-
Epilepsy & Behavior : E&B Feb 2021To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize and quantitatively evaluate the electroencephalogram (EEG) findings in patients with coronavirus disease... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize and quantitatively evaluate the electroencephalogram (EEG) findings in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
METHODS
The MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.Gov databases were comprehensively assessed and searched for observational studies with EEG findings in patients with COVID-19. Pooled proportions of EEG findings with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were assessed using a random effects model. The quality of assessment for each study, heterogeneity between the studies, and publication bias were also evaluated.
RESULTS
In total, 12 studies with 308 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Abnormal background activity and generalized slowing in the pooled proportions were common findings among the patients with COVID-19 (96.1% [95% CI: 89.4-99.9]; I = 60%; p < 0.01 and 92.3% [95% CI: 81.2-99.3]; I = 74%; p < 0.01, respectively). The proportion of patients with epileptiform discharges (EDs) was 20.3% ([95% CI: 9.85-32.9]; I = 78%; p < 0.01). The proportion of EDs varied between patients with a history of epilepsy or seizures (59.5% [95% CI: 33.9-83.2]; I = 0%; p = 0.49) and patients without them (22.4% [95% CI: 10.4-36.4]; I = 46%; p = 0.07). The findings of seizures and status epilepticus on EEG were observed in 2.05% ([95% CI: 0.02-6.04]; I = 39%; p = 0.08) and 0.80% ([95% CI: 0.00.-3.69]; I = 28%; p = 0.17) of the patients, respectively.
CONCLUSION
The proportion of abnormal background activity in patients with COVID-19 was high (96.1%). Epileptiform discharges were present in 20.3% of the cases and the proportion varied between people who had a history of epilepsy/seizure and those who did not. However, the proportion of seizures and status epilepticus on EEG was low (2.05% and 0. 80%, respectively).
Topics: COVID-19; Clinical Trials as Topic; Electroencephalography; Epilepsy; Humans
PubMed: 33342709
DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2020.107682 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Nov 2021Vascular punctures are widely used in clinical applications; however, clinical trials have identified complications and poor prognosis for patients undergoing common... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Vascular punctures are widely used in clinical applications; however, clinical trials have identified complications and poor prognosis for patients undergoing common peripheral vein puncture as compared to ultrasound-guided peripheral venipuncture and catheterization. Ultrasound-guided peripheral venipuncture and catheterization is accurate, simple, has fewer associated complications, and will gradually take the place of common peripheral vein puncture.
METHODS
To study the safety of ultrasound-guided peripheral venous catheterization, a meta-analysis was conducted of relevant articles dating from establishment date of the database (such as PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE) to March 2021, with the search keywords being peripheral venipuncture, ultrasound guidance, vascular injury rate, and hematoma formation rate. A total of 8 trials were used to determine accuracy indicators, which included puncture failure rate, arterial injury rate, hematoma formation rate, pneumothorax incidence rate, and hemothorax incidence rate.
RESULTS
There were statistically significant differences between the two methods for peripheral venipuncture and catheterization in terms of puncture failure rate [odds ratio (OR) =0.08; 95% CI: 0.04-0.16; P<0.00001], incidence of vascular injury (OR =0.15; 95% CI: 0.07-0.32; P<0.00001), probability of hematoma formation during the puncture process (OR =0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.69; P=0.008), and probability of pneumothorax during puncture (OR =0.10; 95% CI: 0.02-0.55; P=0.008).
DISCUSSION
Eight articles were included for meta-analysis. Ultrasound-guided peripheral venipuncture and catheterization is a commonly used puncture method for patients needing rapid fluid infusion with pressure or a pressure pump, repeated transfusion of blood product, or multiple daily venous blood drawing test. The results were very clear, and the puncture failure rate and other complications of ultrasound-guided peripheral venipuncture catheterization were low.
Topics: Catheterization, Central Venous; Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Incidence; Phlebotomy; Ultrasonography; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 34872297
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-3163 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2018Impaired mucociliary clearance characterises lung disease in cystic fibrosis (CF). Hypertonic saline enhances mucociliary clearance and may lessen the destructive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Impaired mucociliary clearance characterises lung disease in cystic fibrosis (CF). Hypertonic saline enhances mucociliary clearance and may lessen the destructive inflammatory process in the airways. This is an update of a previously published review.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate efficacy and tolerability of treatment with nebulised hypertonic saline on people with CF compared to placebo and or other treatments that enhance mucociliary clearance.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched ongoing trials databases.Date of most recent searches: 08 August 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials assessing hypertonic saline compared to placebo or other mucolytic therapy, for any duration or dose regimen in people with CF (any age or disease severity).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently reviewed all identified trials and data, and assessed trial quality. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 17 trials (966 participants, aged 4 months to 63 years) were included; 19 trials were excluded, three trials are ongoing and 16 are awaiting classification. We judged 14 of the 17 included trials to have a high risk of bias due to participants ability to discern the taste of the solutions.Hypertonic saline 3% to 7% versus placeboAt four weeks, we found very low-quality evidence from three placebo-controlled trials (n = 225) that hypertonic saline (3% to 7%, 10 mL twice-daily) increased the mean change from baseline of the forced expiratory volume at one second (FEV) (% predicted) by 3.44% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 6.21), but there was no difference between groups in lung clearance index in one small trial (n = 10). By 48 weeks the effect was slightly smaller in one trial (n = 134), 2.31% (95% CI -2.72 to 7.34) (low-quality evidence). No deaths occurred in the trials. Two trials reporting data on exacerbations were not combined as the age difference between the participants in the trials was too great. One trial (162 adults) found 0.5 fewer exacerbations requiring antibiotics per person in the hypertonic saline group; the second trial (243 children, average age of two years) found no difference between groups (low-quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence reported across the trials to determine the rate of different adverse events such as cough, chest tightness, tonsillitis and vomiting (very low-quality evidence). Four trials (n = 80) found very low-quality evidence that sputum clearance was better with hypertonic saline.A further trial was performed in adults with an acute exacerbation of lung disease (n = 132). The effects of hypertonic saline on short-term lung function, 5.10% higher (14.67% lower to 24.87% higher) and the time to the subsequent exacerbation post-discharge, hazard ratio 0.86 (95% CI 0.57 to 1.30) are uncertain (low-quality evidence). No deaths were reported. Cough and wheeze were reported but no serious adverse events (very low-quality evidence).Hypertonic saline versus mucus mobilising treatments Three trials compared a similar dose of hypertonic saline to recombinant deoxyribonuclease (rhDNase); two (61 participants) provided data for inclusion in the review. There was insufficient evidence from one three-week trial (14 participants) to determine the effects of hypertonic saline on FEV % predicted, mean difference (MD) 1.60% (95% CI -7.96 to 11.16) (very low-quality evidence). In the second trial, rhDNase led to a greater increase in FEV % predicted than hypertonic saline (5 mL twice daily) at 12 weeks in participants with moderate to severe lung disease, MD 8.00% (95% CI 2.00 to 14.00) (low-quality evidence). One cross-over trial (47 participants) reported 15 exacerbations during treatment with hypertonic saline and 18 exacerbations in the rhDNase group (low-quality evidence). Increased cough was reported in 13 participants using hypertonic saline and 17 on daily rhDNase in one cross-over trial of 47 people (low-quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to assess rates of other adverse events reported. No deaths were reported.One trial (12 participants) compared hypertonic saline to amiloride and one (29 participants) to sodium-2-mercaptoethane sulphonate. Neither trial found a difference between treatments in any measures of sputum clearance; additionally the comparison of hypertonic saline and sodium-2-mercaptoethane sulphonate reported no differences in courses of antibiotics or adverse events (very low-quality evidence).One trial (12 participants) compared hypertonic saline to mannitol but did not report lung function at relevant time points for this review; there were no differences in sputum clearance, but mannitol was reported to be more 'irritating' (very low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Regular use of nebulised hypertonic saline by adults and children over the age of 12 years with CF results in an improvement in lung function after four weeks (very low-quality evidence from three trials), but this was not sustained at 48 weeks (low-quality evidence from one trial). The review did show that nebulised hypertonic saline reduced the frequency of pulmonary exacerbations (although we found insufficient evidence for this outcome in children under six years of age) and may have a small effect on improvement in quality of life in adults.Evidence from one small cross-over trial in children indicates that rhDNase may lead to better lung function at three months; qualifying this we highlight that while the study did demonstrate that the improvement in FEV was greater with daily rHDNase, there were no differences seen in any of the secondary outcomes.Hypertonic saline does appear to be an effective adjunct to physiotherapy during acute exacerbations of lung disease in adults. However, for the outcomes assessed, the quality of the evidence ranged from very low to at best moderate, according to the GRADE criteria.
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Cystic Fibrosis; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Mucociliary Clearance; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Saline Solution, Hypertonic
PubMed: 30260472
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001506.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2015Telerehabilitation, an emerging method, extends rehabilitative care beyond the hospital, and facilitates multifaceted, often psychotherapeutic approaches to modern... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Telerehabilitation, an emerging method, extends rehabilitative care beyond the hospital, and facilitates multifaceted, often psychotherapeutic approaches to modern management of patients using telecommunication technology at home or in the community. Although a wide range of telerehabilitation interventions are trialed in persons with multiple sclerosis (pwMS), evidence for their effectiveness is unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the effectiveness and safety of telerehabilitation intervention in pwMS for improved patient outcomes. Specifically, this review addresses the following questions: does telerehabilitation achieve better outcomes compared with traditional face-to-face intervention; and what types of telerehabilitation interventions are effective, in which setting and influence which specific outcomes (impairment, activity limitation and participation)?
SEARCH METHODS
We performed a literature search using the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Review Group Specialised Register( 9 July, 2014.) We handsearched the relevant journals and screened the reference lists of identified studies, and contacted authors for additional data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) that reported telerehabilitation intervention/s in pwMS and compared them with some form of control intervention (such as lower level or different types of intervention, minimal intervention, waiting-list controls or no treatment (or usual care); interventions given in different settings) in adults with MS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. Three review authors assessed the methodological quality of studies using the GRADEpro software (GRADEpro 2008) for best-evidence synthesis. A meta-analysis was not possible due to marked methodological, clinical and statistical heterogeneity between included trials and between measurement tools used. Hence, we performed a best-evidence synthesis using a qualitative analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine RCTs, one with two reports, (N = 531 participants, 469 included in analyses) investigated a variety of telerehabilitation interventions in adults with MS. The mean age of participants varied from 41 to 52 years (mean 46.5 years) and mean years since diagnosis from 7.7 to 19.0 years (mean 12.3 years). The majority of the participants were women (proportion ranging from 56% to 87%, mean 74%) and with a relapsing-remitting course of MS. These interventions were complex, with more than one rehabilitation component and included physical activity, educational, behavioural and symptom management programmes.All studies scored 'low' on the methodological quality assessment. Overall, the review found 'low-level' evidence for telerehabilitation interventions in reducing short-term disability and symptoms such as fatigue. There was also 'low-level' evidence supporting telerehabilitation in the longer term for improved functional activities, impairments (such as fatigue, pain, insomnia); and participation measured by quality of life and psychological outcomes. There were limited data on process evaluation (participants'/therapists' satisfaction) and no data available for cost effectiveness. There were no adverse events reported as a result of telerehabilitation interventions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is currently limited evidence on the efficacy of telerehabilitation in improving functional activities, fatigue and quality of life in adults with MS. A range of telerehabilitation interventions might be an alternative method of delivering services in MS populations. There is insufficient evidence to support on what types of telerehabilitation interventions are effective, and in which setting. More robust trials are needed to build evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of these interventions.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Middle Aged; Multiple Sclerosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Telemedicine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25854331
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010508.pub2 -
Medicine Aug 2023Tezepelumab is a human thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) antibody with effects in asthma. Therefore, our study aimed to evaluate the overall efficacy and safety of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Tezepelumab is a human thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) antibody with effects in asthma. Therefore, our study aimed to evaluate the overall efficacy and safety of tezepelumab for the treatment of uncontrolled asthma.
METHODS
The databases Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Clinical Trials were searched from inception to April 1, 2022. Only randomized controlled trial (RCTs) that evaluated tezepelumab and a comparator for treating uncontrolled asthma were included. Additionally, articles were limited to English. The primary outcome was clinical efficacy, and the secondary outcome was adverse events. The risk of bias and quality were assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration bias assessment tool. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager Version 5.3.
RESULTS
Four RCTs with a total of 1600 patients were included in the study. Pooled analysis indicated that tezepelumab had significantly decreased annualized asthma exacerbations (odds ratio [OR] = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.57, -0.80], P < .00001) and the asthma control questionnaire score of 6 (ACQ-6) among the patients (standard mean difference [SMD] = -0.29, 95% CI = [-0.39, -0.20], P < .00001) compared to placebo. Furthermore, tezepelumab treatment significantly improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1, SMD = 0.28, 95% CI = [0.11, 0.45], P = .001). Regarding safety, the pooled analysis indicated that patients treated with tezepelumab showed no significant difference in adverse events that led to discontinuation of the treatment, but they experienced some other (non-serious) adverse events compared to the placebo group. However, there was a significant decrease in the incidence of serious adverse events and any adverse events in the tezepelumab group. Tezepelumab use was associated with adverse events, including nasopharyngitis, headache, and bronchitis, despite effectively treating asthma.
CONCLUSION
Tezepelumab effectively improved FEV1, reduced the disease symptom score, and decreased the risk of exacerbations in uncontrolled asthma patients. Tezepelumab was associated with some adverse events compared to placebo. This suggests that careful management of adverse events is required if tezepelumab is used to treat asthma patients.
Topics: Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Asthma; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37565847
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034746 -
BMC Complementary and Alternative... Feb 2018Saliva is fundamental to our oral health and our well-being. Many factors can impair saliva secretion, such as adverse effects of prescribed medication, auto-immune... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Saliva is fundamental to our oral health and our well-being. Many factors can impair saliva secretion, such as adverse effects of prescribed medication, auto-immune diseases (for example Sjögren's syndrome) and radiotherapy for head and neck cancers. Several studies have suggested a positive effect of acupuncture on oral dryness.
METHODS
Pubmed and Web of Science were electronically searched. Reference lists of the included studies and relevant reviews were manually searched. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were systematically evaluated. Two reviewers assessed each of the included studies to confirm eligibility and assessing the risk of bias.
RESULTS
Ten randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of acupuncture were included. Five trials compared acupuncture to sham/placebo acupuncture. Four trials compared acupuncture to oral hygiene/usual care. Only one clinical trial used oral care sessions as control group. For all the included studies, the quality for all the main outcomes has been assessed as low. Although some publications suggest a positive effect of acupuncture on either salivary flow rate or subjective dry mouth feeling, the studies are inconclusive about the potential effects of acupuncture.
CONCLUSIONS
Insufficient evidence is available to conclude whether acupuncture is an evidence-based treatment option for xerostomia/hyposalivation. Further well-designed, larger, double blinded trials are required to determine the potential benefit of acupuncture. Sample size calculations should be performed before before initiating these studies.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Saliva; Treatment Outcome; Xerostomia
PubMed: 29439690
DOI: 10.1186/s12906-018-2124-x -
Biomedica : Revista Del Instituto... Oct 2020Introduction: Recently, researchers from China and France reported on the effectiveness of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 viral...
Introduction: Recently, researchers from China and France reported on the effectiveness of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 viral replication in vitro. Timely dissemination of scientific information is key in times of pandemic. A systematic review of the effect and safety of these drugs on COVID-19 is urgently needed. Objective: To map published studies until March 25, 2020, on the use of chloroquine and its derivates in patients with COVID-19. Materials and methods: We searched on PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, and 15 registries from the World Health Organization’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for theoretical and empirical research in English, Spanish, Italian, French, or Portuguese until March 25, 2020, and made a narrative synthesis of the results. Results: We included 19 records and 24 trial registries (n=43) including 18,059 patients. China registered 66% (16/24) of the trials. Nine trials evaluate chloroquine exclusively and eight hydroxychloroquine. The records are comments (n=9), in vitro studies (n=3), narrative reviews (n=2), clinical guidelines (n=2), as well as a systematic review, an expert consensus, and a clinical trial. Conclusions: One small (n=26), non-randomized, and flawed clinical trial supports hydroxychloroquine use in patients with COVID-19. There is an urgent need for more clinical trial results to determine the effect and safety of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine on COVID-19.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Chloroquine; Clinical Trials as Topic; Compassionate Use Trials; Coronavirus Infections; Cytokine Release Syndrome; Drug Repositioning; Humans; Hydroxychloroquine; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Pandemics; Pneumonia, Viral; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Registries; SARS-CoV-2; Treatment Outcome; Virus Replication; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 33152192
DOI: 10.7705/biomedica.5478 -
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology Dec 2023To inform clinical practice guidelines, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the management of pneumonia need to address the outcomes that are most important to...
OBJECTIVES
To inform clinical practice guidelines, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the management of pneumonia need to address the outcomes that are most important to patients and health professionals using consistent instruments, to enable results to be compared, contrasted, and combined as appropriate. This systematic review describes the outcomes reported in clinical trials of pneumonia management and the instruments used to measure these outcomes.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
Based on a prospective protocol, we searched MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL and clinical trial registries for ongoing or completed clinical trials evaluating pneumonia management in adults in any clinical setting. We grouped reported outcomes thematically and classified them following the COMET Initiative's taxonomy. We describe instruments used for assessing each outcome.
RESULTS
We found 280 eligible RCTs of which 115 (41.1%) enrolled critically ill patients and 165 (58.9%) predominantly noncritically ill patients. We identified 43 distinct outcomes and 108 measurement instruments, excluding nonvalidated scores and questionnaires. Almost all trials reported clinical/physiological outcomes (97.5%). Safety (63.2%), mortality (56.4%), resource use (48.6%) and life impact (11.8%) outcomes were less frequently addressed. The most frequently reported outcomes were treatment success (60.7%), mortality (56.4%) and adverse events (41.1%). There was significant variation in the selection of measurement instruments, with approximately two-thirds used in less than 10 of the 280 RCTs. None of the patient-reported outcomes were used in 10 or more RCTs.
CONCLUSION
This review reveals significant variation in outcomes and measurement instruments reported in clinical trials of pneumonia management. Outcomes that are important to patients and health professionals are often omitted. Our findings support the need for a rigorous core outcome set, such as that being developed by the European Respiratory Society.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Pneumonia; Treatment Outcome; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37898460
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.10.011 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017Dry eye syndrome is a disorder of the tear film that is associated with symptoms of ocular discomfort. Punctal occlusion is a mechanical treatment that blocks the tear... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dry eye syndrome is a disorder of the tear film that is associated with symptoms of ocular discomfort. Punctal occlusion is a mechanical treatment that blocks the tear drainage system in order to aid in the preservation of natural tears on the ocular surface.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of punctal plugs versus no punctal plugs, different types of punctal plugs, and other interventions for managing dry eye.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 11), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 8 December 2016), Embase.com (1947 to 8 December 2016), PubMed (1948 to 8 December 2016), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database) (1982 to 8 December 2016), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com; last searched 18 November 2012 - this resource is now archived), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov; searched 8 December 2016), and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en; searched 8 December 2016). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We also searched the Science Citation Index-Expanded database and reference lists of included studies. The evidence was last updated on 8 December 2016 SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of collagen or silicone punctal plugs in symptomatic participants diagnosed with aqueous tear deficiency or dry eye syndrome.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study investigators for additional information when needed.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 18 trials (711 participants, 1249 eyes) from Austria, Canada, China, Greece, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, Turkey, the UK, and the USA in this review. We also identified one ongoing trial. Overall we judged these trials to be at unclear risk of bias because they were poorly reported. We assessed the evidence for eight comparisons.Five trials compared punctal plugs with no punctal plugs (control). Three of these trials employed a sham treatment and two trials observed the control group. Two trials did not report outcome data relevant to this review. There was very low-certainty evidence on symptomatic improvement. The three trials that reported this outcome used different scales to measure symptoms. In all three trials, there was little or no improvement in symptom scores with punctal plugs compared with no punctal plugs. Low-certainty evidence from one trial suggested less ocular surface staining in the punctal plug group compared with the no punctal plug group however this difference was small and possibly clinically unimportant (mean difference (MD) in fluorescein staining score -1.50 points, 95% CI -1.88 to -1.12; eyes = 61). Similarly there was a small difference in tear film stability with people in the punctal plug group having more stability (MD 1.93 seconds more, 95% CI 0.67 to 3.20; eyes = 28, low-certainty evidence). The number of artificial tear applications was lower in the punctal plug group compared with the no punctal plugs group in one trial (MD -2.70 applications, 95% CI -3.11 to -2.29; eyes = 61, low-certainty evidence). One trial with low-certainty evidence reported little or no difference between the groups in Schirmer scores, but did not report any quantitative data on aqueous tear production. Very low-certainty evidence on adverse events suggested that events occurred reasonably frequently in the punctal plug group and included epiphora, itching, tenderness and swelling of lids with mucous discharge, and plug displacement.One trial compared punctal plugs with cyclosporine (20 eyes) and one trial compared punctal plugs with oral pilocarpine (55 eyes). The evidence was judged to be very low-certainty due to a combination of risk of bias and imprecision.Five trials compared punctal plugs with artificial tears. In one of the trials punctal plugs was combined with artificial tears and compared with artificial tears alone. There was very low-certainty evidence on symptomatic improvement. Low-certainty evidence of little or no improvement in ocular surface staining comparing punctal plugs with artificial tears (MD right eye 0.10 points higher, 0.56 lower to 0.76 higher, MD left eye 0.60 points higher, 0.10 to 1.10 higher) and low-certainty evidence of little or no difference in aqueous tear production (MD 0.00 mm/5 min, 0.33 lower to 0.33 higher)Three trials compared punctal plugs in the upper versus the lower puncta, and none of them reported the review outcomes at long-term follow-up. One trial with very low-certainty evidence reported no observed complications, but it was unclear which complications were collected.One trial compared acrylic punctal plugs with silicone punctal plugs and the trial reported outcomes at approximately 11 weeks of follow-up (36 eyes). The evidence was judged to be very low-certainty due to a combination of risk of bias and imprecision.One trial compared intracanalicular punctal plugs with silicone punctal plugs at three months follow-up (57 eyes). The evidence was judged to be very low-certainty due to a combination of risk of bias and imprecision.Finally, two trials with very low-certainty evidence compared collagen punctal plugs versus silicone punctal plugs (98 eyes). The evidence was judged to be very low-certainty due to a combination of risk of bias and imprecision.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although the investigators of the individual trials concluded that punctal plugs are an effective means for treating dry eye signs and symptoms, the evidence in this systematic review suggests that improvements in symptoms and commonly tested dry eye signs are inconclusive. Despite the inclusion of 11 additional trials, the findings of this updated review are consistent with the previous review published in 2010. The type of punctal plug investigated, the type and severity of dry eye being treated, and heterogeneity in trial methodology confounds our ability to make decisive statements regarding the effectiveness of punctal plug use. Although punctal plugs are believed to be relatively safe, their use is commonly associated with epiphora and, less commonly, with inflammatory conditions such as dacryocystitis.
Topics: Dry Eye Syndromes; Female; Humans; Lacrimal Apparatus; Male; Punctal Plugs; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tears; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28649802
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006775.pub3 -
PloS One 2017The aim of this systematic review was to document efficacy, safety and quality of evidence of analgesic interventions after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this systematic review was to document efficacy, safety and quality of evidence of analgesic interventions after total knee arthroplasty (TKA).
METHODS
This PRISMA-compliant and PROSPERO-registered review includes all-language randomized controlled trials of medication-based analgesic interventions after TKA. Bias was evaluated according to Cochrane methodology. Outcomes were opioid consumption (primary), pain scores at rest and during mobilization, adverse events, and length of stay. Interventions investigated in three or more trials were meta-analysed. Outcomes were evaluated using forest plots, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), L'Abbe Plots and trial sequential analysis.
RESULTS
The included 113 trials, investigating 37 different analgesic interventions, were characterized by unclear/high risk of bias, low assay sensitivity and considerable differences in pain assessment tools, basic analgesic regimens, and reporting of adverse events. In meta-analyses single and continuous femoral nerve block (FNB), intrathecal morphine, local infiltration analgesia, intraarticular injection of local anaesthetics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and gabapentinoids demonstrated significant analgesic effects. The 24-hour morphine-sparing effects ranged from 4.2 mg (CI: 1.3, 7.2; intraarticular local anaesthetics), to 16.6 mg (CI: 11.2, 22; single FNB). Pain relieving effects at rest at 6 hours ranged from 4 mm (CI: -10, 2; gabapentinoids), to 19 mm (CI: 8, 31; single FNB), and at 24 hours from 3 mm (CI: -2, 8; gabapentinoids), to 16 mm (CI: 8, 23; continuous FNB). GRADE-rated quality of evidence was generally low.
CONCLUSION
A low quality of evidence, small sample sizes and heterogeneity of trial designs prohibit designation of an optimal procedure-specific analgesic regimen after TKA.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Clinical Trials as Topic; Combined Modality Therapy; Humans; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28273133
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173107