self-adjust according to patients' continuous glucose monitoring readings have expanded the offer to clinicians for achieving tight glucose control.
AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY
Unsafe effects of insulin and insulin analogues in pregnancy with diabetes could be linked with changes in insulin immunogenicity, teratogenicity, and mitogenicity. Second-generation insulin analogues need to be tested and proven. Effectiveness and safety of new insulin delivery systems in real life of diabetic women in pregnancy need further confirmations.
SOURCES
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, randomized controlled trials, systematic review and meta-analysis, observational prospective and retrospective studies, case series reports for the most recent insulin analogues, published in English impacted journals, and consensus statements from scientific societies I excluded 60 from 221 papers as not suitable for the purpose of the subject.
RESULTS
Subcutaneous insulin infusion can be safely used during pregnancy and delivery of well-trained women. Sensors are increasingly accurate tools that improve the efficacy and safety of integrated systems' functioning. Continuous glucose monitoring provides metrics ("time in range" time in "hypoglycemia" and in "hyperglycemia," glucose variability, average glucose levels in different time intervals) used as a guide to diabetes management; these new metrics are object of discussion in special populations. Randomized controlled trials have shown that sensor-augmented pump therapy improves pregnancy outcomes in women with type 1 diabetes. Closed-loop insulin delivery provides better glycemic control than sensor-augmented pump therapy during pregnancy, before, and after delivery.
CONCLUSION
Second-generation insulin analogues and newer insulin infusion systems that automatically self-adjust according to patients continuous glucose monitor readings are important tools improving the treatment and quality of life of these women. Multi-institutional and disciplinary teams are working to develop and evaluate a pregnancy-specific artificial pancreas.
Topics: Blood Glucose; Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring; Diabetes Complications; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Drug Delivery Systems; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin; Insulin Infusion Systems; Insulin-Like Growth Factor I; Pregnancy; Quality of Life
PubMed: 31688066
DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000001095 -
MedRxiv : the Preprint Server For... Sep 2023Beta-cell monogenic forms of diabetes are the area of diabetes care with the strongest support for precision medicine. We reviewed treatment of hyperglycemia in...
BACKGROUND
Beta-cell monogenic forms of diabetes are the area of diabetes care with the strongest support for precision medicine. We reviewed treatment of hyperglycemia in GCK-related hyperglycemia, HNF1A-HNF4A- and HNF1B-diabetes, Mitochondrial diabetes (MD) due to m.3243A>G variant, 6q24-transient neonatal diabetes (TND) and SLC19A2-diabetes.
METHODS
Systematic reviews with data from PubMed, MEDLINE and Embase were performed for the different subtypes. Individual and group level data was extracted for glycemic outcomes in individuals with genetically confirmed monogenic diabetes.
RESULTS
147 studies met inclusion criteria with only six experimental studies and the rest being single case reports or cohort studies. Most studies had moderate or serious risk of bias.For GCK-related hyperglycemia, six studies (N=35) showed no deterioration in HbA1c on discontinuing glucose lowering therapy. A randomized trial (n=18 per group) showed that sulfonylureas (SU) were more effective in HNF1A-diabetes than in type 2 diabetes, and cohort and case studies supported SU effectiveness in lowering HbA1c. Two crossover trials (n=15 and n=16) suggested glinides and GLP-1 receptor agonists might be used in place of SU. Evidence for HNF4A-diabetes was limited. While some patients with HNF1B-diabetes (n=301) and MD (n=250) were treated with oral agents, most were on insulin. There was some support for the use of oral agents after relapse in 6q24-TND, and for thiamine improving glycemic control and reducing insulin requirement in SLC19A2-diabetes (less than half achieved insulin-independency).
CONCLUSION
There is limited evidence to guide the treatment in monogenic diabetes with most studies being non-randomized and small. The data supports: no treatment in GCK-related hyperglycemia; SU for HNF1A-diabetes. Further evidence is needed to examine the optimum treatment in monogenic subtypes.
PubMed: 37214872
DOI: 10.1101/2023.05.12.23289807