-
Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy Feb 2021To evaluate the efficacy and vision-threatening complication rate of plaque brachytherapy with iodine-125 (I), palladium-103 (Pd), and ruthenium-106 (Ru) for treatment... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy and vision-threatening complication rate of plaque brachytherapy with iodine-125 (I), palladium-103 (Pd), and ruthenium-106 (Ru) for treatment of iris and iridociliary melanoma.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A literature review was done based on results yielded from searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane database, using following key words: iris melanoma, iridociliary melanoma, brachytherapy, iodine-125 brachytherapy, palladium-103 brachytherapy, and ruthenium-106 brachytherapy. Initially, relationships between mean radiation dose to apex and local recurrence and complication rate were analyzed, and then, a comparison was performed between I, Pd, and Ru studies.
RESULTS
Twelve retrospective and prospective studies were selected, with 491 patients treated primarily with plaque brachytherapy. The range of radiation dose to tumor apex were from 84 to 151.5 Gy. Ranges of mean and median of follow-up time were from 27 to 96 months. Local recurrence rate following brachytherapy ranged from 0 to 8%. A decrease in the average study dose was not associated with an increased local recurrence or metastasis rate ( = 0.373 and 0.195, respectively); however, an increase in radiation dose was associated with higher radiation-related cataract and glaucoma ( < 0.05). The rate of post-treatment glaucoma was higher in studies with I plaque brachytherapy ( = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS
For brachytherapy of iris and iridociliary melanoma, in a range of 84 to 150 Gy, an increase in radiation dose may increase the risk of complications, while the tumor control rate does not change.
PubMed: 34025736
DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2021.103586 -
International Journal of Radiation... Aug 2022Studies dating back to a century ago have reported using low-dose radiation therapy for the treatment of viral and bacterial pneumonia. In the modern era, since the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Studies dating back to a century ago have reported using low-dose radiation therapy for the treatment of viral and bacterial pneumonia. In the modern era, since the COVID-19 pandemic began, several groups worldwide have researched the applicability of whole lung irradiation (WLI) for the treatment of COVID-19. We aimed to bring together the results of these experimental studies.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis searching PubMed and Scopus databases for clinical trials incorporating WLI for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Required data were extracted from each study. Using the random-effects model, the overall pooled day 28 survival rate, survival hazard ratio, and intubation-free days within 15 days after WLI were calculated, and forest plots were produced.
RESULTS
Ten studies were identified, and eventually, 5 were included for meta-analysis. The overall survival hazard ratio was calculated to be 0.85 (0.46-1.57). The pooled mean difference of intubation-free days within 15 days after WLI was 1.87, favoring the WLI group (95% confidence interval, -0.02 to 3.76). The overall day 28 survival rate of patients receiving WLI for the 9 studies with adequate follow-up data was 74% (95% confidence interval, 61-87). Except for 2 studies, the other 8 studies were assessed to have moderate to high risk of bias, and there were many differences among the designs of the studies, included patients, primary endpoints, outcome measurement methods, and reporting of the results.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite a mild improvement in intubation-free days, WLI had no significant effect on patients' overall survival. Currently, we cannot recommend routine use of WLI for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Lung; Lung Neoplasms; Pandemics
PubMed: 35537577
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2022.04.043 -
Urologic Oncology Jun 2023This study aimed to assess both efficacy and safety outcomes of lowering the dose of BCG compared to intravesical chemotherapies in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This study aimed to assess both efficacy and safety outcomes of lowering the dose of BCG compared to intravesical chemotherapies in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) patients using a systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis approach. A comprehensive literature search was performed through Pubmed®, Web of Science™, and Scopus® in December 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the oncologic and/or safety outcomes of reduced dose intravesical BCG and/or intravesical chemotherapies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. The outcomes of interest were risk of recurrence, progression, treatment-related adverse events, and discontinuation. Overall, 24 studies were eligible for quantitative synthesis. Among 22 studies that adopted induction followed by maintenance intravesical therapy, with reference to the lower-dose BCG, epirubicin was associated with a significantly higher risk of recurrence (Odds ratio [OR]: 2.82, 95% CI: 1.54-5.15), but not other intravesical chemotherapies. There were no significant differences in risk of progression among the intravesical therapies. On the other hand, standard-dose BCG was associated with a higher risk of any AEs (OR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.07-3.41) but other intravesical chemotherapies had a comparable risk of AEs compared to lower-dose BCG. The discontinuation rate did not significantly differ between lower-dose and standard-dose BCG (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 0.81-2.43) as well as other intravesical. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, gemcitabine, and standard-dose BCG were preferable to lower-dose BCG in terms of recurrence risk; gemcitabine was also preferable to lower-dose BCG in terms of risk of AEs. In patients with NMIBC, lowering the dose of BCG decreases the risks of AEs and discontinuation rate compared to standard-dose BCG, but there is no difference in these endpoints compared to other intravesical chemotherapies. Standard-dose of BCG is preferred for all intermediate and high-risk NMIBC patients based on oncologic efficacy; however, lower-dose BCG and intravesical chemotherapies, especially gemcitabine, could be considered a reasonable alternative to BCG in selected patients who suffer from significant AEs or in case standard-dose BCG is not available.
Topics: Humans; BCG Vaccine; Network Meta-Analysis; Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Neoplasms; Adjuvants, Immunologic; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms; Gemcitabine; Administration, Intravesical; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
PubMed: 37137745
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2023.04.003 -
Reviews in Medical Virology Jan 2023Several phase-1 clinical trials have been performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of candidate anti-Zika vaccines. In this systematic review, we systematically... (Review)
Review
Several phase-1 clinical trials have been performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of candidate anti-Zika vaccines. In this systematic review, we systematically evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of candidate vaccines, which would aid researchers in formulating an effective vaccination strategy for phase-2 trials based on current evidence. A literature search was conducted using the electronic databases MEDLINE through Pubmed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database for relevant studies on candidate anti-zika vaccines. Studies on animal models were excluded from our study. Healthy individuals who were administered candidate Zika vaccines to evaluate the immune response and adverse events (AEs) compared to placebo were considered. Data were extracted, tabulated, and analysed using Microsoft Excel, while the risk of bias plots were generated using tidyverse and Robvis packages in R-studio. A total of five phase-1 clinical trials were included in our analysis comprising of studies on inactivated, viral vector, and DNA vaccines. Immunogenicity ranged from 10% to 100% after vaccination with the lowest seroconversion rate (10%) and geometric mean titre (GMT) (6.3; 95% confidence interval (CI):3.7-10.8) observed among recipients of single-dose inactivated anti-zika vaccine (ZPIV). For DNA vaccines, the seroconversion rate ranged from 60% to 100% with the highest seroconversion rate (100%) and GMT (2871; 95% CI:705.3-11688) observed among recipients of three shots of high dose GLS-5700 vaccine. For viral vector vaccine (Ad26.ZIKV.001) seroconversion rate (100%) and GMT peaked after two shots with both low and high-dose vaccines. In all those studies AEs were mostly local including injection site pain, erythema, and itching. The most common systemic AEs included fever, myalgia, nausea, and fatigue. In phase-1 clinical trials, all candidate vaccines were found to be highly immunogenic and relatively safe, especially when administered in higher doses and with the help of needle-free devices.
Topics: Animals; Zika Virus; Zika Virus Infection; Vaccines, DNA; Viral Vaccines; Vaccination; Antibodies, Viral
PubMed: 35986594
DOI: 10.1002/rmv.2385 -
Clinical Research in Cardiology :... Oct 2022Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccination has been associated with the development of carditis, especially in children and adolescent males. However, the rates of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) vaccination has been associated with the development of carditis, especially in children and adolescent males. However, the rates of these events in the global setting have not been explored in a systematic manner. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate the rates of carditis in children and adolescents receiving COVID-19 vaccines.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase and several Latin American databases were searched for studies. The number of events, and where available, at-risk populations were extracted. Rate ratios were calculated and expressed as a rate per million doses received. Subgroup analysis based on the dose administered was performed. Subjects ≤ 19 years old who developed pericarditis or myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination were included.
RESULTS
A total of 369 entries were retrieved. After screening, 39 articles were included. Our meta-analysis found that 343 patients developed carditis after the administration of 12,602,625 COVID-19 vaccination doses (pooled rate per million: 37.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] 23.57, 59.19). The rate of carditis was higher amongst male patients (pooled rate ratio: 5.04; 95% CI 1.40, 18.19) and after the second vaccination dose (pooled rate ratio: 5.60; 95% CI 1.97, 15.89). In 301 cases of carditis (281 male; mean age: 15.90 (standard deviation [SD] 1.52) years old) reported amongst the case series/reports, 261 patients were reported to have received treatment. 97.34% of the patients presented with chest pain. The common findings include ST elevation and T wave abnormalities on electrocardiography. Oedema and late gadolinium enhancement in the myocardium were frequently observed in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). The mean length of hospital stay was 3.91 days (SD 1.75). In 298 out of 299 patients (99.67%) the carditis resolved with or without treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
Carditis is a rare complication after COVID-19 vaccination across the globe, but the vast majority of episodes are self-limiting with rapid resolution of symptoms within days. Central illustration. Balancing the benefits of vaccines on COVID-19-caused carditis and post-vaccination carditis.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Child; Contrast Media; Gadolinium; Humans; Infant; Male; Myocarditis; Vaccination; Vaccines; Young Adult
PubMed: 35906423
DOI: 10.1007/s00392-022-02070-7 -
Medeniyet Medical Journal Jun 2022Management of increased intracranial pressure in traumatic brain injury remains challenging in neurosurgical emergencies. The mainstay of medical management for...
Management of increased intracranial pressure in traumatic brain injury remains challenging in neurosurgical emergencies. The mainstay of medical management for increased intracranial pressure is hyperosmolar therapy with mannitol or hypertonic saline. Mannitol has been the "gold standard" osmotic agent for almost a century. Given its wide usage, there has been a dilemma of concern because of its adverse effects. Over the past few decades, hypertonic saline has become an increasingly better alternative. To date, there is no consensus on the optimal therapeutic dose and concentration of hypertonic saline for treating increased intracranial pressure. This systematic review aimed to compare the efficacy of hypertonic saline and mannitol in the management of traumatic brain injury and investigate the optimal dose and concentration of hypertonic saline for the treatment. Extensive research was conducted on PubMed, DOAJ, and Cochrane databases. Studies published within the last 20 years were included. Research articles in the form of meta-analyses, clinical trials, and randomized controlled trials were preferred. Those with ambiguous remarks, irrelevant correlations to the main issue, or a focus on other disorders were excluded. Nineteen studies were included in the systematic review. Eleven studies have stated that hypertonic saline and mannitol were equally efficacious, whereas eight studies have reported that hypertonic saline was superior. Moreover, 3% hypertonic saline was the main concentration most discussed in research. Improvements in increased intracranial pressure, cerebral perfusion pressure, survival rate, brain relaxation, and systemic hemodynamics were observed. Hypertonic saline is worthy of consideration as an excellent alternative to mannitol. This study suggests 3% hypertonic saline as the optimal concentration, with the therapeutic dose from 1.4 to 2.5 mL/kg, given as a bolus.
PubMed: 35735001
DOI: 10.4274/MMJ.galenos.2022.75725 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Jul 2023Heat adaptation regimes are used to prepare athletes for exercise in hot conditions to limit a decrement in exercise performance. However, the heat adaptation literature... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Heat adaptation regimes are used to prepare athletes for exercise in hot conditions to limit a decrement in exercise performance. However, the heat adaptation literature mostly focuses on males, and consequently, current heat adaptation guidelines may not be optimal for females when accounting for the biological and phenotypical differences between sexes.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to examine: (1) the effects of heat adaptation on physiological adaptations in females; (2) the impact of heat adaptation on performance test outcomes in the heat; and (3) the impact of various moderators, including duration (minutes and/or days), total heat dose (°Cmin), exercise intensity (kcalmin), total energy expended (kcal), frequency of heat exposures and training status on the physiological adaptations in the heat.
METHODS
SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE Complete and Embase databases were searched to December 2022. Random-effects meta-analyses for resting and exercise core temperature, skin temperature, heart rate, sweat rate, plasma volume and performance tests in the heat were completed using Stata Statistical Software: Release 17. Sub-group meta-analyses were performed to explore the effect of duration, total heat dose, exercise intensity, total energy expended, frequency of heat exposure and training status on resting and exercise core temperature, skin temperature, heart rate and sweat rate. An explorative meta-regression was conducted to determine the effects of physiological adaptations on performance test outcomes in the heat following heat adaptation.
RESULTS
Thirty studies were included in the systematic review; 22 studies were meta-analysed. After heat adaptation, a reduction in resting core temperature (effect size [ES] = - 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.69, - 0.22; p < 0.001), exercise core temperature (ES = - 0.81; 95% CI - 1.01, - 0.60; p < 0.001), skin temperature (ES = - 0.64; 95% CI - 0.79, - 0.48; p < 0.001), heart rate (ES = - 0.60; 95% CI - 0.74, - 0.45; p < 0.001) and an increase in sweat rate (ES = 0.53; 95% CI 0.21, 0.85; p = 0.001) were identified in females. There was no change in plasma volume (ES = - 0.03; 95% CI - 0.31, 0.25; p = 0.835), whilst performance test outcomes were improved following heat adaptation (ES = 1.00; 95% CI 0.56, 1.45; p < 0.001). Across all moderators, physiological adaptations were more consistently observed following durations of 451-900 min and/or 8-14 days, exercise intensity ≥ 3.5 kcalmin, total energy expended ≥ 3038 kcal, consecutive (daily) frequency and total heat dose ≥ 23,000 °Cmin. The magnitude of change in performance test outcomes in the heat was associated with a reduction in heart rate following heat adaptation (standardised mean difference = - 10 beatsmin; 95% CI - 19, - 1; p = 0.031).
CONCLUSIONS
Heat adaptation regimes induce physiological adaptations beneficial to thermoregulation and performance test outcomes in the heat in females. Sport coaches and applied sport practitioners can utilise the framework developed in this review to design and implement heat adaptation strategies for females.
Topics: Male; Humans; Female; Hot Temperature; Thermotolerance; Adaptation, Physiological; Exercise; Body Temperature Regulation
PubMed: 37222863
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-023-01831-2 -
Arthritis Research & Therapy May 2022Polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) supplementation has been reported to improve disease activity in inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs). However, data are often... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Impact of type and dose of oral polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation on disease activity in inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) supplementation has been reported to improve disease activity in inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs). However, data are often conflicting and studies insufficiently large to draw conclusions. This systematic literature review and meta-analysis aimed to better estimate the effect of oral supplementation with omega (n)-3 and n-6 PUFA on IRD activity in terms of duration, dose, type, and source.
METHODS
The literature was searched in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases up to October 2020. Studies were reviewed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The effect of PUFA supplementation on disease activity was expressed as the standardized mean difference (95% CI). Metaregression and subgroup analyses involved type of IRD, Jadad score, PUFA source (animal or vegetable), and doses.
RESULTS
We obtained 42 references; 30 randomized controlled studies were included comparing the effects of PUFA versus control on disease activity (710 IRD patients receiving PUFA supplementation and 710 controls, most with rheumatoid arthritis). We found a significant improvement in pain, swollen and tender joint count, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, and Health Assessment Questionnaire score in IRD patients receiving PUFA supplementation as compared with controls, with a significant decrease in erythrocyte sedimentation rate but not C-reactive protein level. Although meta-regression revealed no difference by IRD type or source or dose of PUFA supplementation, subgroup analysis revealed more parameters significantly improved with animal- than vegetable-derived PUFAs and 3- to 6-month supplementation. Most studies examined high-dose supplementation (>2 g/day).
CONCLUSION
PUFA consumption, especially omega-3 from animal source >2 g/day, may improve IRD activity and might be an adjuvant therapy in rheumatoid arthritis.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
The protocol was registered at PROSPERO ( CRD42021253685 ).
Topics: Animals; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Dietary Supplements; Fatty Acids, Omega-3; Fatty Acids, Unsaturated; Humans; Rheumatic Diseases
PubMed: 35526074
DOI: 10.1186/s13075-022-02781-2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2017Managed withdrawal is a necessary step prior to drug-free treatment or as the endpoint of substitution treatment. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Managed withdrawal is a necessary step prior to drug-free treatment or as the endpoint of substitution treatment.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of buprenorphine versus tapered doses of methadone, alpha-adrenergic agonists, symptomatic medications or placebo, or different buprenorphine regimens for managing opioid withdrawal, in terms of the intensity of the withdrawal syndrome experienced, duration and completion of treatment, and adverse effects.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 11, 2016), MEDLINE (1946 to December week 1, 2016), Embase (to 22 December 2016), PsycINFO (1806 to December week 3, 2016), and the Web of Science (to 22 December 2016) and handsearched the reference lists of articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of interventions using buprenorphine to modify the signs and symptoms of withdrawal in participants who were primarily opioid dependent. Comparison interventions involved reducing doses of methadone, alpha-adrenergic agonists (clonidine or lofexidine), symptomatic medications or placebo, and different buprenorphine-based regimens.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 27 studies involving 3048 participants. The main comparators were clonidine or lofexidine (14 studies). Six studies compared buprenorphine versus methadone, and seven compared different rates of buprenorphine dose reduction. We assessed 12 studies as being at high risk of bias in at least one of seven domains of methodological quality. Six of these studies compared buprenorphine with clonidine or lofexidine and two with methadone; the other four studies compared different rates of buprenorphine dose reduction.For the comparison of buprenorphine and methadone in tapered doses, meta-analysis was not possible for the outcomes of intensity of withdrawal or adverse effects. However, information reported by the individual studies was suggestive of buprenorphine and methadone having similar capacity to ameliorate opioid withdrawal, without clinically significant adverse effects. The meta-analyses that were possible support a conclusion of no difference between buprenorphine and methadone in terms of average treatment duration (mean difference (MD) 1.30 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.11 to 10.72; N = 82; studies = 2; low quality) or treatment completion rates (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.20; N = 457; studies = 5; moderate quality).Relative to clonidine or lofexidine, buprenorphine was associated with a lower average withdrawal score (indicating less severe withdrawal) during the treatment episode, with an effect size that is considered to be small to moderate (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.43, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.28; N = 902; studies = 7; moderate quality). Patients receiving buprenorphine stayed in treatment for longer, with an effect size that is considered to be large (SMD 0.92, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.27; N = 558; studies = 5; moderate quality) and were more likely to complete withdrawal treatment (RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.06; N = 1264; studies = 12; moderate quality). At the same time there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse effects, but dropout due to adverse effects may be more likely with clonidine (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.15; N = 134; studies = 3; low quality). The difference in treatment completion rates translates to a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome of 4 (95% CI 3 to 6), indicating that for every four people treated with buprenorphine, we can expect that one additional person will complete treatment than with clonidine or lofexidine.For studies comparing different rates of reduction of the buprenorphine dose, meta-analysis was possible only for treatment completion, with separate analyses for inpatient and outpatient settings. The results were diverse, and we assessed the quality of evidence as being very low. It remains very uncertain what effect the rate of dose taper has on treatment outcome.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Buprenorphine is more effective than clonidine or lofexidine for managing opioid withdrawal in terms of severity of withdrawal, duration of withdrawal treatment, and the likelihood of treatment completion.Buprenorphine and methadone appear to be equally effective, but data are limited. It remains possible that the pattern of withdrawal experienced may differ and that withdrawal symptoms may resolve more quickly with buprenorphine.It is not possible to draw any conclusions from the available evidence on the relative effectiveness of different rates of tapering the buprenorphine dose. The divergent findings of studies included in this review suggest that there may be multiple factors affecting the response to the rate of dose taper. One such factor could be whether or not the initial treatment plan includes a transition to subsequent relapse prevention treatment with naltrexone. Indeed, the use of buprenorphine to support transition to naltrexone treatment is an aspect worthy of further research.Most participants in the studies included in this review were male. None of the studies reported outcomes on the basis of sex, preventing any exploration of differences related to this variable. Consideration of sex as a factor influencing response to withdrawal treatment would be relevant research for selecting the most appropriate type of intervention for each individual.
Topics: Acute Disease; Buprenorphine; Clonidine; Female; Humans; Male; Methadone; Narcotic Antagonists; Opiate Substitution Treatment; Opioid-Related Disorders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Substance Withdrawal Syndrome
PubMed: 28220474
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002025.pub5 -
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and... Aug 2023Melioidosis is an infectious disease caused by the bacterium Burkholderia pseudomallei. The two stages of melioidosis treatment are the intense intravenous phase and the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Melioidosis is an infectious disease caused by the bacterium Burkholderia pseudomallei. The two stages of melioidosis treatment are the intense intravenous phase and the oral eradication phase. Although co-trimoxazole has been in use for several years, the literature does not demonstrate uniformity of the drug doses, combinations, or durations suitable for the eradication phase of melioidosis. The safety profile of co-trimoxazole was not documented in the literature, nor have systematic studies of its effectiveness been done. This systematic review sought to study on the dose, duration and combination of co-trimoxazole therapy in view of clinical efficacy and safety in the eradication phase of melioidosis.
MAIN BODY
This systematic review included all of the published articles that employed co-trimoxazole in the eradication phase after 1989, including, randomized clinical trials, case-control studies, cohorts, case reports, and case series. Throughout the eradication (maintenance) phase, co-trimoxazole usage was permissible in any dose for any period. A total of 40 results were included in the analysis which contained six clinical trials, one cohort study, one Cochrane review, and thirty-two case series/case reports. Clinical and microbial relapse rates are low when co-trimoxazole is used in single therapy than in combination. There were several adverse events of co-trimoxazole, however, a quantitative analysis was not conducted as the data did not include quantitative values in most studies.
SHORT CONCLUSION
The dose of co-trimoxazole, duration of the eradication phase, and other combinations used in the treatment was varying between studies. Compared to combined therapy patients treated with co-trimoxazole alone the mortality and relapse rates were low. The lowest relapse rate and lowest mortality rate occur when using co-trimoxazole 1920 mg twice daily. The duration of therapy varies on the focus of melioidosis and it is ranged from 2 months to one year and minimum treatment duration associated with low relapse rate is 3 months. The use of co-trimoxazole over the maintenance phase of melioidosis is associated with clinical cure but has adverse effects.
Topics: Humans; Melioidosis; Cohort Studies; Administration, Intravenous; Case-Control Studies; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Trimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination
PubMed: 37592339
DOI: 10.1186/s12941-023-00620-z