-
The International Journal of... Jun 2024Central nervous system involvement by Brucella species is the most morbid form of brucellosis disease. Studies on neurobrucellosis are scarce and limited to case reports... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Central nervous system involvement by Brucella species is the most morbid form of brucellosis disease. Studies on neurobrucellosis are scarce and limited to case reports and series. Brucella is unable to infect or harm neurons without the assistance of monocytes. This raises the question of whether ceftriaxone-based regimens are effective.
METHODS
The primary aim of this study was to identify, evaluate, and summarize the findings of all relevant individual studies in the past 30 years to help better understand the disease. To achieve this, a broad systematic search was undertaken to identify all relevant records. Epidemiological and clinical features of the disease were assessed by the pooled analysis of descriptive studies. Through a meta-analysis, the treatment period duration was compared between the ceftriaxone-based and oral regimens using Standardized mean differences to measure effect size.
RESULTS
448 patients were included in the Meta-analyses from 5 studies. A moderate positive effect was found for ceftriaxone-based regimens over oral treatments, and there was a significant difference between these two groups (SMD 0.428, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.22, I 2 = 37.64). Neurobrucellosis has a different clinical picture in pediatric patients. The disease is less chronic in children. Fever, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, and abdominal pain were significantly more prevalent symptoms in children, and Convulsions, ascites, sensorineural hearing loss, and papilledema were significantly more prevalent signs in children than adults.
CONCLUSION
It is recommended to initiate the treatment of neurobrucellosis with IV ceftriaxone therapy in combination with oral therapy.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Ceftriaxone; Administration, Oral; Brucella; Brucellosis; Fatigue
PubMed: 35930502
DOI: 10.1080/00207454.2022.2100776 -
EBioMedicine Dec 2023Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a common complication of diabetes, associated with important morbidity. Appropriate animal models of DFUs may improve drug development,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a common complication of diabetes, associated with important morbidity. Appropriate animal models of DFUs may improve drug development, and subsequently the success rate of clinical trials. However, while many models have been proposed, they are extremely heterogeneous, and no standard has emerged. We thus propose a systematic review with a network meta-analysis (NMA) to gather direct and indirect evidence, and compare the different mouse models of diabetes-related ulcers.
METHODS
The systematic search was performed in Pubmed and Embase. The main outcomes were wound size measurement at days 3, 7, 11 and 15 (±1 day). The risk of bias and methodological quality of all included studies was assessed by using the Systematic Review Center for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) risk of bias tool. Meta-regressions were done on prespecified variables, including mouse strain, type of ulcer, sex, age, and use of a splint.
FINDINGS
We included 295 studies. Among all models, only db/db, ob/ob, streptozotocin (STZ), and STZ + high fat diet mice showed a significantly delayed wound healing, compared with controls, at each time point. Age, sex and ulcer type had influence on wound healing, although not at all time points.
INTERPRETATION
In conclusion, the db/db model is associated with the largest delay in wound healing The STZ model also exhibits significantly decreased wound healing. STZ + high fat diet and ob/ob mice may also be relevant models of diabetes-related ulcers, although the results rely on a more limited number of studies.
FUNDING
This work was funded by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (grant ANR-18-CE17-0017).
Topics: Animals; Mice; Network Meta-Analysis; Disease Models, Animal; Diabetic Foot; Animal Experimentation; Diet, High-Fat; Streptozocin; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 38251464
DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2023.104856 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2023Despite potential analgesic benefits from topical ophthalmic amides and esters, their outpatient use has become of concern because of the potential for abuse and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Despite potential analgesic benefits from topical ophthalmic amides and esters, their outpatient use has become of concern because of the potential for abuse and ophthalmic complications.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of topical ophthalmic anesthetics compared with placebo or other treatments in persons with corneal abrasions.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; Embase.com; Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences (LILACS); ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), without restriction on language or year of publication. The search was performed on 10 February 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of topical ophthalmic anesthetics alone or in combination with another treatment (e.g. nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)) versus a non-anesthetic control group (e.g. placebo, non-treatment, or alternative treatment). We included trials that enrolled participants of all ages who had corneal abrasions within 48 hours of presentation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine parallel-group RCTs with a total of 556 participants (median number of participants per study: 45, interquartile range (IQR) 44 to 74), conducted in eight countries: Australia, Canada, France, South Korea, Turkey, New Zealand, UK, and USA. Study characteristics and risk of bias Four RCTs (314 participants) investigated post-traumatic corneal abrasions diagnosed in the emergency department setting. Five trials described 242 participants from ophthalmology surgery centers with post-surgical corneal defects: four from photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and one from pterygium surgery. Study duration ranged from two days to six months, the most common being one week (four RCTs). Treatment duration ranged from three hours to one week (nine RCTs); the majority were between 24 and 48 hours (five RCTs). The age of participants was reported in eight studies, ranging from 17 to 74 years of age. Only one participant in one trial was under 18 years of age. Of four studies that reported funding sources, none was industry-sponsored. We judged a high risk of bias in one trial with respect to the outcome pain control by 48 hours, and in five of seven trials with respect to the outcome complications at the furthest time point. The domain for which we assessed studies to be at the highest risk of bias was missing or selective reporting of outcome data. Findings The treatments investigated included topical anesthetics compared with placebo, topical anesthetic compared with NSAID (post-surgical cases), and topical anesthetics plus NSAID compared with placebo (post-surgical cases). Pain control by 24 hours In all studies, self-reported pain outcomes were on a 10-point scale, where lower numbers represent less pain. In post-surgical trials, topical anesthetics provided a moderate reduction in self-reported pain at 24 hours compared with placebo of 1.28 points on a 10-point scale (mean difference (MD) -1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.76 to -0.80; 3 RCTs, 119 participants). In the post-trauma participants, there may be little or no difference in effect (MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.02; 1 RCT, 76 participants). Compared with NSAID in post-surgical participants, topical anesthetics resulted in a slight increase in pain at 24 hours (MD 0.82, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.63; 1 RCT, 74 participants). One RCT compared topical anesthetics plus NSAID to placebo. There may be a large reduction in pain at 24 hours with topical anesthetics plus NSAID in post-surgical participants, but the evidence to support this large effect is very uncertain (MD -5.72, 95% CI -7.35 to -4.09; 1 RCT, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Pain control by 48 hours Compared with placebo, topical anesthetics reduced post-trauma pain substantially by 48 hours (MD -5.68, 95% CI -6.38 to -4.98; 1 RCT, 111 participants) but had little to no effect on post-surgical pain (MD 0.41, 95% CI -0.45 to 1.27; 1 RCT, 44 participants), although the evidence is very uncertain. Pain control by 72 hours One post-surgical RCT showed little or no effect of topical anesthetics compared with placebo by 72 hours (MD 0.49, 95% CI -0.06 to 1.04; 44 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Proportion of participants with unresolved epithelial defects When compared with placebo or NSAID, topical anesthetics increased the number of participants without complete resolution of defects in trials of post-trauma participants (risk ratio (RR) 1.37, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.42; 3 RCTs, 221 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The proportion of placebo-treated post-surgical participants with unresolved epithelial defects at 24 to 72 hours was lower when compared with those assigned to topical anesthetics (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.55; 1 RCT, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or topical anesthetics plus NSAID (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.85; 1 RCT, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Proportion of participants with complications at the longest follow-up When compared with placebo or NSAID, topical anesthetics resulted in a higher proportion of post-trauma participants with complications at up to two weeks (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.23 to 5.46; 3 RCTs, 242 participants) and post-surgical participants with complications at up to one week (RR 7.00, 95% CI 0.38 to 128.02; 1 RCT, 44 participants). When topical anesthetic plus NSAID was compared with placebo, no complications were reported in either treatment arm up to one week post-surgery (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.12; 1 RCT, 30 participants). The evidence is very uncertain for safety outcomes. Quality of life None of the included trials assessed quality of life outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite topical anesthetics providing excellent pain control in the intraoperative setting, the currently available evidence provides little or no certainty about their efficacy for reducing ocular pain in the initial 24 to 72 hours after a corneal abrasion, whether from unintentional trauma or surgery. We have very low confidence in this evidence as a basis to recommend topical anesthetics as an efficacious treatment modality to relieve pain from corneal abrasions. We also found no evidence of a substantial effect on epithelial healing up to 72 hours or a reduction in ocular complications when we compared anesthetics alone or with NSAIDs versus placebo.
Topics: Humans; Adolescent; Young Adult; Adult; Middle Aged; Aged; Anesthetics, Local; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Analgesics; Corneal Injuries; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 37555621
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015091.pub2 -
European Journal of Dermatology : EJD Oct 2023Despite extensive research on biological therapies for atopic dermatitis (AD), recent clinical trials of the Janus kinase inhibitor 1, abrocitinib, have provided more... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib for the treatment of adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: update of a living systematic review and meta-analysis.
Despite extensive research on biological therapies for atopic dermatitis (AD), recent clinical trials of the Janus kinase inhibitor 1, abrocitinib, have provided more definitive evidence regarding its efficacy and safety in treating AD. To conduct a living systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe AD. The databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and clinical trial registries were searched from inception of the databases to July 11, 2023. Only randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in individuals with moderate-to-severe AD were included in the meta-analysis. Twelve studies involving a total of 5,644 participants aged 12 years or older were included in the analysis. The pooled results revealed a significantly higher proportion of patients achieving Investigator Global Assessment response (RR = 3.52, 95% CI: 2.78 to 4.46), Eczema Area and Severity Index response (RR = 3.35, 95% CI: 2.54 to 4.41), Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale response (RR = 2.54, 95% CI: 1.95 to 3.30), and Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure response (abrocitinib 100-mg group: -4.25, 95% CrI: -5.24 to -3.27; abrocitinib 200-mg group: -7.69, 95% CrI: -8.39 to -6.99) compared to the placebo group. Additionally, there was no significant differences in adverse events between the abrocitinib and placebo groups. Abrocitinib demonstrates a favourable safety profile and robust efficacy in treating moderate-to-severe AD compared to placebo. The 200-mg dose regimen appears to be more effective than the 100-mg dose regimen for the treatment of AD.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Adolescent; Dermatitis, Atopic; Pyrimidines; Sulfonamides; Eczema; Treatment Outcome; Severity of Illness Index; Double-Blind Method
PubMed: 38297930
DOI: 10.1684/ejd.2023.4557 -
Biomedicines Aug 2023Post-Covid Olfactory Dysfunction (PCOD) is characterized by olfactory abnormalities, hyposmia, and anosmia, which are among the most often enduring symptoms in... (Review)
Review
Post-Covid Olfactory Dysfunction (PCOD) is characterized by olfactory abnormalities, hyposmia, and anosmia, which are among the most often enduring symptoms in individuals who have recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection. This disorder has been reported to persist in subsets of patients well after 12 months following infection, significantly affecting their quality of life. Despite the high prevalence of PCOD among patients who suffered from SARS-CoV-2 infection, specific therapeutic strategies are still limited. Among these, emerging evidence seems to indicate the administration of CoUltraPEALut, a combination of micronized Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA), an endogenous fatty acid amide, and Luteolin, a natural antioxidant flavonoid, as a viable therapy, especially when given as an adjuvant to olfactory training. Based on the above, a systematic review and a meta-analysis of the literature were conducted, with the aim of evaluating the efficacy of CoUltraPEALut as an addition to olfactory training (OT), in treating PCOD symptoms. Pubmed (MEDLINE), Embase (OVID), and Web of Science scientific databases were screened from the inception until 31 May 2023, and a total of 407 articles were recovered; only five of these studies (441 total patients between treated and control groups) were included in the systematic review. CoUltraPEALut demonstrated significant efficacy in the overall recovery of the olfactory function, compared to the conventional therapy, suggesting that it could represent a possible future adjuvant treatment for PCOD.
PubMed: 37626685
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11082189 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Sep 2023Tuberculosis, along with HIV, is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity globally. Despite the fact that several primary studies have been conducted on the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Tuberculosis, along with HIV, is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity globally. Despite the fact that several primary studies have been conducted on the incidence rate of tuberculosis in HIV-infected people in Sub-Saharan Africa, the regional-level tuberculosis incidence rate remains unknown. The objective of this study is to determine the tuberculosis incidence rate and its associated factors in HIV-infected people in Sub-Saharan Africa.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by searching four databases for studies published in English between January 1, 2000, and November 25, 2022. The study was carried out using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method. To assess the quality of the studies, the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist was used. A random-effects model meta-analysis was used to determine the pooled incidence of tuberculosis using STATA version 15. The I heterogeneity test was used to assess heterogeneity. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. Funnel plots and Egger's regression tests were used to investigate publication bias. The pooled estimate predictors of tuberculosis incidence rate with a 95% confidence interval were also determined using the hazard ratio of each factor (HR).
RESULTS
Out of a total of 3339 studies, 43 were included in the analysis. The overall pooled incidence rate of tuberculosis in HIV-infected people was 3.49 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 2.88-4.17). In the subgroup analysis, the pooled incidence rate of tuberculosis in HIV-infected children was 3.42 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 1.78, 5.57), and it was 3.79 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 2.63, 5.15) in adults. A meta-analysis revealed that underweight (AHR = 1.79, 95% CI: 1.61-1.96), low CD4 count (AHR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.13-1.35), male gender (AHR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.22-1.64), advanced WHO clinical stages (AHR = 2.29, 95% CI: 1.34-3.23), anemia (AHR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.34-2.13), bedridden or ambulatory (AHR = 1.87, 95%), lack of isoniazid preventive therapy (AHR = 3.32, 95% CI: 1.08-2.28), and lack of cotrimoxazole (AHR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.08-2.28) were risk factors for tuberculosis incidence. HIV patients who received antiretroviral therapy had a 0.53 times higher risk of acquiring tuberculosis than HIV patients who did not receive antiretroviral therapy (AHR = 0.53; 95% CI: 0.3-0.77).
CONCLUSION
In this systematic review and meta-analysis study, the incidence rate of tuberculosis among HIV-positive people was higher than the WHO 2022 Africa regional estimated report. To reduce the incidence of tuberculosis among HIV patients, HIV patients should take isoniazid prevention therapy (IPT), cotrimoxazole prophylaxis, and antiretroviral therapy (ART) without interruption, as well as increase the frequency and diversity of their nutritional intake. Active tuberculosis screening should be increased among HIV-infected people.
Topics: Adult; Child; Male; Humans; Incidence; Isoniazid; HIV Infections; Trimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination; Tuberculosis; Africa South of the Sahara
PubMed: 37723415
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08533-0 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2024Leptospirosis is a disease transmitted from animals to humans through water, soil, or food contaminated with the urine of infected animals, caused by pathogenic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Leptospirosis is a disease transmitted from animals to humans through water, soil, or food contaminated with the urine of infected animals, caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are commonly prescribed for the management of leptospirosis. Despite the widespread use of antibiotic treatment for leptospirosis, there seems to be insufficient evidence to determine its effectiveness or to recommend antibiotic use as a standard practice. This updated systematic review evaluated the available evidence regarding the use of antibiotics in treating leptospirosis, building upon a previously published Cochrane review.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotics versus placebo, no intervention, or another antibiotic for the treatment of people with leptospirosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified randomised clinical trials following standard Cochrane procedures. The date of the last search was 27 March 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised clinical trials of various designs that examined the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis. We did not impose any restrictions based on the age, sex, occupation, or comorbidities of the participants involved in the trials. Our search encompassed trials that evaluated antibiotics, regardless of the method of administration, dosage, and schedule, and compared them with placebo or no intervention, or compared different antibiotics. We included trials regardless of the outcomes reported.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
During the preparation of this review, we adhered to the Cochrane methodology and used Review Manager. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and serious adverse events (nosocomial infection). Our secondary outcomes were quality of life, proportion of people with adverse events considered non-serious, and days of hospitalisation. To assess the risk of bias of the included trials, we used the RoB 2 tool, and for evaluating the certainty of evidence we used GRADEpro GDT software. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD), both accompanied by their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the random-effects model for all our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. For our primary outcome analyses, we included trial data from the longest follow-up period.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified nine randomised clinical trials comprising 1019 participants. Seven trials compared two intervention groups and two trials compared three intervention groups. Amongst the trials comparing antibiotics versus placebos, four trials assessed penicillin and one trial assessed doxycycline. In the trials comparing different antibiotics, one trial evaluated doxycycline versus azithromycin, one trial assessed penicillin versus doxycycline versus cefotaxime, and one trial evaluated ceftriaxone versus penicillin. One trial assessed penicillin with chloramphenicol and no intervention. Apart from two trials that recruited military personnel stationed in endemic areas or military personnel returning from training courses in endemic areas, the remaining trials recruited people from the general population presenting to the hospital with fever in an endemic area. The participants' ages in the included trials was 13 to 92 years. The treatment duration was seven days for penicillin, doxycycline, and cephalosporins; five days for chloramphenicol; and three days for azithromycin. The follow-up durations varied across trials, with three trials not specifying their follow-up periods. Three trials were excluded from quantitative synthesis; one reported zero events for a prespecified outcome, and two did not provide data for any prespecified outcomes. Antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus placebo on all-cause mortality (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.79; I = 8%; 3 trials, 367 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin or chloramphenicol versus placebo on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.17; I = 0%; 2 trials, 162 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials assessed serious adverse events. Antibiotics versus another antibiotic The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cephalosporin on all-cause mortality (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.47 to 4.04; I = 0%; 2 trials, 348 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus doxycycline (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.46; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of cefotaxime versus doxycycline on all-cause mortality (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.78; 1 trial, 169 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus doxycycline on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.62; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or versus cefotaxime (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of doxycycline versus cefotaxime on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cefotaxime (RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.13 to 73.47; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), versus doxycycline (RR 2.80, 95% CI 0.12 to 67.66; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus chloramphenicol on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 3.67; 1 trial, 52 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Funding Six of the nine trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources and three trials did not mention funding source. Four of the six trials mentioning sources received funds from public or governmental sources or from international charitable sources, and the remaining two, in addition to public or governmental sources, received support in the form of trial drug supply directly from pharmaceutical companies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
As the certainty of evidence is very low, we do not know if antibiotics provide little to no effect on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, or adverse events considered non-serious. There is a lack of definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis infection, and the absence of trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes further adds to this limitation.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Doxycycline; Azithromycin; Quality of Life; Chloramphenicol; Penicillins; Cephalosporins; Cefotaxime; Leptospirosis; Cross Infection
PubMed: 38483092
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014960.pub2 -
Rheumatology (Oxford, England) Dec 2023To evaluate the evidence concerning systemic pharmacological treatments for SSc digital ulcers (DUs) to inform the development of evidence-based treatment guidelines.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the evidence concerning systemic pharmacological treatments for SSc digital ulcers (DUs) to inform the development of evidence-based treatment guidelines.
METHODS
A systematic literature review of seven databases was performed to identify all original research studies of adult patients with SSc DUs. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective longitudinal observational studies (OBSs) were eligible for inclusion. Data were extracted, applying the patient, intervention, comparison, outcome framework, and risk of bias (RoB) was assessed. Due to study heterogeneity, narrative summaries were used to present data.
RESULTS
Forty-seven studies that evaluated the treatment efficacy or safety of pharmacological therapies were identified among 4250 references. Data from 18 RCTs of 1927 patients and 29 OBSs of 661 patients, at various RoB (total 2588 patients) showed that i.v. iloprost, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors and atorvastatin are effective for the treatment of active DUs. Bosentan reduced the rate of future DUs in two RCTs (moderate RoB) and eight OBSs at low to high RoB. Two small studies (moderate RoB) indicate that Janus kinase inhibitors may be effective for the treatment of active DUs, otherwise there are no data to support the use of immunosuppression or anti-platelet agents in the management of DUs.
CONCLUSION
There are several systemic treatments, across four medication classes, that are effective therapies for the management of SSc DUs. However, a lack of robust data means it is not possible to define the optimal treatment regimen for SSc DUs. The relatively low quality of evidence available has highlighted further areas of research need.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Skin Ulcer; Fingers; Scleroderma, Systemic; Bosentan
PubMed: 37335850
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kead289 -
Molecular Psychiatry Sep 2023Antipsychotic-induced sialorrhea carries a significant burden, but evidence-based treatment guidance is incomplete, warranting network meta-analysis (NMA) of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Antipsychotic-induced sialorrhea carries a significant burden, but evidence-based treatment guidance is incomplete, warranting network meta-analysis (NMA) of pharmacological interventions for antipsychotic-related sialorrhea. PubMed Central/PsycInfo/Cochrane Central database/Clinicaltrials.gov/WHO-ICTRP and the Chinese Electronic Journal Database (Qikan.cqvip.com) were searched for published/unpublished RCTs of antipsychotic-induced sialorrhea (any definition) in adults, up to 06/12/2023. We assessed global/local inconsistencies, publication bias, risk of bias (RoB2), and confidence in the evidence, conducting subgroup/sensitivity analyses. Co-primary efficacy outcomes were changes in saliva production (standardized mean difference/SMD) and study-defined response (risk ratios/RRs). The acceptability outcome was all-cause discontinuation (RR). Primary nodes were molecules; the mechanism of action (MoA) was secondary. Thirty-four RCTs entered a systematic review, 33 NMA (n = 1958). All interventions were for clozapine-induced sialorrhea in subjects with mental disorders. Regarding individual agents and response, metoclopramide (RR = 3.11, 95% C.I. = 1.39-6.98), cyproheptadine, (RR = 2.76, 95% C.I. = 2.00-3.82), sulpiride (RR = 2.49, 95% C.I. = 1.65-3.77), propantheline (RR = 2.39, 95% C.I. = 1.97-2.90), diphenhydramine (RR = 2.32, 95% C.I. = 1.88-2.86), benzhexol (RR = 2.32, 95% C.I. = 1.59-3.38), doxepin (RR = 2.30, 95% C.I. = 1.85-2.88), amisulpride (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.30-3.81), chlorpheniramine (RR = 2.20, 95% C.I. = 1.67-2.89), amitriptyline (RR = 2.09, 95% C.I. = 1.34-3.26), atropine, (RR = 2.03, 95% C.I. = 1.22-3.38), and astemizole, (RR = 1.70, 95% C.I. = 1.28-2.26) outperformed placebo, but not glycopyrrolate or ipratropium. Across secondary nodes (k = 28, n = 1821), antimuscarinics (RR = 2.26, 95% C.I. = 1.91-2.68), benzamides (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.75-3.10), TCAs (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.83-2.72), and antihistamines (RR = 2.18, 95% C.I. = 1.83-2.59) outperformed placebo. In head-to-head comparisons, astemizole and ipratropium were outperformed by several interventions. All secondary nodes, except benzamides, outperformed the placebo on the continuous efficacy outcome. For nocturnal sialorrhea, neither benzamides nor atropine outperformed the placebo. Active interventions did not differ significantly from placebo regarding constipation or sleepiness/drowsiness. Low-confidence findings prompt caution in the interpretation of the results. Considering primary nodes' co-primary efficacy outcomes and head-to-head comparisons, efficacy for sialorrhea is most consistent for the following agents, decreasing from metoclopramide through cyproheptadine, sulpiride, propantheline, diphenhydramine, benzhexol, doxepin, amisulpride, chlorpheniramine, to amitriptyline, and atropine (the latter not for nocturnal sialorrhea). Shared decision-making with the patient should guide treatment decisions regarding clozapine-related sialorrhea.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Clozapine; Sulpiride; Amisulpride; Sialorrhea; Doxepin; Amitriptyline; Network Meta-Analysis; Propantheline; Trihexyphenidyl; Metoclopramide; Chlorpheniramine; Astemizole; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Cyproheptadine; Diphenhydramine; Ipratropium; Atropine Derivatives
PubMed: 37821573
DOI: 10.1038/s41380-023-02266-x -
European Journal of Medical Research Aug 2023To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan-amoxicillin (VA) dual therapy for radically eradicating Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan-amoxicillin (VA) dual therapy for radically eradicating Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori).
METHODS
The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang databases were searched up to July 7, 2022, to identify clinical trials comparing the efficacy of VA dual therapy and triple therapy for H. pylori eradication. After evaluating the quality of the included studies, random effects models were conducted, and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the efficacy and safety of each approach.
RESULTS
Six publications (including four randomized controlled trials) involving 2019 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, the eradication rate for VA dual therapy was 89.9%, while it was 85.2% for triple therapy based on other acid inhibitors. The eradication rate of H. pylori in the VA dual regimen group was higher than that in the PPI-based (omeprazole or lansoprazole) triple therapy group (RR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.07-1.23, p < 0.0001). However, the efficacy of VA dual therapy was comparable with VA-Clarithromycin (VAC) triple therapy (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.93-1.02). Besides, the incidence of adverse reactions in VA dual therapy was also lower than that in triple therapy (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.91, p = 0.0009).
CONCLUSION
Compared with PPI-based triple therapy, VA dual therapy showed a better therapeutic effect, safety and patient compliance rate for eradicating H. pylori, which should be used as a novel curative strategy in the future.
Topics: Humans; Amoxicillin; Helicobacter pylori; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Helicobacter Infections; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37550781
DOI: 10.1186/s40001-023-01249-6