-
Pediatric Emergency Care Sep 2020The aims of the study were to perform the first systematic review of pediatric syncope etiologies and to determine the most common diagnoses with credible intervals...
OBJECTIVES
The aims of the study were to perform the first systematic review of pediatric syncope etiologies and to determine the most common diagnoses with credible intervals (CredIs).
METHODS
Review was performed within Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines and used Embase, Scopus, PubMed, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial databases. The following inclusion criteria for the articles were used: minimum of 10 patients, standard definition of syncope used, subjects who were 21 years or younger, and subjects who were either a consecutive retrospective group or a prospective group. No restrictions were made regarding language of the studies, but an English abstract was required. The following information was collected: purpose of the study, definition of syncope, number of patients, patient age range, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and etiologies of syncope.
RESULTS
Of the 500 articles initially identified, 11 studies met the inclusion criteria and were the basis for this review. Three thousand seven hundred patients were included, ranging in age from 3 months to 21 years. The most common etiologies identified were vasovagal (52.2%; 95% CredI, 50.6-53.9), postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (13.1%; 95% CredI, 12.1-14.2), and cardiac causes (4.0%; 95% CredI, 3.39-4.65). A total of 18.3% (95% CredI, 17.0-19.5) of patients were found to have syncope of unknown cause.
CONCLUSIONS
Syncope is a common pediatric complaint. Most cases seen are a result of benign causes, with only a small percentage because of serious medical conditions. In addition, most syncopal episodes in the pediatric population are diagnosed clinically or with minimally invasive testing, emphasizing the importance of a detailed history and physical examination.
Topics: Child; Diagnosis, Differential; Humans; Medical History Taking; Physical Examination; Syncope
PubMed: 32530839
DOI: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000002149 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2020Lumbosacral radicular pain (commonly called sciatica) is a syndrome involving patients who report radiating leg pain. Epidural corticosteroid injections deliver a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Lumbosacral radicular pain (commonly called sciatica) is a syndrome involving patients who report radiating leg pain. Epidural corticosteroid injections deliver a corticosteroid dose into the epidural space, with the aim of reducing the local inflammatory process and, consequently, relieving the symptoms of lumbosacral radicular pain. This Cochrane Review is an update of a review published in Annals of Internal Medicine in 2012. Some placebo-controlled trials have been published recently, which highlights the importance of updating the previous review.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the efficacy and safety of epidural corticosteroid injections compared with placebo injection on pain and disability in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases without language limitations up to 25 September 2019: Cochrane Back and Neck group trial register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and two trial registers. We also performed citation tracking of included studies and relevant systematic reviews in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included studies that compared epidural corticosteroid injections of any corticosteroid drug to placebo injections in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain. We accepted all three anatomical approaches (caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal) to delivering corticosteroids into the epidural space. We considered trials that included a placebo treatment as delivery of an inert substance (i.e. one with no pharmacologic activity), an innocuous substance (e.g. normal saline solution), or a pharmacologically active substance but not one considered to provide sustained benefit (e.g. local anaesthetic), either into the epidural space (i.e. to mimic epidural corticosteroid injection) or adjacent spinal tissue (i.e. subcutaneous, intramuscular, or interspinous tissue). We also included trials in which a local anaesthetic with a short duration of action was used as a placebo and injected together with corticosteroid in the intervention group.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently performed the screening, data extraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessments. In case of insufficient information, we contacted the authors of the original studies or estimated the data. We grouped the outcome data into four time points of assessment: immediate (≤ 2 weeks), short term (> 2 weeks but ≤ 3 months), intermediate term (> 3 months but < 12 months), and long term (≥ 12 months). We assessed the overall quality of evidence for each outcome and time point using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 25 clinical trials (from 29 publications) investigating the effects of epidural corticosteroid injections compared to placebo in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain. The included studies provided data for a total of 2470 participants with a mean age ranging from 37.3 to 52.8 years. Seventeen studies included participants with lumbosacral radicular pain with a diagnosis based on clinical assessment and 15 studies included participants with mixed duration of symptoms. The included studies were conducted mainly in North America and Europe. Fifteen studies did not report funding sources, five studies reported not receiving funding, and five reported receiving funding from a non-profit or government source. Eight trials reported data on pain intensity, 12 reported data on disability, and eight studies reported data on adverse events. The duration of the follow-up assessments ranged from 12 hours to 1 year. We considered eight trials to be of high quality because we judged them as having low risk of bias in four out of the five bias domains. We identified one ongoing trial in a trial registry. Epidural corticosteroid injections were probably slightly more effective compared to placebo in reducing leg pain at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) -4.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.77 to -1.09 on a 0 to 100 scale; 8 trials, n = 949; moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias)). For disability, epidural corticosteroid injections were probably slightly more effective compared to placebo in reducing disability at short-term follow-up (MD -4.18, 95% CI -6.04 to -2.17, on a 0 to 100 scale; 12 trials, n = 1367; moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias)). The treatment effects are small, however, and may not be considered clinically important by patients and clinicians (i.e. MD lower than 10%). Most trials provided insufficient information on how or when adverse events were assessed (immediate or short-term follow-up) and only reported adverse drug reactions - that is, adverse events that the trialists attributed to the study treatment. We are very uncertain that epidural corticosteroid injections make no difference compared to placebo injection in the frequency of minor adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 1.14, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.42; 8 trials, n = 877; very low quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision)). Minor adverse events included increased pain during or after the injection, non-specific headache, post-dural puncture headache, irregular periods, accidental dural puncture, thoracic pain, non-local rash, sinusitis, vasovagal response, hypotension, nausea, and tinnitus. One study reported a major drug reaction for one patient on anticoagulant therapy who had a retroperitoneal haematoma as a complication of the corticosteroid injection.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This study found that epidural corticosteroid injections probably slightly reduced leg pain and disability at short-term follow-up in people with lumbosacral radicular pain. In addition, no minor or major adverse events were reported at short-term follow-up after epidural corticosteroid injections or placebo injection. Although the current review identified additional clinical trials, the available evidence still provides only limited support for the use of epidural corticosteroid injections in people with lumbosacral radicular pain as the treatment effects are small, mainly evident at short-term follow-up and may not be considered clinically important by patients and clinicians (i.e. mean difference lower than 10%). According to GRADE, the quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate, suggesting that further studies are likely to play an important role in clarifying the efficacy and tolerability of this treatment. We recommend that further trials should attend to methodological features such as appropriate allocation concealment and blinding of care providers to minimise the potential for biased estimates of treatment and harmful effects.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Anesthetics, Local; Humans; Injections, Epidural; Lumbosacral Region; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sciatica
PubMed: 32271952
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013577 -
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 2022Sleep syncope is a subtype of vasovagal syncope in which patients experience syncope after awakening from their sleep. The aim was to investigate the association of...
BACKGROUND
Sleep syncope is a subtype of vasovagal syncope in which patients experience syncope after awakening from their sleep. The aim was to investigate the association of clinical characteristics and gastrointestinal symptoms with syncope, as well as the body position in which symptoms began.
METHODS
A systematic search of studies was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE without language restrictions, from inception to 9 January 2022. Studies were included if they reported data on the proportion of patients who experienced symptoms (nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and diarrhea) associated with syncope.
RESULTS
Data were included for 116 patients in 13 studies. Patients were 46.9 ± 4.3 years and 61.4% were female. In 52.5% of patients, a supine body position at the time of syncope was reported. A history of phobias was reported by 67.6% of patients, and 96.5% of patients also had typical daytime vasovagal syncope. In the 5 studies reporting the results of head-up tilt testing ( = 77), 90.9% of patients had positive tests. Gastrointestinal symptoms were present in the majority of patients with reported rates of 65.6% for upper gastrointestinal symptoms and 86.0% for lower gastrointestinal symptoms.
CONCLUSION
Patients with sleep syncope patients are predominantly female with a history of daytime vasovagal syncope. Gastrointestinal symptoms are present in the majority of patients and is therefore an important feature of sleep syncope.
PubMed: 36277790
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.973368 -
Clinical Cardiology Jul 2023Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is the most prevalent type of syncope and its management includes pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions. Recently, studies have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is the most prevalent type of syncope and its management includes pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions. Recently, studies have investigated vitamin D levels in VVS patients. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to review these studies to find possible associations between vitamin D deficiency and vitamin D levels with VVS. International databases including Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase were searched with keywords related to "vasovagal syncope" and "vitamin D." Studies were screened and the data were extracted from them. Random-effect meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for vitamin D levels in comparison to VVS patients and controls. Also, VVS occurrence was measured and the odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI were calculated for comparison of vitamin D deficient cases and nondeficient individuals. Six studies were included with 954 cases investigated. Meta-analysis showed that patients with VVS had significantly lower vitamin D serum levels in comparison to non-VVS cases (SMD -1.05, 95% CI -1.54 to -0.57, p-value < .01). Moreover, VVS occurrence was higher in vitamin D-deficient individuals (OR 5.43, 95% CI 2.40 to 12.27, p-value < .01). Our findings which show lower vitamin D levels in VVS patients can have clinical implications in order for clinicians to pay attention to this when approaching VVS. Further randomized controlled trials are certainly warranted to assess the role of vitamin D supplementation in individuals with VVS.
Topics: Humans; Tilt-Table Test; Syncope, Vasovagal; Syncope; Vitamin D Deficiency; Vitamin D
PubMed: 37226313
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24035 -
Global Epidemiology Jun 2024Today, vasovagal syncope is a common problem that has become a significant health and social challenge. The present study investigated the global prevalence of vasovagal... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Today, vasovagal syncope is a common problem that has become a significant health and social challenge. The present study investigated the global prevalence of vasovagal syncope using a systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis study, the global prevalence of vasovagal syncope using the keywords Prevalence, Epidemiology, Vasovagal syncope, and Reflex syncope in PubMed, WoS, Scopus, ScienceDirect databases, and Google scholar search engine without time limit until July 20, 2022, was extracted and transferred to the information management software (EndNote). Then the repeated studies were excluded, and researchers evaluated the remaining studies during three stages (i.e., screening, eligibility, and qualitative assessment). The heterogeneity of studies was investigated using the I index, and the analysis of eligible studies was performed using the random effects model.
RESULTS
In the review of 12 studies with a sample size of 36,156 people, the global prevalence of vasovagal syncope was reported as 16.4 (95%CI: 6-37.5), and the study of publication bias in the studies through the Egger test shows the absence of publication bias in the studies.
CONCLUSION
The prevalence reported in the studies shows a high prevalence of vasovagal syncope, which requires serious intervention and preventive, diagnostic, and therapeutic measures. It is necessary for health policymakers to take effective measures in this field.
PubMed: 38283939
DOI: 10.1016/j.gloepi.2024.100136 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Hysteroscopy done in an outpatient setting is the 'gold standard' method for evaluating the uterine cavity. Media used to distend the uterine cavity include gas as... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hysteroscopy done in an outpatient setting is the 'gold standard' method for evaluating the uterine cavity. Media used to distend the uterine cavity include gas as carbon dioxide and liquid as saline that can be used at room temperature or warmed to body temperature. Both media offer advantages as well as disadvantages.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review is to compare the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of gas (carbon dioxide) and liquid (normal saline) used for uterine distension during outpatient hysteroscopy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO on 28 April 2021. We checked references of relevant trials and contacted study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies. CINAHL records and ongoing trials from the trial registries were included in the CENTRAL search.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing saline with carbon dioxide, as well as RCTs comparing saline at different temperatures, for uterine distension in outpatient hysteroscopy done for any indication.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Primary review outcomes were patient tolerability and adverse events or complications related to the distending medium. Secondary outcomes were quality of the hysteroscopic view and duration of the procedure.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 RCTs (1946 women). The quality of evidence ranged from very low to high: the main limitations were risk of bias due to absence of blinding due to the nature of the procedure, imprecision, and inconsistency. Saline versus carbon dioxide Analysis ruled out a clinically relevant difference in pain scores during the procedure between saline and carbon dioxide, but the quality of evidence was low (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.02; 9 RCTs, N = 1705; I² = 86%). This translates to differences of 0.39 cm (lower) and 0.05 cm (higher) on a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Evidence was insufficient to show differences between groups in the proportion of procedures abandoned due to intense pain (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.42; 1 RCT, N = 189; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether saline decreases the need for analgesia compared to carbon dioxide (Peto OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.99; 1 RCT, N = 189; very low-quality evidence). Saline compared to carbon dioxide is probably associated with fewer vasovagal reaction events (Peto OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.86; 6 RCTs, N = 1076; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer shoulder-tip pain events (Peto OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54; 4 RCTs, N = 623; I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). Evidence suggests that if 10% of women undergoing outpatient hysteroscopy experience a vasovagal reaction event with the use of carbon dioxide, this rate would be between 3% and 9% with the use of saline. Similarly, if the rate of shoulder-tip pain with carbon dioxide is 9%, it would be between 1% and 5% with saline. We are uncertain whether saline is similar to carbon dioxide in terms of endometrial bleeding (Peto OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.75; 2 RCTs, N = 349; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Infection was not reported by any study in this comparison. Saline may result in fewer procedures with an unsatisfactory hysteroscopic view than carbon dioxide (Peto OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.82; 5 RCTs, N = 1082; I² = 67%; low-quality evidence). The duration of the procedure was shorter with saline in three of the four studies that reported this outcome, and duration was similar in both arms in the fourth study. Warm saline versus room temperature saline Use of warm saline for uterine distension during office hysteroscopy may reduce pain scores when compared with room temperature saline (mean difference (MD) -1.14, 95% CI -1.55 to -0.73; 3 RCTs, N = 241; I² = 77%; low-quality evidence). Evidence is insufficient to show differences between groups in either the proportion of procedures abandoned due to intense pain (Peto OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.87; 1 RCT, N = 77; very low-quality evidence) or the need for analgesia (Peto OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.32; 1 RCT, N = 100; very low-quality evidence). Analysis ruled out a clinically relevant difference in duration of the procedure between warm and room temperature saline, but the quality of evidence is low (MD 13.17 seconds, 95% CI -12.96 to 39.29; 2 RCTs, N = 141; I² = 21%). No cases of infection were reported in either group (1 RCT, N = 100). No other adverse events and no information on quality of the hysteroscopic view were reported by any study in this comparison.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence was insufficient to show differences between different distension media used for uterine distension in outpatient hysteroscopy in terms of patient tolerability, operator satisfaction, or duration of the procedure. However, saline was superior to carbon dioxide in producing fewer adverse events (shoulder-tip pain and vasovagal reaction).
Topics: Endometrium; Female; Humans; Hysteroscopy; Outpatients; Pain; Pregnancy; Uterus
PubMed: 34826139
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006604.pub2 -
American Journal of Blood Research 2020There are a lot of reports related to adverse reactions post blood donation. The present study is designed to investigate the incidence of adverse reactions in blood... (Review)
Review
There are a lot of reports related to adverse reactions post blood donation. The present study is designed to investigate the incidence of adverse reactions in blood donation around the world. This research was conducted through searching databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EmBase, Ovid, as well as the specialized journal of TRANSFUSION without any time limit by using the keywords including "Adverse Event", "Adverse Effect", "Adverse Reaction", "Complication", "Side Effect", "Vasovagal Reaction", "Local Reaction", "General Reaction", "Allergic Reaction", "Blood Donor", and "Blood Donation". In the initial search, 7054 documents were found, of which 2517 duplicates were excluded. After screening the remaining 4,537 documents, 97 one were reviewed for quality assessment, of which 30 with the appropriate quality were selected for the review process. The results of the study showed that the reactions caused by blood donation are very different. Most reactions were systemic, and ranged from 0.08 to 13 percent in different countries. The incidence of adverse reactions in blood donation differ across the countries which might be related to the donors' characteristics. The difference did even existed in studies conducted in the same country and the same year. This suggests that many factors can cause adverse reactions in blood donation, and that a wide range of them investigated in one study, most of which were systemic.
PubMed: 33224558
DOI: No ID Found -
Cureus Dec 2022Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is a transient, sudden loss of consciousness followed by complete resolution, usually due to a paradoxical autonomic reaction that results in... (Review)
Review
Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is a transient, sudden loss of consciousness followed by complete resolution, usually due to a paradoxical autonomic reaction that results in hypotension and/or bradycardia. In this study, we assessed the correlation between VVS and a patient's psychiatric status, as well as if this association could be a target in the treatment of those patients. We conducted a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched the available literature using the following databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect, with last access on July 21, 2022. The search resulted in 1691 articles, and inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to nine remaining articles, all of which were accepted after using the quality assessment tools, four observational and four randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Four of the included studies assessed the correlation among vasovagal syncope, psychosocial impairment, and quality of life. We found a consistent correlation among VVS, psychosocial impairment, and quality of life (QoL), meaning that VVS patients usually have some degree of psychosocial impairment, especially in the form of anxiety and depression, and a poorer QoL in comparison to their healthy counterparts. The use of psychotherapy and antidepressants was proven to be effective in VVS in RCTs, but further evidence is needed.
PubMed: 36694488
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.32793 -
Journal of Arrhythmia Apr 2023Brugada syndrome is an inherited arrhythmic disease associated with major arrhythmic events (MAE). The importance of primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in...
INTRODUCTION
Brugada syndrome is an inherited arrhythmic disease associated with major arrhythmic events (MAE). The importance of primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in Brugada syndrome is well recognized; however, ventricular arrhythmia risk stratification remains challenging and controversial. We aimed to assess the association of type of syncope with MAE via systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
We comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to December 2021. Included studies were cohort (prospective or retrospective) studies that reported the types of syncope (cardiac, unexplained, vasovagal, and undifferentiated) and MAE. Data from each study were combined using the random-effects, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Seventeen studies from 2005 to 2019 were included in this meta-analysis involving 4355 Brugada syndrome patients. Overall, syncope was significantly associated with an increased risk of MAE in Brugada syndrome (OR = 3.90, 95% CI: 2.22-6.85, < .001, = 76.0%). By syncope type, cardiac (OR = 4.48, 95% CI: 2.87-7.01, < .001, = 0.0%) and unexplained (OR = 4.71, 95% CI: 1.34-16.57, = .016, = 37.3%) syncope was significantly associated with increased risk of MAE in Brugada syndrome. Vasovagal (OR = 2.90, 95% CI: 0.09-98.45, = .554, = 70.9%) and undifferentiated syncope (OR = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.00-4.03, = .050, = 64.6%, respectively) were not.
CONCLUSION
Our study demonstrated that cardiac and unexplained syncope was associated with MAE risk in Brugada syndrome populations but not in vasovagal syncope and undifferentiated syncope. Unexplained syncope is associated with a similar increased risk of MAE compared to cardiac syncope.
PubMed: 37021016
DOI: 10.1002/joa3.12822 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Orthostatic hypotension is an excessive fall in blood pressure (BP) while standing and is the result of a decrease in cardiac output or defective or inadequate...
BACKGROUND
Orthostatic hypotension is an excessive fall in blood pressure (BP) while standing and is the result of a decrease in cardiac output or defective or inadequate vasoconstrictor mechanisms. Fludrocortisone is a mineralocorticoid that increases blood volume and blood pressure. Fludrocortisone is considered the first- or second-line pharmacological therapy for orthostatic hypotension alongside mechanical and positional measures such as increasing fluid and salt intake and venous compression methods. However, there has been no Cochrane Review of the benefits and harms of this drug for this condition.
OBJECTIVES
To identify and evaluate the benefits and harms of fludrocortisone for orthostatic hypotension.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases on 11 November 2019: Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL. We also searched trials registries.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all studies evaluating the benefits and harms of fludrocortisone compared to placebo, another drug for orthostatic hypotension, or studies without comparators, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and observational studies. We included studies in people with orthostatic hypotension due to a chronic peripheral neuropathy, a central autonomic neuropathy, or autonomic failure from other causes, but not medication-induced orthostatic hypotension or orthostatic hypotension from acute volume depletion or blood loss.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used Cochrane methodological procedures for most of the review. We developed and used a tool to prioritize observational studies that offered the best available evidence where there are gaps in the evidence from RCTs. We assessed the certainty of evidence for fludrocortisone versus placebo using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 studies of 513 participants, including three cross-over RCTs and 10 observational studies (three cohort studies, six case series and one case-control study). The included RCTs were small (total of 28 participants in RCTs), short term (two to three weeks), only examined fludrocortisone for orthostatic hypotension in people with two conditions (diabetes and Parkinson disease), and had variable risk of bias (two had unclear risk of bias and one had low risk of bias). Heterogeneity in participant populations, comparators and outcome assessment methods prevented meta-analyses of the RCTs. We found very low-certainty evidence about the effects of fludrocortisone versus placebo on drop in BP in people with diabetes (-26 mmHg versus -39 mmHg systolic; -7 mmHg versus -11 mmHg diastolic; 1 cross-over study, 6 participants). For people with Parkinson disease, we found very-low certainty evidence about the effects of fludrocortisone on drop in BP compared to pyridostigmine (-14 mmHg versus -22.1 mmHg diastolic; P = 0.036; 1 cross-over study, 9 participants) and domperidone (no change after treatment in either group; 1 cross-over study, 13 participants). For orthostatic symptoms, we found very low-certainty evidence for fludrocortisone versus placebo in people with diabetes (4 out of 5 analyzed participants had improvements in orthostatic symptoms, 1 cross-over study, 6 participants), for fludrocortisone versus pyridostigmine in people with Parkinson disease (orthostatic symptoms unchanged; 1 cross-over study, 9 participants) or fludrocortisone versus domperidone (improvement to 6 for both interventions on the Composite Autonomic Symptom Scale-Orthostatic Domain (COMPASS-OD); 1 cross-over study, 13 participants). Evidence on adverse events was also very low-certainty in both populations, but indicated side effects were minimal. Observational studies filled some gaps in evidence by examining the effects in larger groups of participants, with more diverse conditions, over longer periods of time. One cohort study (341 people studied retrospectively) found fludrocortisone may not be harmful in the long term for familial dysautonomia. However, it is unclear if this translates to long-term improvements in BP drop or a meaningful improvement in orthostatic symptoms.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of fludrocortisone on blood pressure, orthostatic symptoms or adverse events in people with orthostatic hypotension and diabetes or Parkinson disease. There is a lack of information on long-term treatment and treatment of orthostatic hypotension in other disease states. There is a need for standardized reporting of outcomes and for standardization of measurements of blood pressure in orthostatic hypotension.
Topics: Bias; Diabetes Mellitus; Domperidone; Dysautonomia, Familial; Fludrocortisone; Humans; Hypotension, Orthostatic; Observational Studies as Topic; Parkinson Disease; Pyridostigmine Bromide; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34000076
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012868.pub2