-
Critical Care (London, England) Feb 2023Ethylene glycol (EG) is metabolized into glycolate and oxalate and may cause metabolic acidemia, neurotoxicity, acute kidney injury (AKI), and death. Historically,...
Ethylene glycol (EG) is metabolized into glycolate and oxalate and may cause metabolic acidemia, neurotoxicity, acute kidney injury (AKI), and death. Historically, treatment of EG toxicity included supportive care, correction of acid-base disturbances and antidotes (ethanol or fomepizole), and extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs), such as hemodialysis. With the wider availability of fomepizole, the indications for ECTRs in EG poisoning are debated. We conducted systematic reviews of the literature following published EXTRIP methods to determine the utility of ECTRs in the management of EG toxicity. The quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations, either strong ("we recommend") or weak/conditional ("we suggest"), were graded according to the GRADE approach. A total of 226 articles met inclusion criteria. EG was assessed as dialyzable by intermittent hemodialysis (level of evidence = B) as was glycolate (Level of evidence = C). Clinical data were available for analysis on 446 patients, in whom overall mortality was 18.7%. In the subgroup of patients with a glycolate concentration ≤ 12 mmol/L (or anion gap ≤ 28 mmol/L), mortality was 3.6%; in this subgroup, outcomes in patients receiving ECTR were not better than in those who did not receive ECTR. The EXTRIP workgroup made the following recommendations for the use of ECTR in addition to supportive care over supportive care alone in the management of EG poisoning (very low quality of evidence for all recommendations): i) Suggest ECTR if fomepizole is used and EG concentration > 50 mmol/L OR osmol gap > 50; or ii) Recommend ECTR if ethanol is used and EG concentration > 50 mmol/L OR osmol gap > 50; or iii) Recommend ECTR if glycolate concentration is > 12 mmol/L or anion gap > 27 mmol/L; or iv) Suggest ECTR if glycolate concentration 8-12 mmol/L or anion gap 23-27 mmol/L; or v) Recommend ECTR if there are severe clinical features (coma, seizures, or AKI). In most settings, the workgroup recommends using intermittent hemodialysis over other ECTRs. If intermittent hemodialysis is not available, CKRT is recommended over other types of ECTR. Cessation of ECTR is recommended once the anion gap is < 18 mmol/L or suggested if EG concentration is < 4 mmol/L. The dosage of antidotes (fomepizole or ethanol) needs to be adjusted during ECTR.
Topics: Humans; Antidotes; Fomepizole; Ethanol; Renal Dialysis; Glycolates; Ethylene Glycol; Poisoning
PubMed: 36765419
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-022-04227-2 -
Skin Research and Technology : Official... Mar 2024The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness and safety of oral and injectable systemic treatments, such as methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine,... (Review)
Review
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness and safety of oral and injectable systemic treatments, such as methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine, tofacitinib, baricitinib, corticosteroids, statins, zinc, apremilast, etc., for treating vitiligo lesions.
METHOD
Databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were meticulously searched for studies spanning from 2010 to August 2023, focusing on systemic oral and injectable therapies for vitiligo, using comprehensive keywords and search syntaxes tailored to each database. Key data extracted included study design, treatment efficacy, patient outcomes, patient satisfaction, and safety profiles.
RESULTS
In a total of 42 included studies, oral mini-pulse corticosteroid therapy (OMP) was the subject of six studies (14.2%). Minocycline was the focus of five studies (11.9%), while methotrexate, apremilast, and tofacitinib each were examined in four studies (9.5%). Antioxidants and Afamelanotide were the subjects of three studies each (7.1%). Cyclosporine, simvastatin, oral zinc, oral corticosteroids (excluding OMP) and injections, and baricitinib were each explored in two studies (4.8%). Azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and Alefacept were the subjects of one study each (2.4%).
CONCLUSION
Systemic treatments for vitiligo have been successful in controlling lesions without notable side effects. OMP, Methotrexate, Azathioprine, Cyclosporine, Mycophenolate mofetil, Simvastatin, Apremilast, Minocycline, Afamelanotide, Tofacitinib, Baricitinib, Antioxidants, and oral/injectable corticosteroids are effective treatment methods. However, oral zinc and alefacept did not show effectiveness.
Topics: Humans; Methotrexate; Azathioprine; Vitiligo; Mycophenolic Acid; Minocycline; Alefacept; Cyclosporine; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Hypopigmentation; Simvastatin; Zinc; Purines; Pyrazoles; Sulfonamides; Azetidines; Thalidomide
PubMed: 38454597
DOI: 10.1111/srt.13642 -
PloS One 2016Historically, warfarin or aspirin have been the recommended therapeutic options for the extended treatment (>3 months) of VTE. Data from Phase III randomised controlled... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of the Non-VKA Oral Anticoagulants Apixaban, Dabigatran, and Rivaroxaban in the Extended Treatment and Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
Historically, warfarin or aspirin have been the recommended therapeutic options for the extended treatment (>3 months) of VTE. Data from Phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are now available for non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in this indication. The current systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of anticoagulants for the extended treatment of VTE.
METHODS
Electronic databases (accessed July 2014 and updated April 2016) were systematically searched to identify RCTs evaluating apixaban, aspirin, dabigatran, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin for the extended treatment of VTE. Eligible studies included adults with an objectively confirmed deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism or both. A fixed-effect Bayesian NMA was conducted, and results were presented as relative risks (RRs). Sensitivity analyses examining (i) the dataset employed according to the time frame for outcome assessment (ii) the model used for the NMA were conducted.
RESULTS
Eleven Phase III RCTs (examining apixaban, aspirin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, warfarin and placebo) were included. The risk of the composite efficacy outcome (VTE and VTE-related death) was statistically significantly lower with the NOACs and warfarin INR 2.0-3.0 compared with aspirin, with no significant differences between the NOACs. Treatment with apixaban (RR 0.23, 95% CrI 0.10, 0.55) or dabigatran (RR 0.55, 95% Crl 0.43, 0.71) was associated with a statistically significantly reduced risk of 'major or clinically relevant non-major bleed' compared with warfarin INR 2.0-3.0. Apixaban also showed a significantly reduced risk compared with dabigatran (RR 0.42, 95% Crl 0.18, 0.97) and rivaroxaban (RR 0.23, 95% Crl 0.09, 0.59). Sensitivity analyses indicate that results were dependent on the dataset, but not on the type of NMA model employed.
CONCLUSIONS
Results from the NMA indicate that NOACs are an effective treatment for prevention of VTE or VTE-related death) in the extended treatment setting. However, bleeding risk differs between potential treatments, with apixaban reporting the most favourable profile compared with other NOACs, warfarin INR 2.0-3.0, and aspirin.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Dabigatran; Humans; Long-Term Care; Network Meta-Analysis; Pyrazoles; Pyridones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Treatment Outcome; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 27487187
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160064 -
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology Dec 2023Cesarean section is associated with moderate to severe pain and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly employed. The optimal NSAID, however, has not... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Cesarean section is associated with moderate to severe pain and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly employed. The optimal NSAID, however, has not been elucidated. In this network meta-analysis and systematic review, we compared the influence of control and individual NSAIDs on the indices of analgesia, side effects, and quality of recovery.
METHODS
CDSR, CINAHL, CRCT, Embase, LILACS, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing a specific NSAID to either control or another NSAID in elective or emergency cesarean section under general or neuraxial anesthesia. Network plots and league tables were constructed, and the quality of evidence was evaluated with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis.
RESULTS
We included 47 trials. Cumulative intravenous morphine equivalent consumption at 24 h, the primary outcome, was examined in 1,228 patients and 18 trials, and control was found to be inferior to diclofenac, indomethacin, ketorolac, and tenoxicam (very low quality evidence owing to serious limitations, imprecision, and publication bias). Indomethacin was superior to celecoxib for pain score at rest at 8-12 h and celecoxib + parecoxib, diclofenac, and ketorolac for pain score on movement at 48 h. In regard to the need for and time to rescue analgesia COX-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib were inferior to other NSAIDs.
CONCLUSIONS
Our review suggests the presence of minimal differences among the NSAIDs studied. Nonselective NSAIDs may be more effective than selective NSAIDs, and some NSAIDs such as indomethacin might be preferable to other NSAIDs.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Diclofenac; Ketorolac; Celecoxib; Cesarean Section; Network Meta-Analysis; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Indomethacin; Pain
PubMed: 37066603
DOI: 10.4097/kja.23014 -
BMC Urology Jul 2016The currently recommended treatment algorithm for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who fail the first-line targeted therapy does not normally include... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The currently recommended treatment algorithm for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who fail the first-line targeted therapy does not normally include pazopanib as a second-line treatment option. It would therefore be of interest to determine the efficiency of pazopanib in this setting in terms of the partial response rate (PRR), disease control rate (DCR), and progression-free survival (PFS).
METHODS
Peer-reviewed clinical reports without language restriction, both full papers and conference abstracts, which assessed the second-line use of pazopanib following failure of first-line non-cytokine-targeted therapy, were included. After the literature retrieval, we conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of the size of the effect of each outcome measure (PRR, DCR, and PFS). The effect size and 95 % confidence interval (CI) were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effects models based on the heterogeneity represented by I(2) of selected studies. Meta-analysis forest plots with a fixed-effect model showing the PRR and DCR were created.
RESULTS
Our results show that there are no available comparative studies on pazopanib second-line treatment. Only phase II trials or retrospective analysis reports were retrievable. Six studies (comprising 217 patients) were included in the qualitative and quantitative analysis. Pazopanib as a second-line treatment resulted in a PRR of 23 % (95 % CI, 17-31 %; I(2) = 52.6 %) and a DCR of 73 % (95 % CI, 65-80 %; I(2) = 0.00 %). The meta-analysis with fixed-effect model revealed that PFS was 6.5 months (95 % CI, 5.6-7.5 months; I(2) = 86.2 %).
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, the effectiveness and indication of pazopanib for use in the second-line setting has not yet been examined in-depth; however, this meta-analysis has shown that the treatment effects in terms of PRR, DCR, and PFS may be similar to other well-studied second-line targeted therapies. Rigorous comparative phase III trials testing this hypothesis are required.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Indazoles; Kidney Neoplasms; Pyrimidines; Sulfonamides; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27377922
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-016-0156-4 -
European Journal of Vascular and... Nov 2014The aim was to perform a review of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants (NOAs) in the management of venous thromboembolism (VTE). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Editor's Choice - efficacy and safety of the new oral anticoagulants dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban in the treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis of phase III trials.
OBJECTIVES
The aim was to perform a review of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants (NOAs) in the management of venous thromboembolism (VTE).
METHODS
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis. On March 26, 2014, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane trial register were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the NOAs dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in VTE treatment and secondary prevention. Two investigators assessed the methodological quality of the RCTs. The main study outcomes (efficacy, safety and net clinical benefit) were expressed as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
Ten RCTs, mostly with low risk of bias, with nearly 38,000 patients, were identified. In six trials of treatment, NOAs were equally effective as VKAs in preventing recurrent symptomatic VTE (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75-1.05), but major bleeding occurred less often (1.08% vs. 1.73% for VKAs, RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.77), leading net clinical benefit to favor NOAs (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.90). Fatal bleeding occurred less often with NOAs (0.09% vs. 0.18% for VKAs), a difference that approached statistical significance (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.26-1.01). In three secondary prevention trials, NOAs reduced VTE recurrence rates to 1.32% (vs. 7.24% with placebo, RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.12-0.24) and fatal pulmonary embolism (PE) (including unexplained deaths) to 0.1% (vs. 0.29% for placebo, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.10-1.38) at the expense of clinically relevant non-major bleeding (4.3% vs. 1.8% for placebo, RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.65-3.35), but not major bleeding. All-cause mortality rate was reduced to 0.41% with NOAs (vs. 0.86% with placebo, RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.79). Net clinical benefit favored NOAs (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.15-0.29), and NNT was 18.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to VKAs, NOAs are not only effective in treating VTE but also safer in terms of bleeding, thereby conferring clinical benefit. Their safety and efficacy was confirmed further in secondary prevention trials.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Benzimidazoles; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Dabigatran; Humans; Morpholines; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Secondary Prevention; Thiazoles; Thiophenes; Venous Thromboembolism; beta-Alanine
PubMed: 24951377
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2014.05.001 -
BMJ Open Sep 2022To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors in ALK-rearranged positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors in ALK-rearranged positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with brain metastases, and update the overall survival (OS) outcomes of the second-generation and third-generation ALK (ALK-2G/3G) inhibitors versus first-generation (ALK-1G) inhibitors.
DESIGN
The study is in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published up to 3 November 2021 were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SETTING
RCTs from any country and healthcare setting.
PARTICIPANTS
Patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC with or without brain metastases.
INTERVENTIONS AND COMPARISONS
The interventions were ALK-2G/3G; the control arm was ALK-1G or crizotinib.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES
Primary outcomes included median progression-free survival and median OS. Secondary outcomes included systemic objective response rate, intracranial response rate and rate of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs).
RESULTS
A total of 12 RCTs involving 3156 patients were analysed. Compared with ALK-1G (crizotinib), ALK-2G (alectinib, brigatinib, ceritinib and ensartinib) significantly improved the OS (HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.90, p=0.004) and intracranial response of patients with any brain metastases, especially with measurable (diameter ≥10 mm) brain metastases. Network meta-analysis demonstrated that ALK-3G (lorlatinib) had superior efficacy for patients with brain lesions, but performed a distinct side-effect profile. Moreover, alectinib showed superior efficacy and lower toxicity in ALK-positive NSCLC.
CONCLUSION
Treatment with ALK-2G inhibitors significantly improved OS compared with crizotinib, and alectinib has less severe AEs than any other ALK inhibitors with moderate-high efficacy. The limited OS follow-up and inadequate sample sizes might contribute to having no statistically significant difference in OS of lorlatinib versus crizotinib. More high-quality and longer follow-up RCTs are warranted to prove our findings.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021292245.
Topics: Aminopyridines; Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase; Brain Neoplasms; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Crizotinib; Humans; Lactams; Lactams, Macrocyclic; Lung Neoplasms; Network Meta-Analysis; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Pyrazoles
PubMed: 36123063
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-060782 -
American Journal of Hematology Mar 2018Ruxolitinib exerts immunosuppressive activity that may increase the risk of infectious complications. We performed a systematic review of the literature with the aim of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Ruxolitinib exerts immunosuppressive activity that may increase the risk of infectious complications. We performed a systematic review of the literature with the aim of estimating the risk of infections in patients treated with ruxolitinib. Studies were identified by electronic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE database. Differences in the incidence of infectious events between ruxolitinib and comparison groups were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Five phase III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (3 phase IIIa with their extended phase and 2 phase IIIb), 6 phase IV studies and 28 case reports were included in this systematic review. Ruxolitinib was associated with a statistically significant increased risk of herpes zoster infection compared to control group in 3 RCTs including patients with polycythemia vera (OR 7.39 [1.33, 41.07]) and in a pooled analysis of the extended phase IIIa RCTs (OR 5.20 [95%CI 1.27, 21.18]). In the larger phase IV post-marketing study, the incidence of the most frequent infections was 8% for herpes zoster, 6.1% for bronchitis and 6% for urinary tract infections. In the published case reports, the most frequent infections were tuberculosis (N = 10), hepatitis B reactivation (N = 5) and pneumocystis jeroveci infection (N = 2). Evidence is not solid enough to accurately estimate the risk of infection in ruxolitinib-treated patients. However, published data clearly suggest that the infection risk may be clinically relevant. Well-designed studies are warranted to evaluate the risk of ruxolitinib-associated infection, in order to identify the most appropriate antimicrobial prophylactic strategy.
Topics: Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Bacterial Infections; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Confidence Intervals; Disease Susceptibility; Herpes Zoster; Humans; Immunocompromised Host; Immunosuppressive Agents; Incidence; Infections; Janus Kinase 1; Janus Kinase 2; Mycoses; Nitriles; Odds Ratio; Product Surveillance, Postmarketing; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk
PubMed: 29150886
DOI: 10.1002/ajh.24976 -
International Journal of Clinical... Nov 2020Management of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) has undergone a paradigm shift with next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors. However,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Management of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) has undergone a paradigm shift with next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors. However, direct comparative data are not available to inform treatment decisions and/or guideline recommendations. Therefore, we performed network meta-analysis to indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of currently available treatments. Multiple databases were searched for articles published before June 2020. Studies that compared overall and/or metastasis-free and/or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival (OS/MFS/PSA-PFS) and/or adverse events (AEs) in nmCRPC patients were considered eligible. Three studies (n = 4117) met our eligibility criteria. Formal network meta-analyses were conducted. For MFS, apalutamide, darolutamide, and enzalutamide were significantly more effective than placebo, and apalutamide emerged as the best option (P score: 0.8809). Apalutamide [hazard ratio (HR): 0.85, 95% credible interval (CrI): 0.77-0.94] and enzalutamide (HR: 0.86, 95% CrI: 0.78-0.95) were both significantly more effective than darolutamide. For PSA-PFS, all three agents were statistically superior to placebo, and apalutamide emerged as the likely preferred option (P score: 1.000). Apalutamide (HR: 0.71, 95% CrI: 0.69-0.74) and enzalutamide (HR: 0.76, 95% CrI: 0.74-0.79) were both significantly more effective than darolutamide. For AEs (including all AEs, grade 3 or grade 4 AEs, grade 5 AEs, and discontinuation rates), darolutamide was the likely best option. Apalutamide and enzalutamide appear to be more efficacious agents for therapy of nmCRPC, while darolutamide appears to have the most favorable tolerability profile. These findings may facilitate individualized treatment strategies and inform future direct comparative trials.
Topics: Androgen Receptor Antagonists; Antineoplastic Agents; Benzamides; Humans; Kallikreins; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Nitriles; Phenylthiohydantoin; Progression-Free Survival; Proportional Hazards Models; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Pyrazoles; Thiohydantoins; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32924096
DOI: 10.1007/s10147-020-01777-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2014Vaginal dilation therapy is advocated after pelvic radiotherapy to prevent stenosis (abnormal narrowing of the vagina), but can be uncomfortable and psychologically... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Vaginal dilation therapy is advocated after pelvic radiotherapy to prevent stenosis (abnormal narrowing of the vagina), but can be uncomfortable and psychologically distressing.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of different types of vaginal dilation methods offered to women treated by pelvic radiotherapy for cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
Searches included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2013, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1950 to June week 2, 2013), EMBASE (1980 to 2013 week 24) and CINAHL (1982 to 2013).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Comparative data of any type, which evaluated dilation or penetration of the vagina after pelvic radiotherapy treatment for cancer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed whether potentially relevant studies met the inclusion criteria. We found no trials and therefore analysed no data.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified no studies for inclusion in the original review or for this update. However, we felt that some studies that were excluded warranted discussion. These included one randomised trial (RCT), which showed no improvement in sexual scores associated with encouraging women to practise dilation therapy; a recent small RCT that did not show any advantage to dilation over vibration therapy during radiotherapy; two non-randomised comparative studies; and five correlation studies. One of these showed that objective measurements of vaginal elasticity and length were not linked to dilation during radiotherapy, but the study lacked power. One study showed that women who dilated tolerated a larger dilator, but the risk of objectivity and bias with historical controls was high. Another study showed that the vaginal measurements increased in length by a mean of 3 cm after dilation was introduced 6 to 10 weeks after radiotherapy, but there was no control group; another case series showed the opposite. Three recent studies showed less stenosis associated with prophylactic dilation after radiotherapy. One small case series suggested that dilation years after radiotherapy might restore the vagina to a functional length.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is no reliable evidence to show that routine, regular vaginal dilation during radiotherapy treatment prevents stenosis or improves quality of life. Several observational studies have examined the effect of dilation therapy after radiotherapy. They suggest that frequent dilation practice is associated with lower rates of self reported stenosis. This could be because dilation is effective or because women with a healthy vagina are more likely to comply with dilation therapy instructions compared to women with strictures. We would normally suggest that a RCT is needed to distinguish between a casual and causative link, but pilot studies highlight many reasons why RCT methodology is challenging in this area.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Benzydamine; Brachytherapy; Constriction, Pathologic; Dilatation; Estrogens; Female; Humans; Hyperbaric Oxygenation; Pelvis; Radiation Injuries; Radiotherapy; Rupture; Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological; Time Factors; Vagina
PubMed: 25198150
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007291.pub3