-
The Lancet. Microbe Oct 2023Pulmonary tuberculosis due to Mycobacterium tuberculosis can be challenging to diagnose when sputum samples cannot be obtained, which is especially problematic in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pulmonary tuberculosis due to Mycobacterium tuberculosis can be challenging to diagnose when sputum samples cannot be obtained, which is especially problematic in children and older people. We systematically appraised the performance characteristics and diagnostic accuracy of upper respiratory tract sampling for diagnosing active pulmonary tuberculosis.
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Cinahl, Web of Science, Global Health, and Global Health Archive databases for studies published between database inception and Dec 6, 2022 that reported on the accuracy of upper respiratory tract sampling for tuberculosis diagnosis compared with microbiological testing of sputum or gastric aspirate reference standard. We included studies that evaluated the accuracy of upper respiratory tract sampling (laryngeal swabs, nasopharyngeal aspirate, oral swabs, saliva, mouth wash, nasal swabs, plaque samples, and nasopharyngeal swabs) to be tested for microbiological diagnosis of tuberculous (by culture and nucleic acid amplification tests) compared with a reference standard using either sputum or gastric lavage for a microbiological test. We included cohort, case-control, cross-sectional, and randomised controlled studies that recruited participants from any community or clinical setting. We excluded post-mortem studies. We used a random-effects meta-analysis with a bivariate hierarchical model to estimate pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostics odds ratio (DOR; odds of a positive test with disease relative to without), stratified by sampling method. We assessed bias using QUADAS-2 criteria. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021262392).
FINDINGS
We screened 10 159 titles for inclusion, reviewed 274 full texts, and included 71, comprising 119 test comparisons published between May 13, 1933, and Dec 19, 2022, in the systematic review (53 in the meta-analysis). For laryngeal swabs, pooled sensitivity was 57·8% (95% CI 50·5-65·0), specificity was 93·8% (88·4-96·8), and DOR was 20·7 (11·1-38·8). Nasopharyngeal aspirate sensitivity was 65·2% (52·0-76·4), specificity was 97·9% (96·0-99·0), and DOR was 91·0 (37·8-218·8). Oral swabs sensitivity was 56·7% (44·3-68·2), specificity was 91·3% (CI 81·0-96·3), and DOR was 13·8 (5·6-34·0). Substantial heterogeneity in diagnostic accuracy was found, probably due to differences in reference and index standards.
INTERPRETATION
Upper respiratory tract sampling holds promise to expand access to tuberculosis diagnosis. Exploring historical methods using modern microbiological techniques might further increase options for alternative sample types. Prospective studies are needed to optimise accuracy and utility of sampling methods in clinical practice.
FUNDING
UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome, and UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.
Topics: Child; Humans; Aged; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Cross-Sectional Studies; Sensitivity and Specificity; Tuberculosis; Tuberculosis, Pulmonary; Respiratory System
PubMed: 37714173
DOI: 10.1016/S2666-5247(23)00190-8 -
Respiratory Research Nov 2017Long-acting bronchodilators are the cornerstone of pharmacologic treatment of COPD. The new combination of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) tiotropium (TIO) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Long-acting bronchodilators are the cornerstone of pharmacologic treatment of COPD. The new combination of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) tiotropium (TIO) and long acting beta-agonists (LABA) olodaterol (OLO) has been introduced as fist line therapy for COPD. This article analyses the evidence of efficacy and safety of the TIO/OLO combination.
METHODS
A systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) with a period of treatment of at least 6 weeks, in patients with COPD confirmed by spirometry, comparing combined treatment with TIO/OLO (approved doses only), with any of the mono-components or any other active comparator administered as an inhalator.
RESULTS
A total of 10 Randomized controlled trials (RCT) were identified (N = 10,918). TIO/OLO significantly improved trough FEV from baseline to week 12 versus TIO, OLO and LABA/ICS (0.06 L, 0.09 L and between 0.04 and 0.05 L, respectively). TIO/OLO improved transitional dyspnea index (TDI) and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) compared with mono-components, with patients more likely to achieve clinically important improvements in TDI (risk ratio [RR]: 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.07, 1.28] versus TIO and RR: 1.14, 95%CI: [1.01, 1.28] versus OLO) and in SGRQ (RR: 1.21, 95%CI: [1.12, 1.30] versus TIO and RR: 1.28, 95%CI: [1.18, 1.40] versus OLO). Patients treated with TIO/OLO showed a significant reduction in the use of rescue medication and no significant differences in frequency of general and serious adverse events were observed between TIO/OLO and mono-components.
CONCLUSIONS
Treatment with TIO/OLO provided significant improvements in lung function versus mono-components and LABA/ICS with more patients achieving significant improvements in dyspnea and health status. No differences in adverse events were observed compared with other active treatments.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO register of systematic reviews ( CRD42016040162 ).
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists; Benzoxazines; Bronchodilator Agents; Drug Combinations; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Muscarinic Antagonists; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spirometry; Tiotropium Bromide; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29178871
DOI: 10.1186/s12931-017-0683-x -
NPJ Primary Care Respiratory Medicine Apr 2017Inhaler device errors are common and may impact the effectiveness of the delivered drug. There is a paucity of up-to-date systematic reviews (SRs) or meta-analyses (MAs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
UNLABELLED
Inhaler device errors are common and may impact the effectiveness of the delivered drug. There is a paucity of up-to-date systematic reviews (SRs) or meta-analyses (MAs) of device errors in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This SR and MA provides an estimate of overall error rates (both critical and non-critical) by device type and evaluates factors associated with inhaler misuse. The following databases from inception to July 23, 2014 (Embase®, MEDLINE®, MEDLINE® In-Process and CENTRAL) were searched, using predefined search terms. Studies in adult males and females with asthma or COPD, reporting at least one overall or critical error, using metered dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers were included. Random-effect MAs were performed to estimate device error rates and to compare pairs of devices. Overall and critical error rates were high across all devices, ranging from 50-100% and 14-92%, respectively. However, between-study heterogeneity was also generally >90% (I-squared statistic), indicating large variability between studies. A trend towards higher error rates with assessments comprising a larger number of steps was observed; however no consistent pattern was identified. This SR and MA highlights the relatively limited body of evidence assessing device errors and the lack of standardised checklists. There is currently insufficient evidence to determine differences in error rates between different inhaler devices and their impact on clinical outcomes. A key step in improving our knowledge on this topic would be the development of standardised checklists for each device.
CHRONIC LUNG DISEASES
CALL TO STANDARDISE RESEARCH INTO INHALER DEVICE ERRORS: Researchers should adopt a standardised approach to investigate the incorrect use of inhalers and its associated clinical implications. Henry Chrystyn at Plymouth University, together with scientists across the UK and the Netherlands, conducted a review of research related to inhaled medication errors made by patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. It is widely acknowledged that many patients with lung conditions don't use their inhaler devices correctly, which affects drug effectiveness and disease control. While Chrystyn's team found high critical error rates reported across all devices, their meta-analysis and systematic review highlighted significant gaps in knowledge regarding different inhalers and associated error rates, and how these affect clinical outcomes. The researchers call for in-depth studies into device use, alongside standardised checklists and definitions for such studies to use to ensure consistency.
Topics: Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Bronchodilator Agents; Drug Delivery Systems; Dry Powder Inhalers; Humans; Metered Dose Inhalers; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Patient Education as Topic; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
PubMed: 28373682
DOI: 10.1038/s41533-017-0016-z -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2016About 10% of adults have suffered an attack of asthma, and up to 5% of these have severe disease that responds poorly to treatment. Patients with severe disease have an... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
About 10% of adults have suffered an attack of asthma, and up to 5% of these have severe disease that responds poorly to treatment. Patients with severe disease have an increased risk of death, but patients with mild to moderate disease are also at risk of exacerbations. Most guidelines about the management of asthma follow stepwise protocols. This overview does not endorse or follow any particular protocol, but presents the evidence about a specific intervention, magnesium sulfate.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic overview, aiming to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of magnesium sulfate for acute asthma? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to November 2014 (Clinical Evidence overviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this overview).
RESULTS
At this update, searching of electronic databases retrieved 50 studies. After deduplication and removal of conference abstracts, 24 records were screened for inclusion in the overview. Appraisal of titles and abstracts led to the exclusion of 10 studies and the further review of 14 full publications. Of the 14 full articles evaluated, one systematic review was updated and one systematic review was added at this update. We performed a GRADE evaluation for five PICO combinations.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic overview, we categorised the efficacy for two comparisons based on information about the effectiveness and safety of magnesium sulfate (iv) versus placebo and magnesium sulfate (nebulised) plus short-acting beta2 agonists (inhaled) versus short-acting beta2 agonists (inhaled) alone.
Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Inhalation; Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Antagonists; Adult; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Humans; Magnesium Sulfate
PubMed: 26761432
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Asthma is the most common chronic disease in childhood. Breathing exercise techniques have been widely used by researchers and professionals in the search for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Asthma is the most common chronic disease in childhood. Breathing exercise techniques have been widely used by researchers and professionals in the search for complementary therapies for the treatment of asthma.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of breathing exercises in children with asthma.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for trials in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and AMED and handsearched respiratory journals and meeting abstracts. We also consulted trial registers and reference lists of included articles.The literature search was run up to September 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of breathing exercises alone versus control or breathing exercises as part of a more complex intervention versus control in children with asthma.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcomes were quality of life, asthma symptoms and serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were reduction in medication usage, number of acute exacerbations, physiological measures (lung function (especially low flow rates) and functional capacity), days off school and adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
The review included three studies involving 112 participants. All the included studies performed the comparison breathing exercises as part of a more complex intervention versus control. There were no trials comparing breathing exercises alone with control. Asthma severity of participants from the included studies varied. The studies measured: quality of life, asthma symptoms, reduction in medication usage, number of acute exacerbations and lung function. Breathing exercise techniques used by the included studies consisted of lateral costal breathing, diaphragmatic breathing, inspiratory patterns and pursed lips. One study included in the review did not specify the type of breathing exercise used. The control groups received different interventions: one received placebo treatment, one an educational programme and doctor appointments, and one was not described. There were no reported between-group comparisons for any of the primary outcomes. We judged the included studies as having an unclear risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We could draw no reliable conclusions concerning the use of breathing exercises for children with asthma in clinical practice. The breathing exercises were part of a more comprehensive package of care, and could not be assessed on their own. Moreover, there were methodological differences among the three small included studies and poor reporting of methodological aspects and results in most of the included studies.
Topics: Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Breathing Exercises; Child; Humans; Lung; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27070225
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011017.pub2 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2015Changes in air pressure during flying can cause ear-drum pain and perforation, vertigo, and hearing loss. It has been estimated that 10% of adults and 22% of children... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Changes in air pressure during flying can cause ear-drum pain and perforation, vertigo, and hearing loss. It has been estimated that 10% of adults and 22% of children might have changes to the ear drum after a flight, although perforation is rare. Symptoms usually resolve spontaneously.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of interventions to prevent middle-ear pain during air travel? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to July 2014 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found three studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: nasal balloon inflation, nasal decongestants (topical), and oral pseudoephedrine.
Topics: Air Travel; Earache; Humans; Nasal Decongestants; Pseudoephedrine
PubMed: 25599243
DOI: No ID Found -
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer... 2015Catastrophic effects of mustard gas as a chemical warfare agent have always been a major problem for those exposed to this agent. In this meta-analysis it was tried to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Catastrophic effects of mustard gas as a chemical warfare agent have always been a major problem for those exposed to this agent. In this meta-analysis it was tried to evaluate carcinogenesis, ocular, cutaneous and respiratory complications of mustard gas exposure among Iranians who had been exposed to this agent during the Iran-Iraq war.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In this meta-analysis, the required data were collected using keywords "mustard gas", "sulfur mustard", "cancer", "neoplasm", "respiratory complications", "ocular complications" , "lung disease", "chronic complication", "eye", "skin", "cutaneous complication", "carcinogenesis" and their combination with keywords "Iran", "Iranian", "prevalence", "mortality" and their Farsi equivalent terms from the databases of SID, Iranmedex, Magiran, Pubmed, Science Direct, Google Search engine, Gray Literature and Reference of References. To determine the prevalence of each complication and perform meta-analysis, CMA: 2 (Comprehensive Meta-Analysis) software with a randomized model was used.
RESULTS
Of the 542 articles found, 7 national articles, consistent with the aims of this study were selected. Meta- analysis of seven papers revealed that cancer risk, especially cancer of the respiratory system was elevated, so that the relative risk (RR) of cancer role of mustard gas was inconsistent from 2/1 to 4 in this survey. Also prevalence of delayed skin disorders due to sulfur mustard was 94.6%, pulmonary complications 94.5% and ocular complications 89.9%. The incidence of various cancers in victims exposed to mustard gas was 1.7% worldwide where the rate was 2.2% in Iranian victims of the Iraq-Iran war.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on present study the prevalence of delayed mustard gas related cutaneous, pulmonary and ocular complications is above 90% and risk of carcinogenesis is higher in comparison to worldwide statistics. This may suggest need for long-term and persistent follow-up and rehabilitation procedures for populations exposed to this agent.
Topics: Carcinogenesis; Chemical Warfare Agents; Eye; Eye Neoplasms; Humans; Iran; Iraq; Lung; Lung Neoplasms; Mucous Membrane; Mustard Gas; Skin; Skin Neoplasms
PubMed: 26625763
DOI: 10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.17.7567 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Oct 2017To investigate the safety of fluoxetine use during pregnancy, and to better understand the relationship between maternal fluoxetine use during the first trimester and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
To investigate the safety of fluoxetine use during pregnancy, and to better understand the relationship between maternal fluoxetine use during the first trimester and congenital malformations in infants.
METHODS
PubMed and Web of Science databases were systematically searched from inception to 21 March 2016. Additional studies were identified in a manual search of the reference lists. Two reviewers independently extracted data. A third reviewer checked the data. Estimates were pooled using a random-effects model to calculate the summarized relative ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS
Among 1918 initially identified articles, 16 cohort studies were included. The offspring of pregnant women exposed to fluoxetine during the first trimester had a statistically increased risk of major malformations (RR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.08-1.29), cardiovascular malformations (RR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.17-1.59), septal defects (RR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.19-1.61), and non-septal defects (RR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.12-1.73) with low heterogeneity in infants. There were no significant observations of other system-specific malformations in the nervous system, eye, urogenital system, digestive system, respiratory system, or musculoskeletal system, respectively. There was no indication of publication bias.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this meta-analysis indicate maternal fluoxetine use is associated with a slightly increased risk of cardiovascular malformations in infants. Health care providers and pregnant women must weigh the risk-benefit potential of these drugs when making decisions about whether to treat with fluoxetine during pregnancy.
Topics: Abnormalities, Drug-Induced; Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Depression; Female; Fluoxetine; Heart Septal Defects; Humans; Incidence; Infant; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Publication Bias
PubMed: 28513059
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.13321 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Jan 2017Asthma is a chronic, inflammatory lung disease affecting around 235 million people worldwide. Conventional medications in asthma are not curative and patients have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Asthma is a chronic, inflammatory lung disease affecting around 235 million people worldwide. Conventional medications in asthma are not curative and patients have significant concerns regarding their side-effects. Consequently, many asthma patients turn to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for a more holistic approach to care. We systematically reviewed the available evidence on the effectiveness of CAM in the management of asthma in adults.We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and Cochrane databases for randomised controlled trials published in English between 1990 and 2016 investigating the effectiveness of oral or topical CAM in asthmatic adults. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool.In all, 23 eligible trials were identified covering 19 different CAMs. Overall, there was limited evidence on the effectiveness of CAM in adult asthma as most CAMs were only assessed in a single trial. CAMs with multiple trials provided null or inconsistent results. Many of the trials were rated as having high risk of bias.The existing evidence is insufficient to recommend any of the oral and topical CAMs in the management of asthma in adults.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Adolescent; Adult; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Chi-Square Distribution; Complementary Therapies; Female; Holistic Health; Humans; Lung; Male; Middle Aged; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 28143878
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0092-2016 -
Journal of Perinatology : Official... May 2016We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the (1) feasibility and efficacy and (2) safety and cost effectiveness of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy... (Review)
Review
We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the (1) feasibility and efficacy and (2) safety and cost effectiveness of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases-MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE and WHOLIS-up to December 2014 and included all studies that enrolled neonates requiring CPAP therapy for any indication. We did not find any randomized trials from LMICs that have evaluated the efficacy of CPAP therapy. Pooled analysis of four observational studies showed 66% reduction in in-hospital mortality following CPAP in preterm neonates (odds ratio 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.82). One study reported 50% reduction in the need for mechanical ventilation following the introduction of bubble CPAP (relative risk 0.5, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.66). The proportion of neonates who failed CPAP and required mechanical ventilation varied from 20 to 40% (eight studies). The incidence of air leaks varied from 0 to 7.2% (nine studies). One study reported a significant reduction in the cost of surfactant usage with the introduction of CPAP. Available evidence suggests that CPAP is a safe and effective mode of therapy in preterm neonates with respiratory distress in LMICs. It reduces the in-hospital mortality and the need for ventilation thereby minimizing the need for up-transfer to a referral hospital. But given the overall paucity of studies and the low quality evidence underscores the need for large high-quality studies on the safety, efficacy and cost effectiveness of CPAP therapy in these settings.
Topics: Continuous Positive Airway Pressure; Developing Countries; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Infant; Infant Mortality; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Observational Studies as Topic; Pulmonary Surfactants; Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn
PubMed: 27109089
DOI: 10.1038/jp.2016.29