-
Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Jan 2024The effects of combining dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine on block duration are unclear. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE
The effects of combining dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine on block duration are unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effects of combining dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine on block duration.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
Systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, the Web of Science, and BIOSIS until June 8, 2023. RCTs with adults undergoing surgery with a peripheral nerve block randomized to combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine versus placebo or other adjuncts were eligible. Primary outcome was duration of analgesia. We performed meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis, risk of bias-2, and Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation assessment.
FINDINGS
We included 9 RCTs with 14 eligible comparisons. The combination of dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine was compared with placebo in three RCTs (173 participants), dexamethasone in seven (569 participants), and dexmedetomidine in four (281 participants). The duration of analgesia was likely increased with the combination versus placebo (mean difference 460 min, 95% CI 249 to 671) and versus dexmedetomidine (mean difference 388 min, 95% CI 211 to 565). The duration was likely similar with the combination versus dexamethasone (mean difference 50 min, 95% CI -140 to 239). The certainty of the evidence was moderate because most trials were at high risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
Combined dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine likely increased the duration of analgesia when compared with placebo and dexmedetomidine. The combination likely provided a similar duration of analgesia as dexamethasone. Based on this systematic review, it seems reasonable to use dexamethasone as the sole adjunct if the goal is to increase the duration of analgesia.
PubMed: 38253609
DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2023-105098 -
Reviews in Medical Virology Sep 2023The COVID-19 pandemic linked to the virus SARS-CoV-2, which began in China, affected ∼765 million people as of 30 April 2023. The widespread use of corticosteroids for... (Review)
Review
The COVID-19 pandemic linked to the virus SARS-CoV-2, which began in China, affected ∼765 million people as of 30 April 2023. The widespread use of corticosteroids for the symptomatic treatment of COVID-19 could lead to the reactivation of infections of opportunistic pathogens, including Strongyloides. We sought to determine the clinical symptoms and demographic characteristics of SARS-CoV-2-Strongyloides co-infection, particularly in patients with severe disease and being treated with immunosuppressive drugs. To do this, we undertook a systematic review of the literature, and searched public accessible scientific databases-the Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed/Medline and Embase -for eligible studies (1 December 2019 to 30 August 2022). The review protocol is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022377062). Descriptive statistical analyses were used to present the clinical and laboratory parameters of the co-infection; for this, we calculated prevalence using the following formula: positive cases/total number of cases × 100. Of a total of 593 studies identified, 17 studies reporting 26 co-infected patients met the criteria for inclusion in this review. The median age of these patients was 55.14 years. Most of cases (53.8%) were treated with dexamethasone, followed by methylprednisolone (26.9%). Eighteen of 26 patients were immigrants living in European countries or the USA; most of these immigrants originated from Latin America (58%) and South-East Asia (11%). The commonest symptoms of co-infection were abdominal pain (50%), fever (46.1%), dyspnoea (30.7%) and cough (30.7%), and frequently reported laboratory findings were high absolute eosinophil count (38.4%), high white blood cell count (30.7%), high C-reactive protein (23.0%) and high neutrophil count (19.2%). Two of the 26 patients (7.7%) had fatal outcomes. Most of the SARS-CoV-2-Strongyloides coinfected cases were immigrants living in developed countries, emphasising the need for clinicians in these countries to be aware of clinical and laboratory parameters associated with such co-infections, as well as the key importance of rapid and accurate diagnostic tests for timely and effective diagnosis and patient management.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Coinfection; Pandemics; Adrenal Cortex Hormones
PubMed: 37353858
DOI: 10.1002/rmv.2469 -
European Journal of Anaesthesiology Mar 2024Despite being a commonly performed surgical procedure, pain management for appendicectomy is often neglected because of insufficient evidence on the most effective...
BACKGROUND
Despite being a commonly performed surgical procedure, pain management for appendicectomy is often neglected because of insufficient evidence on the most effective treatment options.
OBJECTIVE
To provide evidence-based recommendations by assessing the available literature for optimal pain management after appendicectomy.
DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES
This systematic review-based guideline was conducted according to the PROSPECT methodology. Relevant randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the English language from January 1999 to October 2022 were retrieved from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Databases using PRISMA search protocols.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included studies on adults and children. If articles reported combined data from different surgeries, they had to include specific information about appendicectomies. Studies needed to measure pain intensity using a visual analogue scale (VAS) or a numerical rating scale (NRS). Studies that did not report the precise appendicectomy technique were excluded.
RESULTS
Out of 1388 studies, 94 met the inclusion criteria. Based on evidence and consensus, the PROSPECT members agreed that basic analgesics [paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)] should be administered perioperatively for open and laparoscopic appendicectomies. A laparoscopic approach is preferred because of lower pain scores. Additional recommendations for laparoscopic appendicectomies include a three-port laparoscopic approach and the instillation of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic. For open appendicectomy, a preoperative unilateral transverse abdominis plane (TAP) block is recommended. If not possible, preincisional infiltration with local anaesthetics is an alternative. Opioids should only be used as rescue analgesia. Limited evidence exists for TAP block in laparoscopic appendicectomy, analgesic adjuvants for TAP block, continuous wound infiltration after open appendicectomy and preoperative ketamine and dexamethasone. Recommendations apply to children and adults.
CONCLUSION
This review identified an optimal analgesic regimen for open and laparoscopic appendicectomy. Further randomised controlled trials should evaluate the use of regional analgesia and wound infiltrations with adequate baseline analgesia, especially during the recommended conventional three-port approach.
REGISTRATION
The protocol for this study was registered with the PROSPERO database (Registration No. CRD42023387994).
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Pain Management; Pain, Postoperative; Analgesics; Acetaminophen; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anesthetics, Local
PubMed: 38214556
DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000001953 -
Laryngoscope Investigative... Jun 2024To establish audiological and other outcomes following cochlear implantation in humans and animals with eluting electrodes. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To establish audiological and other outcomes following cochlear implantation in humans and animals with eluting electrodes.
METHODS
Systematic review and narrative synthesis. Databases searched (April 2023): MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Web of Science. Studies reporting outcomes in either humans or animals following cochlear implantation with a drug-eluting electrode were included. No limits were placed on language or year of publication. Risk of bias assessment was performed on all included studies using either the Brazzelli or Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) assessment tools. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement.
RESULTS
Searches identified 146 abstracts and 108 full texts. Of these, 18 studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting outcomes in 523 animals (17 studies) and 24 humans (1 study). Eluting electrodes included dexamethasone (16 studies), aracytine (1 study), nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (1 study), the growth factors insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1) and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) (1 study), and neurotrophin-3 (1 study). All included studies compare outcomes following implantation with an eluting electrode with a control non-eluting electrode. In the majority of studies, audiological outcomes (e.g., auditory brainstem response threshold) were superior following implantation with an eluting electrode compared with a standard electrode. Most studies which investigated post-implantation impedance reported lower impedance following implantation with an eluting electrode. The influence of eluting electrodes on other reported outcomes (including post-implantation cochlear fibrosis and the survival of hair cells and spiral ganglion neurons) was more varied across the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Eluting electrodes have shown promise in animal studies in preserving residual hearing following cochlear implantation and in reducing impedance, though data from human studies remain lacking. Further in-human studies will be required to determine the clinical usefulness of drug-eluting cochlear implants as a future treatment for sensorineural hearing loss.
PubMed: 38855776
DOI: 10.1002/lio2.1263 -
American Journal of Hematology Jun 2024Thrombosis represents a frequent and potentially severe complication in individuals diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). These events can be driven by both the disease... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Thromboembolic risk of carfilzomib or bortezomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: A comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.
Thrombosis represents a frequent and potentially severe complication in individuals diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). These events can be driven by both the disease as well as the therapies themselves. Overall, available evidence is inconclusive about the differential thrombogenicity of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). This meta-analysis compares the risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE; including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE; including myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke) with KRd versus VRd as primary therapy for newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Out of 510 studies identified after deduplication, one randomized controlled trial and five retrospective cohort studies were included. We analyzed 2304 patients (VRd: 1380; KRd: 924) for VTE events and 2179 patients (VRd: 1316; KRd: 863) for ATE events. Lower rates of VTE were observed in the VRd group when compared with the KRd group (6.16% vs. 8.87%; odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.88; p = .01). Both treatment groups exhibited minimal ATE incidence, with no significant difference between them (0.91% vs. 1.16%; OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.24-4.20; p = .99). In view of potential biases from retrospective studies, heterogeneity of baseline population characteristics, and limited access to patient-level data (e.g., VTE risk stratification and type of thromboprophylaxis regimen used) inherent to this meta-analysis, additional research is warranted to further validate our findings and refine strategies for thrombosis prevention in MM.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Dexamethasone; Oligopeptides; Bortezomib; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Lenalidomide; Thromboembolism; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 38488702
DOI: 10.1002/ajh.27288 -
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology... Mar 2024Due to ethical considerations, antenatal dose finding for prednisolone and dexamethasone in pregnant women is limited, leading to a knowledge gap.
CONTEXT
Due to ethical considerations, antenatal dose finding for prednisolone and dexamethasone in pregnant women is limited, leading to a knowledge gap.
OBJECTIVE
In order to guide the clinician in weighing benefits vs risks, the aim is to systematically review the current literature on the side effects of antenatal predniso(lo)ne and dexamethasone use on the fetus, newborn, and (pre)pubertal child.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase using prespecified keywords and Medical Subject Headings. This systematic review investigated studies published until August 2022, with the following inclusion criteria: studies were conducted in humans and assessed side effects of long-term antenatal predniso(lo)ne and dexamethasone use during at least one of the trimesters on the child during the fetal period, neonatal phase, and during childhood.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
In total, 328 papers in PubMed and 193 in Embase were identified. Fifteen studies were eligible for inclusion. Seven records were added through references. Antenatal predniso(lo)ne use may be associated with lower gestational age, but was not associated with miscarriages and stillbirths, congenital abnormalities, differences in blood pressure or low blood glucose levels at birth, or with low bone mass, long-term elevated cortisol and cortisone, or high blood pressure at prepubertal age. Increased risks of antenatal dexamethasone use include association with miscarriages and stillbirths, and from age 16 years, associations with disturbed insulin secretion and higher glucose and cholesterol levels.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the limited evidence found, predniso(lo)ne may have less side effects compared with dexamethasone in short- and long-term outcomes. Current literature shows minimal risk of side effects in the newborn from administration of a prenatal predniso(lo)ne dose of up to 10 mg per day.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Child; Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Adolescent; Stillbirth; Abortion, Spontaneous; Prenatal Care; Dexamethasone; Fetus
PubMed: 37715964
DOI: 10.1210/clinem/dgad547 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2024The aim of this study was to better understand the efficacy of various drugs, such as glucocorticoids and anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGF), in the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this study was to better understand the efficacy of various drugs, such as glucocorticoids and anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGF), in the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME), and to evaluate various clinical treatment regimens consisting of different therapeutic measures.
METHODS
This study included randomized controlled trials up to February 2023 comparing the efficacy of corticosteroid-related therapy and anti-VEGF therapy. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched, and the quality of the studies was carefully assessed. Finally, 39 studies were included.
RESULTS
Results at 3-month followup showed that intravitreal injection of bevacizumab (IVB) + triamcinolone acetonide (TA) was the most beneficial in improving best-corrected visual acuity and reducing the thickness of macular edema in the center of the retina in patients with DME. Results at 6-month follow-up showed that intravitreal dexamethasone (DEX) was the most effective in improving patients' bestcorrected visual acuity and reducing the thickness of central macular edema.
DISCUSSION
Overall, IVB+TA was beneficial in improving best-corrected visual acuity and reducing central macular edema thickness over a 3-month follow-up period, while DEX implants had a better therapeutic effect than anti-VEGF agents at 6 months, especially the patients with severe macular edema and visual acuity impaired.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=397100, identifier CRD42023397100.
Topics: Humans; Diabetes Mellitus; Diabetic Retinopathy; Glucocorticoids; Macular Edema; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Triamcinolone Acetonide; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A
PubMed: 38586457
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1342530 -
Life (Basel, Switzerland) Nov 2023Over the last decade, many studies have assessed the efficacy of treatments for refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma (R/R MM). While combination therapies show greater... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Over the last decade, many studies have assessed the efficacy of treatments for refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma (R/R MM). While combination therapies show greater efficacy than traditional methods, limited research has targeted elderly patients who might be less resilient to treatments. Our study aimed to evaluate treatment efficacy for these elderly patients.
METHODS
We carried out a comprehensive review of the literature using a systematic approach. Initially, 4966 citations were retrieved and subsequently narrowed down to 13 eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through our systematic review process from databases like Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2022. Evidence was collated through a frequentist network meta-analysis, using the hazard ratio (HR) for evaluation.
RESULTS
Combined therapy of daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (DaraLenDex) was the preferred treatment for R/R MM elderly patients. Its strengths included an HR for progression-free survival (0.15; 95% CI: 0.09-0.25) and a 96% P-score.
CONCLUSIONS
Our analysis suggests that, pending more comprehensive RCTs, DaraLenDex is the treatment with the highest efficacy for R/R MM in elderly patients.
PubMed: 38137860
DOI: 10.3390/life13122259 -
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics Jul 2024The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the clinical relevance of the different intra-articular corticosteroids (CS) effects in vivo for osteoarthritis... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the clinical relevance of the different intra-articular corticosteroids (CS) effects in vivo for osteoarthritis (OA) treatment.
METHODS
The search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science in October 2023. The PRISMA guidelines were used. Inclusion criteria: animal or human randomized controlled trials (RCTs), English language and no time limitation, on the comparison of different intra-articular CS for OA treatment. The articles' quality was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 and GRADE guidelines for human RCTs, and SYRCLE's tool for animal RCTs.
RESULTS
Eighteen RCTs were selected (16 human and 2 animal studies), including 1577 patients (1837 joints) and 31 animals (51 joints). The CS used were triamcinolone (14 human and 2 animal studies), methylprednisolone (7 human and 1 animal study), betamethasone (3 human studies) and dexamethasone (1 human study). All studies addressed knee OA except for three human and one animal study. A meta-analysis was performed on the comparison of methylprednisolone and triamcinolone in humans with knee OA analysing VAS pain at very short- (≤2 weeks), short- (>2 and ≤4 weeks), mid- (>4 and ≤8 weeks), long- (>8 and ≤ 12 weeks), and very long-term (>12 and ≤24 weeks). Triamcinolone showed better post-injection values compared to methylprednisolone at very short-term ( = 0.028). No difference in terms of VAS improvement was observed at any follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
The available preclinical and clinical literature provides limited evidence on the comparison of different CS, hindering the possibility of determining the best CS approach in terms of molecule and dose for the intra-articular injection of OA joints.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level I.
PubMed: 38911187
DOI: 10.1002/jeo2.12060 -
American Journal of Hematology Jul 2024In view of the increasing data evaluating carfilzomib-based induction for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Comparative efficacy of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) versus bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) in newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
In view of the increasing data evaluating carfilzomib-based induction for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) versus bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). Three studies totaling 1597 patients (50% KRd-treated, 50% VRd-treated) were included. Despite similar survival outcomes and overall response rate compared with the VRd arm, KRd-treated subjects showed higher odds of achieving complete responses and measurable residual disease negativity. Among patients with high-risk cytogenetics (n = 348), KRd was associated with significant improvement in progression-free survival (HR = 0.70; 95% CI = 0.50-0.97; p = .03; I = 0%), suggesting carfilzomib-based induction may be preferable in this NDMM subpopulation.
Topics: Multiple Myeloma; Humans; Lenalidomide; Dexamethasone; Oligopeptides; Bortezomib; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Progression-Free Survival; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38606993
DOI: 10.1002/ajh.27314