-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2023Gastro-oesophageal reflux (GOR) is characterised by the regurgitation of gastric contents into the oesophagus. GOR is a common presentation in infancy, both in primary... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Gastro-oesophageal reflux (GOR) is characterised by the regurgitation of gastric contents into the oesophagus. GOR is a common presentation in infancy, both in primary and secondary care, affecting approximately 50% of infants under three months old. The natural history of GOR in infancy is generally of a self-limiting condition that improves with age, but older children and children with co-existing medical conditions can have more protracted symptoms. The distinction between gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) and GOR is debated. Current National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines define GORD as GOR causing symptoms severe enough to merit treatment. This is an update of a review first published in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of pharmacological treatments for GOR in infants and children.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science up to 17 September 2022. We also searched for ongoing trials in clinical trials registries, contacted experts in the field, and searched the reference lists of trials and reviews for any additional trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any currently-available pharmacological treatment for GOR in children with placebo or another medication. We excluded studies assessing dietary management of GORD and studies of thickened feeds. We included studies in infants and children up to 16 years old.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodology expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 36 RCTs involving 2251 children and infants. We were able to extract summary data from 14 RCTs; the remaining trials had insufficient data for extraction. We were unable to pool results in a meta-analysis due to methodological differences in the included studies (including heterogeneous outcomes, study populations, and study design). We present the results in two groups by age: infants up to 12 months old, and children aged 12 months to 16 years old. Infants Omeprazole versus placebo: there is no clear effect on symptoms from omeprazole. One study (30 infants; very low-certainty evidence) showed cry/fuss time in infants aged three to 12 months had altered from 246 ± 105 minutes/day at baseline (mean +/- standard deviation (SD)) to 191 ± 120 minutes/day in the omeprazole group and from 287 ± 132 minutes/day to 201 ± 100 minutes/day in the placebo group (mean difference (MD) 10 minutes/day lower (95% confidence interval (CI) -89.1 to 69.1)). The reflux index changed in the omeprazole group from 9.9 ± 5.8% in 24 hours to 1.0 ± 1.3% and in the placebo group from 7.2 ± 6.0% to 5.3 ± 4.9% in 24 hours (MD 7% lower, 95% CI -4.7 to -9.3). Omeprazole versus ranitidine: one study (76 infants; very low-certainty evidence) showed omeprazole may or may not provide symptomatic benefit equivalent to ranitidine. Symptom scores in the omeprazole group changed from 51.9 ± 5.4 to 2.4 ± 1.2, and in the ranitidine group from 47 ± 5.6 to 2.5 ± 0.6 after two weeks: MD -4.97 (95% CI -7.33 to -2.61). Esomeprazole versus placebo: esomeprazole appeared to show no additional reduction in the number of GORD symptoms compared to placebo (1 study, 52 neonates; very low-certainty evidence): both the esomeprazole group (184.7 ± 78.5 to 156.7 ± 75.1) and placebo group (183.1 ± 77.5 to 158.3 ± 75.9) improved: MD -3.2 (95% CI -4.6 to -1.8). Children Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) at different doses may provide little to no symptomatic and endoscopic benefit. Rabeprazole given at different doses (0.5 mg/kg and 1 mg/kg) may provide similar symptom improvement (127 children in total; very low-certainty evidence). In the lower-dose group (0.5 mg/kg), symptom scores improved in both a low-weight group of children (< 15 kg) (mean -10.6 ± SD 11.13) and a high-weight group of children (> 15 kg) (mean -13.6 ± 13.1). In the higher-dose groups (1 mg/kg), scores improved in the low-weight (-9 ± 11.2) and higher-weight groups (-8.3 ± 9.2). For the higher-weight group, symptom score mean difference between the two different dosing regimens was 2.3 (95% CI -2 to 6.6), and for the lower-weight group, symptom score MD was 4.6 (95% CI -2.9 to 12). Pantoprazole: pantoprazole may or may not improve symptom scores at 0.3 mg/kg, 0.6 mg/kg, and 1.2 mg/kg pantoprazole in children aged one to five years by week eight, with no difference between 0.3 mg/kg and 1.2 mg/kg dosing (0.3 mg/kg mean -2.4 ± 1.7; 1.2 mg/kg -1.7 ± 1.2: MD 0.7 (95% CI -0.4 to 1.8)) (one study, 60 children; very low-certainty evidence). There were insufficient summary data to assess other medications.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is very low-certainty evidence about symptom improvements and changes in pH indices for infants. There are no summary data for endoscopic changes. Medications may or may not provide a benefit (based on very low-certainty evidence) for infants whose symptoms remain bothersome, despite nonmedical interventions or parental reassurance. If a medication is required, there is no clear evidence based on summary data for omeprazole, esomeprazole (in neonates), H₂antagonists, and alginates for symptom improvements (very low-certainty evidence). Further studies with longer follow-up are needed. In older children with GORD, in studies with summary data extracted, there is very low-certainty evidence that PPIs (rabeprazole and pantoprazole) may or may not improve GORD outcomes. No robust data exist for other medications. Further RCT evidence is required in all areas, including subgroups (preterm babies and children with neurodisabilities).
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Esomeprazole; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Omeprazole; Pantoprazole; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Rabeprazole; Ranitidine
PubMed: 37635269
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008550.pub3 -
Drug Metabolism Reviews Nov 2023Nebivolol is a beta-1 receptor blocker used to treat hypertension, heart failure, erectile dysfunction, vascular disease, and diabetes mellitus. This review investigated... (Review)
Review
Nebivolol is a beta-1 receptor blocker used to treat hypertension, heart failure, erectile dysfunction, vascular disease, and diabetes mellitus. This review investigated the data regarding pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters, drug-drug interactions, dextrorotatory (D), and levorotatory (L) stereoisomers of nebivolol. The articles related to the PK of nebivolol were retrieved by searching the five databases; Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, and EBSCO. A total of 20 studies comprising plasma concentration-time profile data following the nebivolol's oral and intravenous (IV) administration were included. The area under the concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC) was 15 times greater in poor metabolizers (PMs) than in extensive metabolizers (EMs). In hypertensive patients, L-nebivolol expressed a higher maximum plasma concentration (C) than D-nebivolol, i.e. 2.5 ng/ml vs 1.2 ng/ml. The AUC of nebivolol was 3-fold greater in chronic kidney disease (CKD). The clearance (CL) was increased in obese than in controls from 51.6 ± 11.6 L/h to 71.6 ± 17.4 L/h when 0.5 mg/ml IV solution was infused. Nebivolol showed higher C, AUC and half-life (t) when co-administered with bupropion, duloxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, lansoprazole, and fluoxetine. This concise review of nebivolol would be advantageous in assessing all PK parameters, which may be crucial for clinicians to avoid drug-drug interactions, prevent adverse drug events and optimize the dosage regimen in diseased patients diagnosed with hypertension and cardiovascular disorders.
Topics: Male; Humans; Nebivolol; Hypertension; Fluvoxamine; Lansoprazole; Drug Interactions
PubMed: 37849071
DOI: 10.1080/03602532.2023.2271195 -
BMC Gastroenterology Oct 2023Since the previous network meta-analysis assessing the efficacy of prokinetics for functional dyspepsia (FD), there have been a number of new studies and cinitapride is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Since the previous network meta-analysis assessing the efficacy of prokinetics for functional dyspepsia (FD), there have been a number of new studies and cinitapride is a new prokinetic agent for FD. This updated meta-analysis aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of prokinetics for FD.
METHODS
An updated study search in Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science was conducted in literatures published from July 2015 to March 2023. Randomized controlled trials investigating the use of prokinetics in adult FD patients were included. The primary outcome was the total efficacy rate and the secondary outcome was adverse events. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using R software.
RESULTS
A total of 28 studies were included. Network meta-analysis showed that metoclopramide had a higher total efficacy rate than mosapride (OR: 3.53, 95%CI: 1.70-7.47), domperidone (OR: 2.29, 95%CI: 1.16-4.63), itopride(OR: 2.77, 95%CI: 1.41-5.59), acotiamide(OR: 2.63, OR: 1.33-5.36), and placebo(OR: 5.68, 95%CI: 2.98-11.10), however similar to cinitapride (OR: 1.62, 95%CI: 0.75-3.53). Cinitapride had a higher total efficacy rate than mosapride (OR: 2.18, 95%CI: 1.16-4.14) and placebo (OR: 3.52, 95%CI: 2.01-6.24). Cinitapride had lower risk of total adverse events than domperidone. There was no difference in the risk of drug-related adverse events between the prokinetics.
CONCLUSIONS
Metoclopramide and cinitapride may have a better efficacy than other prokinetics in the treatment of FD, and cinitapride may have a lower risk of total adverse events. Further studies using uniform definitions or validated tools to measure the total efficacy rate are needed.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Dyspepsia; Domperidone; Metoclopramide; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37907846
DOI: 10.1186/s12876-023-03014-9 -
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 -
Safety of misoprostol vs dinoprostone for induction of labor: A systematic review and meta-analysis.European Journal of Obstetrics,... Oct 2023Pharmacological agents such as prostaglandins (dinoprostone and misoprostol) are commonly used to reduce the duration of labor and promote vaginal delivery. However, key... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Pharmacological agents such as prostaglandins (dinoprostone and misoprostol) are commonly used to reduce the duration of labor and promote vaginal delivery. However, key safety considerations with its use include an increased risk of uterine rupture, tachysystole and hyperstimulation of pregnant women, which could potentially lead to a non-reassuring fetal heart rate and to fetal hypoxemia. The aim of this systematic review was to assess maternal and fetal outcomes between misoprostol group (PGE1) and dinoprostone group (PGE2) STUDY DESIGN: We search on MEDLINE (PubMed), CINHAL (EBSCOhost), EMBASE, Scopus (Ovid), CENTRAL (January 1, 1998, to December 31, 2022). Patients were eligible if they presented at greater than 36 weeks gestation with an indication for induction of labor and a single live cephalic fetus. We conducted a meta-analysis of data for both primary (cesarean section rate, instrumental deliveries rate, tachysystole, uterine rupture, post-partum haemorrage; chorionamiositis) and secondary outcomes (Apgar at 5 min <7, meconium-stained liquor, NICU admission, infant death) using odds-ratio (OR) as a measure of effect-size. Risk of bias assessment was performed with RoB-I. We performed statistical analyses using Cochrane RevMan version 5.4 software.
RESULTS
We found 39 RCTs comparing the outcomes of interest between misoprostol and dinoprostone. The pooled effect showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of cesarean section rate [OR: 0.94; 95% CI 0.84-1.05], instrumental deliveries rate [OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.90-1.19; p = 0.62], tachysystole [OR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.91-1.60; p = 0.19], post-partum hemorrhage [OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.62-1.15p = 0.30], chorioamnionitis [OR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.76-1.17p = 0.59], Apgar at 5 min < 7 [OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.61-1.12, p = 0.21], meconium-stained liquor [OR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.97-1.27p = 0.59], NICU admission group [OR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.77-1.09], infant death [OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.22-1.44]. After performing a sub-group analysis based on the type of prostaglandins administrations (oral, vaginal gel, vaginal pessary), results did not change substantially.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that misoprostol and dinoprostone appear to have a similar safety profile.
Topics: Infant; Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Dinoprostone; Misoprostol; Cesarean Section; Uterine Rupture; Prostaglandins; Oxytocics; Abortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal; Infant Death; Labor, Induced
PubMed: 37660506
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.08.382 -
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Mar 2024Low-dose aspirin (LDA) administration is associated with an elevated risk of recurring peptic ulcer (PU) and gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Low-dose aspirin (LDA) administration is associated with an elevated risk of recurring peptic ulcer (PU) and gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage.
AIMS
This systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively assess the effectiveness of diverse medications in preventing the recurrence of PU and GI hemorrhage in patients with a history of PU receiving long-term LDA therapy.
METHODS
This systematic review and network meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023406550). We searched relevant studies in main databases from inception to March 2023. All statistical analyses were performed using R (version 4.1.3), with the "Gemtc" (version 1.0-1) package. The pooled risk ratio (RR), corresponding 95% credible interval (95% CrI), and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) were calculated.
RESULTS
11 Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. The analysis underscored pantoprazole was the most efficacious for reducing the risk of PU recurrence (RR [95% CrI] = 0.02 [0, 0.28]; SUCRA: 90.76%), followed by vonoprazan (RR [95% CrI] = 0.03 [0, 0.19]; SUCRA: 86.47%), comparing with the placebo group. Pantoprazole also performed well in preventing GI hemorrhage (RR [95% CrI] = 0.01[0, 0.42]; SUCRA: 87.12%) compared with Teprenone.
CONCLUSIONS
For patients with a history of PU receiving LDA, pantoprazole and vonoprazan might be the optimal choices to prevent PU recurrence and GI hemorrhage.
Topics: Humans; Pantoprazole; Peptic Ulcer; Aspirin; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Pyrroles; Sulfonamides
PubMed: 38252210
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-023-08233-4 -
Indian Journal of Gastroenterology :... Aug 2023Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the mainstay of treatment in erosive esophagitis (EE). An alternative to PPIs in EE is Vonoprazan, a potassium competitive acid... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the mainstay of treatment in erosive esophagitis (EE). An alternative to PPIs in EE is Vonoprazan, a potassium competitive acid blocker. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vonoprazan to lansoprazole.
METHODS
Multiple databases searched through November 2022. Meta-analysis was performed to assess endoscopic healing at two, four and eight weeks, including for patients with severe EE (Los Angeles C/D). Serious adverse events (SAE) leading to drug discontinuation were assessed. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.
RESULTS
Four RCTs with 2208 patients were included in the final analysis. Vonoprazan 20 mg once-daily was compared to lansoprazole 30 mg once-daily dosing. Among all patients, at two and eight weeks post-treatment, vonoprazan resulted in significantly higher rates of endoscopic healing as compared to lansoprazole, risk ratios (RR) 1.1, p<0.001 and RR 1.04, p=0.03. The same effect was not observed at four weeks, RR 1.03 (CI 0.99-1.06, I=0%) following therapy. Among patients with severe EE, vonoprazan resulted in higher rates of endoscopic healing at two weeks, RR 1.3 (1.2-1.4, I=47%), p=<0.001, at four weeks, RR 1.2 (1.1-1.3, I=36%), p=<0.001 and at eight weeks post-treatment, RR 1.1 (CI 1.03-1.3, I=79%), p=0.009. We found no significant difference in the overall pooled rate of SAE and pooled rate of adverse events leading to drug discontinuation. Finally, the overall certainty of evidence for our main summary estimates was rated as high (grade A).
CONCLUSION
Based on limited number of published non-inferiority RCTs, our analysis demonstrates that among patients with EE, vonoprazan 20 mg once-daily dosing achieves comparable and in those with severe EE, higher endoscopic healing rates as compared to lansoprazole 30 mg once-daily dosing. Both drugs have a comparable safety profile.
Topics: Humans; Lansoprazole; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Esophagitis; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Pyrroles; Peptic Ulcer
PubMed: 37418052
DOI: 10.1007/s12664-023-01384-2 -
Contraception Nov 2023This study aimed to update our 2019 systematic review of data on the effectiveness and safety of misoprostol-only for first-trimester abortion. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to update our 2019 systematic review of data on the effectiveness and safety of misoprostol-only for first-trimester abortion.
STUDY DESIGN
We searched PubMed on December 18, 2022, to find published articles describing the outcomes of treatment with misoprostol-only for abortion of viable intrauterine pregnancy at ≤91 days of gestation. From each article identified, two authors independently abstracted relevant data about each group of patients treated with a distinct regimen. We assessed the risk of bias using four defined indicators. We estimated the proportion of patients with treatment failure using meta-analytic methods as well as the proportion hospitalized or transfused after treatment. We examined associations between treatment failure and selected characteristics of the groups.
RESULTS
We identified 49 papers with 66 groups that collectively included 16,354 evaluable patients, of whom 2960 (meta-analytic estimate 15%, 95% CI 12%, 19%) had treatment failures. Of 9228 patients assessed for ongoing pregnancy after treatment, 521 (meta-analytic estimate 6%, 95% CI 5%, 8%) had that condition. Failure risk was significantly associated with misoprostol dose, the total allowed number of doses, the maximum duration of dosing, and certain indicators of risk of bias. Among 11,007 patients allowed to take at least three misoprostol doses, the first consisting of misoprostol 800 mcg administered vaginally, sublingually, or buccally, the meta-analytic estimate of the failure risk was 11% (95% CI 8%, 14%). At most, 0.2% of 15,679 evaluable patients were hospitalized or received transfusions.
CONCLUSIONS
Although some studies in this updated review were adjudicated to have a high risk of bias, the results continue to support the key conclusion of our 2019 analysis: misoprostol-only is effective and safe for the termination of first-trimester intrauterine pregnancy.
IMPLICATIONS
Misoprostol-only is a safe and effective option for medication abortion in the first trimester if mifepristone is unavailable or inaccessible.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Misoprostol; Abortifacient Agents; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Mifepristone; Abortion, Induced; Abortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal
PubMed: 37517447
DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2023.110132 -
European Journal of Obstetrics,... Dec 2023To conduct the first-ever systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the antihemorrhagic utility and safety of tranexamic acid (TXA)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To conduct the first-ever systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the antihemorrhagic utility and safety of tranexamic acid (TXA) versus misoprostol for management (prevention and/or treatment) of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH).
METHODS
Six databases were screened from inception until May 2023 and updated in September 2023. The RCTs were assessed for quality according to the Cochrane's risk of bias tool. The endpoints were summarized as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Ten RCTs with 2121 patients (TXA = 1061 and misoprostol = 1060) were analyzed. There was no significant difference between TXA and misoprostol groups regarding the mean intraoperative blood loss (n = 9 RCTs, MD = 17.32 ml, 95% CI [-40.43, 75.07], p = 0.56), mean change in hemoglobin (n = 6 RCTs, MD = 0.11 mg/dl, 95% CI [-0.1, 0.31], p = 0.30), mean hospital stay (n = 2 RCTs, MD = -0.3 day, 95% CI [-0.61, 0.01], p = 0.06), blood transfusion rate (n = 4 RCTs, RR = 0.49, 95% CI [0.16, 1.47], p = 0.2), and rate of additional uterotonic agents (n = 4 RCTs, RR = 1.05, 95% CI [0.72, 1.53], p = 0.81). Leave-one-out sensitivity analysis showed robustness of the results, and there was no evidence of publication bias. Regarding safety endpoints, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding the rates of minor side effects, such as diarrhea, fever, nausea, and vomiting. No patient developed thromboembolic events in the TXA group.
CONCLUSION
There was no significant antihemorrhagic efficacy between adjunct TXA and misoprostol for the management of PPH. The safety profile was comparable between both agents.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Misoprostol; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Tranexamic Acid; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Hemostatics; Blood Loss, Surgical; Antifibrinolytic Agents
PubMed: 37832480
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.10.006 -
Journal of Medicinal Food Nov 2023The aim of this study was to systematically review the scientific literature, with Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines,... (Review)
Review
The aim of this study was to systematically review the scientific literature, with Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, of the articles found in the past 11 years on the gastroprotective role of fruit extracts in gastric ulcers induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Scientific articles published between 2010 and 2020 were included in this systematic review, including and models, to define the gastroprotective role of fruit extracts. Studies were selected by Rayyan using PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Science Direct databases. The keywords for the search strategy were: "gastric injury," "gastric ulcer," "fruit," "indomethacin," and "aspirin." Twenty-two articles with animal models of gastric ulcers were included. The NSAIDs used were aspirin and indomethacin. To know the damage caused by these, the ulceration index and biomarkers, such as aggressive/defensive factors involved in the gastric ulceration process, were measured. Most studies have shown that fruit extracts have antiulcer activity, with the most abundant metabolites being flavonoids, followed by terpenes and alkaloids. Possible antiulcer activities such as antioxidant, cytoprotective, gastric acid antisecretory, anti-inflammatory, or angiogenesis stimulant were declared, manifested mainly as a reduction of lipid peroxidation products, an increase in antioxidant enzymes and prostaglandins, and by the formation of a protective film through protein precipitation in the ulcer area. This systematic review demonstrates the importance of fruit extracts as gastric protectors.
Topics: Rats; Animals; Stomach Ulcer; Antioxidants; Fruit; Gastric Mucosa; Plant Extracts; Rats, Wistar; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Indomethacin; Aspirin
PubMed: 37902784
DOI: 10.1089/jmf.2023.0005