-
Pediatric Nephrology (Berlin, Germany) Dec 2023Acute pyelonephritis (APN) in pediatric patients may lead to kidney scarring and is one of the main causes of permanent kidney damage. The incidence of kidney scarring... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in pediatric kidney scar prevention after urinary tract infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
BACKGROUND
Acute pyelonephritis (APN) in pediatric patients may lead to kidney scarring and is one of the main causes of permanent kidney damage. The incidence of kidney scarring after one febrile urinary tract infection (UTI) is reported to range from 2.8 to 15%, with the percentage rising to 28.6% after ≥ 3 febrile UTIs. Corticosteroids may have a role in the reduction of kidney scar formation and urine cytokine levels. The possible benefit of adjuvant corticosteroid administration in the reduction of kidney scar formation in children with APN has been recently examined in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this meta-analysis was to provide a summary of the current literature about the efficacy and safety of adjuvant corticosteroid administration in the reduction of kidney scar formation in children with APN.
DATA SOURCES
An extensive literature search through major databases (PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus) was carried out for RCTs from inception until October 12, 2022, investigating the efficacy and safety of adjuvant corticosteroids in preventing kidney scarring in children with APN. A risk ratio with 95% CI was used for dichotomous outcomes.
RESULTS
In total, 5 RCTs with 918 pediatric patients with APN were included in the study. Adjuvant corticosteroid treatment revealed a statistically significant reduction in kidney scarring (95% CI 0.42-0.95, p = 0.03), without increasing the risk of adverse events like bacteremia, prolonged hospitalization, or recurrence of UTI.
LIMITATIONS
There were limitations regarding sample size (n = 498 children), different classes of corticosteroids (methylprednisolone or dexamethasone), different routes of corticosteroid administration (intravenous or oral), and different day courses (3-day or 4-day course).
CONCLUSIONS
Adjuvant corticosteroid administration seems to have a beneficial effect on kidney scar reduction in children with APN. Future studies should focus on the evaluation of the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in kidney scarring reduction after APN to strengthen the results of our study. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.
Topics: Child; Humans; Cicatrix; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Urinary Tract Infections; Pyelonephritis; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Kidney; Glomerulonephritis
PubMed: 36943468
DOI: 10.1007/s00467-023-05922-0 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2023We assessed the efficacies of various corticosteroid treatments for preventing postexubation stridor and reintubation in mechanically ventilated adults with planned...
OBJECTIVES
We assessed the efficacies of various corticosteroid treatments for preventing postexubation stridor and reintubation in mechanically ventilated adults with planned extubation.
METHODS
We searched the Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrial.gov registration for articles published through September 29, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the clinical efficacies of systemic corticosteroids and other therapeutics for preventing postextubation stridor and reintubation were included. The primary outcome was postextubation stridor and the secondary outcome was reintubation.
RESULTS
The 11 assessed RCTs reported 4 nodes: methylprednisolone, dexamethasone, hydrocortisone, and placebo, which yielded 3 possible pairs for comparing the risks of post extubation stridor and 3 possible pairs for comparing the risks of reintubation. The risk of postextubation stridor was significantly lower in dexamethasone- and methylprednisolone-treated patients than in placebo-treated patients (dexamethasone: OR = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.22-0.70; methylprednisolone: OR = 0.22; 95% CI = 0.11-0.41). The risk of postextubation stridor was significantly lower in methylprednisolone-treated patients than in hydrocortisone-treated: OR = 0.24; 95% CI = 0.08-0.67) and dexamethasone-treated patients: OR = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.24-1.26). The risk of reintubation was significantly lower in dexamethasone- and methylprednisolone-treated patients than in placebo-treated patients: (dexamethasone: OR = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.13-0.85; methylprednisolone: OR = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.25-0.70). Cluster analysis showed that dexamethasone- and methylprednisolone-treated patients had the lowest risks of stridor and reintubation. Subgroup analyses of patients with positive cuff-leak tests showed similar results.
CONCLUSIONS
Methylprednisolone and dexamethasone were the most effective agents against postextubation stridor and reintubation.
PubMed: 37554508
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1135570 -
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 -
Journal of Nephrology Jul 2023Acute pyelonephritis is a common infection in children that may cause renal scarring. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyse the use of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute pyelonephritis is a common infection in children that may cause renal scarring. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyse the use of corticosteroid treatment to prevent renal scarring.
METHODS
We searched the PubMED, SCOPUS, Cochrane CENTRAL and Web of Science databases in June 2022 for (corticosteroid* or dexamethasone or prednisolone* or prednisone* or hydrocortisone*) AND pyelonephritis. Randomised controlled trials focusing on children were included. The intervention was corticosteroid treatment with antibiotics compared to antibiotics with or without a placebo. The main outcome was the presence of renal scars on dimercaptosuccinic acid scanning at follow-up. The evidence quality was assessed using the GRADE methodology and risk of bias 2.0 tool. We calculated the risk ratio (RR), absolute risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the number needed to treat (NNT). We applied a fixed effects model due to low heterogeneity.
RESULTS
We screened 872 abstracts and included five full texts. Renal scarring at follow-up was found in 31/220 (14.1%) patients in the corticosteroid groups and 76/278 (27.3%) in the control groups (RR 0.65, CI 0.44-0.96, RD - 13.2%, NNT 8). The evidence quality was moderate. Two studies reported adverse events with no differences between the groups. The risk of bias analysis showed some concerns in four studies.
CONCLUSION
We found moderate quality evidence that adjuvant corticosteroid treatment could prevent renal scarring. Adverse events were insufficiently reported, and more research on their effectiveness and harm is therefore needed before using corticosteroids in clinical settings.
Topics: Child; Humans; Cicatrix; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Prednisolone; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Pyelonephritis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36692666
DOI: 10.1007/s40620-022-01552-1 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2024Since no randomized controlled trials have directly compared the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy with daratumumab versus lenalidomide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (RVD)...
BACKGROUND
Since no randomized controlled trials have directly compared the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy with daratumumab versus lenalidomide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (RVD) in the frontline treatment of transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (TIE-NDMM), this study systematically reviewed the clinical studies regarding immunotherapy with daratumumab and RVD regimen in the treatment of TIE-NDMM to explore the optimization direction of the best first-line therapy.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to collect studies on regimens containing daratumumab or RVD/RVD-lite for TIE-NDMM. Pooled and meta-analysis was then performed to compare the overall response rate (ORR), stringent complete remission (sCR) and CR rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and treatment-related discontinuation rate between daratumumab-containing immunotherapy regimen and RVD/RVD-lite regimen by using R 4.3.1 software.
RESULTS
Nine prospective clinical trials were included, including 1795 TIE-NDMM or NDMM without intent for immediate ASCT. Among them, 938 patients were treated with daratumumab-based immunotherapy and 857 with RVD/RVD-lite regimens. Meta-analysis results showed that The daratumumab-based regimen showed a significantly higher CR/sCR rate than RVD/RVD-lite for TIE-NDMM (47% vs. 24%, P<0.01). The median PFS of the daratumumab-based and RVD/RVD-lite groups were 52.6 months and 35.1 months respectively (HR 0.77, 95%CI, 0.66-0.90). The median OS of both groups was not reached, and there were no significant differences in OS between the two groups (HR 1.03, 95%CI, 0.86-1.23). The therapy discontinuation rate led by adverse events was significantly higher in the RVD/RVD-lite group than in the daratumumab-based regimen group for the TIE-NDMM (16% vs. 7%, P=0.03).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis suggests that daratumumab-containing immunotherapy is superior to RVD in the depth of treatment efficacy, progression-free survival, and lower treatment-related discontinuation rates. Limited by the lack of head-to-head clinical trials, this conclusion needs to be verified by concurrent cohort studies.
PubMed: 38333688
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1286029 -
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 -
Medicine Sep 2023Methylprednisolone (MP) and dexamethasone (DXM) are commonly prescribed hormone drugs for treating coronavirus pandemic disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, but conflicting... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Methylprednisolone (MP) and dexamethasone (DXM) are commonly prescribed hormone drugs for treating coronavirus pandemic disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, but conflicting results from previous studies and meta-analyses on their efficacy and safety necessitate further investigation. Therefore, in this study, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to enhance the level of evidence and compare the efficacy and safety of MP and DXM in COVID-19 patients.
METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to retrieve randomized clinical trials. Our primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality, with secondary outcomes including admission to the intensive care unit, length of hospital stay, mechanical ventilation, and adverse events.
RESULTS
This study analyzed six randomized controlled trials involving 1403 patients (MP group: 704; DXM group: 699). The results of the analysis showed no significant differences in mortality rates, admission to intensive care units, hospitalization time, mechanical ventilation, or adverse events between the MP and DXM groups (P > .05). However, a significant difference was observed in the incidence of hyperglycemia between these 2 groups (RR = 1.78, 95% CI [1.09, 2.89], P = .02, I2 = 78%).
CONCLUSION
The results of this meta-analysis showed that there was no difference in mortality, ICU admission rate, hospital stay, mechanical ventilation, or adverse events between MP and DXM in the treatment of COVID-19. The incidence of hyperglycemia with methylprednisolone was higher than that with dexamethasone.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Hyperglycemia; Methylprednisolone; Dexamethasone
PubMed: 37682199
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034738 -
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) Feb 2024This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify the outcomes of stem cell transplant (SCT) patients during the COVID-19 era. Pooled event rates (PER) were... (Review)
Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify the outcomes of stem cell transplant (SCT) patients during the COVID-19 era. Pooled event rates (PER) were calculated, and meta-regression was performed. A random effects model was utilized. In total, 36 eligible studies were included out of 290. The PER of COVID-19-related deaths and COVID-19-related hospital admissions were 21.1% and 55.2%, respectively. The PER of the use of hydroxychloroquine was 53.27%, of the receipt of immunosuppression it was 39.4%, and of the use of antivirals, antibiotics, and steroids it was 71.61%, 37.94%, and 18.46%, respectively. The PER of the time elapsed until COVID-19 infection after SCT of more than 6 months was 85.3%. The PER of fever, respiratory symptoms, and gastrointestinal symptoms were 70.9, 76.1, and 19.3%, respectively. The PER of acute and chronic GvHD were 40.2% and 60.9%, respectively. SCT patients are at a higher risk of severe COVID-19 infection and mortality. The use of dexamethasone improves the survival of hospitalized SCT patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen or ventilation. The SCT patient group is a heterogeneous group with varying characteristics. The quality of reporting on these patients when infected with COVID-19 is not uniform and further prospective or registry studies are needed to better guide clinical care in this unique setting.
PubMed: 38470640
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12050530 -
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology... May 2024Synthetic glucocorticoids are widely used to treat patients with a broad range of diseases. While efficacious, glucocorticoids can be accompanied by neuropsychiatric... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
Synthetic glucocorticoids are widely used to treat patients with a broad range of diseases. While efficacious, glucocorticoids can be accompanied by neuropsychiatric adverse effects.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses and quantifies the proportion of different neuropsychiatric adverse effects in patients using synthetic glucocorticoids.
METHODS
Six electronic databases were searched to identify potentially relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies assessing psychiatric side effects of glucocorticoids measured with validated questionnaires were eligible. Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2, ROBINS-I, and AXIS appraisal tool. For proportions of neuropsychiatric outcomes, we pooled proportions, and when possible, differences in questionnaire scores between glucocorticoid users and nonusers were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMD). Data were pooled in a random-effects logistic regression model.
RESULTS
We included 49 studies with heterogeneity in study populations, type, dose, and duration of glucocorticoids. For glucocorticoid users, meta-analysis showed a proportion of 22% for depression (95% CI, 14%-33%), 11% for mania (2%-46%), 8% for anxiety (2%-25%), 16% for delirium (6%-36%), and 52% for behavioral changes (42%-61%). Questionnaire scores for depression (SMD of 0.80 [95% CI 0.35-1.26]), and mania (0.78 [0.14-1.42]) were higher than in controls, indicating more depressive and manic symptoms following glucocorticoid use.
CONCLUSION
The heterogeneity of glucocorticoid use is reflected in the available studies. Despite this heterogeneity, the proportion of neuropsychiatric adverse effects in glucocorticoid users is high. The most substantial associations with glucocorticoid use were found for depression and mania. Upon starting glucocorticoid treatment, awareness of possible psychiatric side effects is essential. More structured studies on incidence and potential pathways of neuropsychiatric side effects of prescribed glucocorticoids are clearly needed.
Topics: Humans; Glucocorticoids; Mental Disorders
PubMed: 38038629
DOI: 10.1210/clinem/dgad701 -
BMJ Open Respiratory Research Jan 2024Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated conflicting results regarding the effects of corticosteroids on the treatment of severe community-acquired... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated conflicting results regarding the effects of corticosteroids on the treatment of severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of different corticosteroids on patients who were hospitalised for severe CAP.
METHODS
We performed a systematic search through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to May 2023. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Data analysis was performed using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
A total of 10 RCTs comprising 1962 patients were included. Corticosteroids were associated with a lower rate of all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR), 0.70 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.90); I=0.00%). When stratified into different corticosteroid types, hydrocortisone was associated with an approximately 50% lower mortality risk (RR, 0.48 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.72); I=0.00%). However, dexamethasone, methylprednisolone or prednisolone were not associated with an improvement in mortality. Furthermore, hydrocortisone was associated with a reduction in the rate of mechanical ventilation, acute respiratory distress syndrome, shock and duration of intensive care unit stay. These trends were not observed for dexamethasone, methylprednisolone or prednisolone. Corticosteroids were not associated with an increased risk of adverse events including gastrointestinal bleeding, secondary infection or hyperglycaemia.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of hydrocortisone, but not other types of corticosteroids, was associated with a reduction in mortality and improvement in pneumonia outcomes among patients hospitalised with severe CAP.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42023431360.
Topics: Humans; Hydrocortisone; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Methylprednisolone; Community-Acquired Infections; Pneumonia; Dexamethasone
PubMed: 38262670
DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2023-002141