-
International Braz J Urol : Official... 2023bladder based on a systematic review and network meta-analysis approach. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
UNLABELLED
bladder based on a systematic review and network meta-analysis approach.
METHODS
Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials databases were systematically searched. The search time frame was from database creation to June 2, 2022. Randomized controlled double-blind trials of oral medication for overactive bladder were screened against the protocol's entry criteria. Trials were evaluated for quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, and data were statistically analyzed using Stata 16.0 software.
RESULT
A total of 60 randomized controlled double-blind clinical trials were included involving 50,333 subjects. Solifenacin 10mg was the most effective in mean daily micturitions and incontinence episodes, solifenacin 5/10mg in mean daily urinary urgency episodes and nocturia episodes, fesoterodine 8mg in urgency incontinence episodes/d and oxybutynin 5mg in voided volume/micturition. In terms of safety, solifenacin 5mg, ER-tolterodine 4mg, mirabegron, vibegron and ER-oxybutynin 10mg all showed a better incidence of dry mouth, fesoterodine 4mg, ER-oxybutynin 10mg, tolterodine 2mg, and vibegron in the incidence of constipation. Compared to placebo, imidafenacin 0.1mg showed a significantly increased incidence in hypertension, solifenacin 10mg in urinary tract infection, fesoterodine 4/8mg and darifenacin 15mg in headache.
CONCLUSION
Solifenacin showed better efficacy. For safety, most anticholinergic drugs were more likely to cause dry mouth and constipation, lower doses were better tolerated. The choice of drugs should be tailored to the patient's specific situation to find the best balance between efficacy and safety.
Topics: Humans; Urinary Bladder, Overactive; Solifenacin Succinate; Tolterodine Tartrate; Network Meta-Analysis; Double-Blind Method; Constipation; Xerostomia; Treatment Outcome; Muscarinic Antagonists; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37506033
DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2023.0158 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2024Antipsychotic-induced akathisia (AIA) occurs in 14% to 35% of patients treated with antipsychotics and is associated with increased suicide and decreased adherence in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Antipsychotic-induced akathisia (AIA) occurs in 14% to 35% of patients treated with antipsychotics and is associated with increased suicide and decreased adherence in patients with schizophrenia. However, no comprehensive review and network meta-analysis has been conducted to compare the efficacy of treatments for AIA.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy associated with AIA treatments.
DATA SOURCES
Three databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) were systematically searched by multiple researchers for double-blind randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing active drugs for the treatment of AIA with placebo or another treatment between May 30 and June 18, 2023.
STUDY SELECTION
Selected studies were RCTs that compared adjunctive drugs for AIA vs placebo or adjunctive treatment in patients treated with antipsychotics fulfilling the criteria for akathisia, RCTs with sample size of 10 patients or more, only trials in which no additional drugs were administered during the study, and RCTs that used a validated akathisia score. Trials with missing data for the main outcome (akathisia score at the end points) were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data extraction and synthesis were performed, estimating standardized mean differences (SMDs) through pairwise and network meta-analysis with a random-effects model. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was the severity of akathisia measured by a validated scale at the last available end point.
RESULTS
Fifteen trials involving 492 participants compared 10 treatments with placebo. Mirtazapine (15 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -1.20; 95% CI, -1.83 to -0.58), biperiden (6 mg/d for ≥14 days; SMD, -1.01; 95% CI, -1.69 to -0.34), vitamin B6 (600-1200 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.92; 95% CI, -1.57 to -0.26), trazodone (50 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.84; 95% CI, -1.54 to -0.14), mianserin (15 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.81; 95% CI, -1.44 to -0.19), and propranolol (20 mg/d for ≥6 days; SMD, -0.78; 95% CI, -1.35 to -0.22) were associated with greater efficacy than placebo, with low to moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 34.6%; 95% CI, 0.0%-71.1%). Cyproheptadine, clonazepam, zolmitriptan, and valproate did not yield significant effects. Eight trials were rated as having low risk of bias; 2, moderate risk; and 5, high risk. Sensitivity analyses generally confirmed the results for all drugs except for cyproheptadine and propranolol. No association between effect sizes and psychotic severity was found.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, mirtazapine, biperiden, and vitamin B6 were associated with the greatest efficacy for AIA, with vitamin B6 having the best efficacy and tolerance profile. Trazodone, mianserin, and propranolol appeared as effective alternatives with slightly less favorable efficacy and tolerance profiles. These findings should assist prescribers in selecting an appropriate medication for treating AIA.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Biperiden; Cyproheptadine; Gallopamil; Mianserin; Mirtazapine; Network Meta-Analysis; Propranolol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Trazodone; Vitamin B 6; Akathisia, Drug-Induced
PubMed: 38451521
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.1527 -
Archives of Dermatological Research Oct 2023Sweating is a physiologic mechanism of human thermoregulation. Hyperhidrosis is defined as a somatic disorder where the sweating is exaggerated in an exact area because... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Sweating is a physiologic mechanism of human thermoregulation. Hyperhidrosis is defined as a somatic disorder where the sweating is exaggerated in an exact area because the sweat glands are hyperfunctioning. It negatively affects the quality of life of the patients. We aim to investigate patient satisfaction and the effectiveness of oxybutynin in treating hyperhidrosis.
METHODS
We prospectively registered the protocol of this systematic review and meta-analysis on PROSPERO (CRD 42022342667). This systematic review and meta-analysis were reported according to the PRISMA statement guidelines. We searched three electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) from inception until June 2, 2022, using MeSH terms. We include studies comparing patients with hyperhidrosis who received oxybutynin or a placebo. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool (ROB2) for randomized controlled trials. The risk ratio was calculated for categorical variables, and the mean difference was calculated for continuous variables using the random effect model with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS
Six studies were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 293 patients. In all studies, patients were assigned to receive either Oxybutynin or Placebo. Oxybutynin represented an HDSS improvement (RR = 1.68 95% CI [1.21, 2.33], p = 0.002). It also can improve the quality of life. There is no difference between oxybutynin and placebo regarding dry mouth (RR = 1.68 95% CI [1.21, 2.33], p = 0.002).
CONCLUSION
Our study suggests that using oxybutynin as a treatment for hyperhidrosis is significant and needs to be highlighted for clinicians. However, more clinical trials are needed to grasp the optimum benefit.
Topics: Humans; Treatment Outcome; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Hyperhidrosis
PubMed: 36869926
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-023-02587-5 -
Systematic Reviews Sep 2023Autonomy-supporting interventions, such as self-determination theory and guided self-determination interventions, may improve self-management and clinical and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Autonomy-supporting interventions, such as self-determination theory and guided self-determination interventions, may improve self-management and clinical and psychosocial outcomes in people with diabetes. Such interventions have never been systematically reviewed assessing both benefits and harms and concurrently controlling the risks of random errors using trial sequential analysis methodology. This systematic review investigates the benefits and harms of self-determination theory-based interventions compared to usual care in people with diabetes.
METHODS
We used the Cochrane methodology. Randomized clinical trials assessing interventions theoretically based on guided self-determination or self-determination theory in any setting were eligible. A comprehensive search (latest search April 2022) was undertaken in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, PsycINFO, SCI-EXPANDED, CINAHL, SSCI, CPCI-S, and CPCI-SSH to identify relevant trials. Two authors independently screened, extracted data, and performed risk-of-bias assessment of included trials using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool 1.0. Our primary outcomes were quality of life, all-cause mortality, and serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, and nonserious adverse events not considered serious. Exploratory outcomes were glycated hemoglobin and motivation (autonomy, controlled, amotivation). Outcomes were assessed at the end of the intervention (primary time point) and at maximum follow-up. The analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.4 and Trial Sequential Analysis 0.9.5.10. Certainty of the evidence was assessed by GRADE.
RESULTS
Our search identified 5578 potentially eligible studies of which 11 randomized trials (6059 participants) were included. All trials were assessed at overall high risk of bias. We found no effect of self-determination theory-based interventions compared with usual care on quality of life (mean difference 0.00 points, 95% CI -4.85, 4.86, I = 0%; 225 participants, 3 trials, TSA-adjusted CI -11.83, 11.83), all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, adverse events, glycated hemoglobulin A1c, or motivation (controlled). The certainty of the evidence was low to very low for all outcomes. We found beneficial effect on motivation (autonomous and amotivation; low certainty evidence).
CONCLUSIONS
We found no effect of self-determination-based interventions on our primary or secondary outcomes. The evidence was of very low certainty.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42020181144.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Diabetes Mellitus; Glycated Hemoglobin; Glycopyrrolate; MEDLINE
PubMed: 37674180
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02308-z -
BMC Geriatrics Aug 2023Drugs with anticholinergic properties are associated with cognitive adverse effects, especially in patients vulnerable to central muscarinic antagonism. A variety of...
BACKGROUND
Drugs with anticholinergic properties are associated with cognitive adverse effects, especially in patients vulnerable to central muscarinic antagonism. A variety of drugs show weak, moderate or strong anticholinergic effects. Therefore, the cumulative anticholinergic burden should be considered in patients with cognitive impairment. This study aimed to develop a Swedish Anticholinergic Burden Scale (Swe-ABS) to be used in health care and research.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed and Ovid Embase to identify previously published tools quantifying anticholinergic drug burden (i.e., exposure). Drugs and grading scores (0-3, no to high anticholinergic activity) were extracted from identified lists. Enteral and parenteral drugs authorized in Sweden were included. Drugs with conflicting scores in the existing lists were assessed by an expert group. Two drugs that were not previously assessed were also added to the evaluation process.
RESULTS
The systematic literature search identified the following nine anticholinergic burden scales: Anticholinergic Activity Scale, Anticholinergic Burden Classification, updated Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden scale, Anticholinergic Drug Scale, Anticholinergic Load Scale, Anticholinergic Risk Scale, updated Clinician-rated Anticholinergic Scale, German Anticholinergic Burden Scale and Korean Anticholinergic Burden Scale. A list of drugs with significant anticholinergic effects provided by The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare was included in the process. The suggested Swe-ABS consists of 104 drugs scored as having weak, moderate or strong anticholinergic effects. Two hundred and fifty-six drugs were listed as having no anticholinergic effects based on evaluation in previous scales. In total, 62 drugs were assessed by the expert group.
CONCLUSIONS
Swe-ABS is a simplified method to quantify the anticholinergic burden and is easy to use in clinical practice. Publication of this scale might make clinicians more aware of drugs with anticholinergic properties and patients' total anticholinergic burden. Further research is needed to validate the Swe-ABS and evaluate anticholinergic exposure versus clinically significant outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Cholinergic Antagonists; Cognitive Dysfunction; Muscarinic Antagonists; Sweden; Health Status Indicators
PubMed: 37626293
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-023-04225-1 -
PloS One 2024We conducted a systematic evaluation of the therapeutic efficacy and complications of tolterodine and α-adrenergic receptor blockers in alleviating ureteral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Comparison of the efficacy and complications of tolterodine and α-adrenergic receptor blockers in improving ureteral stent-related symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
We conducted a systematic evaluation of the therapeutic efficacy and complications of tolterodine and α-adrenergic receptor blockers in alleviating ureteral stent-related symptoms.
METHODS
Until August 2023, we conducted a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and complications of tolterodine and α-adrenergic receptor blockers in treating ureteral stent-related symptoms. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. The scores from various domains of the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ) were summarized and compared, and statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.0 software.
RESULTS
A total of 8 studies met the inclusion criteria for our analysis. These studies were conducted at different centers. All studies were randomized controlled trials, involving a total of 487 patients, with 244 patients receiving α-adrenergic receptor blockers and 243 patients receiving tolterodine. The results showed that tolterodine demonstrated significantly better improvement in body pain (MD, 1.56; 95% CI [0.46, 2.66]; p = 0.005) (MD, 0.46; 95% CI [0.12, 0.80]; p = 0.008) (MD, 3.21; 95% CI [1.89, 4.52]; p = 0.00001) among patients after ureteral stent placement compared to α-adrenergic receptor blockers at different time points. Additionally, at 4 weeks, tolterodine showed superior improvement in general health (MD, 0.15; 95% CI [0.03, 0.27]; p = 0.01) and urinary symptoms (MD, 1.62; 95% CI [0.59, 2.66]; p = 0.002) compared to α-adrenergic receptor blockers, while at 6 weeks, tolterodine showed better improvement in work performance (MD, -1.60; 95% CI [-2.73, -0.48]; p = 0.005) compared to α-adrenergic receptor blockers. Additionally, the incidence of dry mouth (RR, 4.21; 95% CI [1.38, 12.87]; p = 0.01) is higher with the use of tolterodine compared to α-adrenergic receptor blockers. However, there were no significant statistical differences between the two drugs in other outcomes.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis suggests that tolterodine is superior to α-adrenergic receptor blockers in improving physical pain symptoms after ureteral stent placement, while α-adrenergic receptor blockers are more effective than tolterodine in enhancing work performance. Additionally, the incidence of dry mouth is higher with the use of tolterodine compared to α-adrenergic receptor blockers. However, higher-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to further investigate this issue.
Topics: Tolterodine Tartrate; Humans; Stents; Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists; Ureter; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38701097
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302716 -
BMC Urology Oct 2023Patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) receive α-blockers as first-line therapy to treat lower urinary tract symptoms; however, some individuals still... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) receive α-blockers as first-line therapy to treat lower urinary tract symptoms; however, some individuals still experience residual storage symptoms. Antimuscarinics, β3-agonists, and desmopressin are effective add-on medications. Nevertheless, there is currently no evidence for the appropriate choice of the first add-on medication. This systematic review aimed to investigate the clinical benefits of antimuscarinics, β3-agonists, and desmopressin, in addition to α-blockers, for persistent storage symptoms in BPH patients.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of different add-on medications in BPH patients with persistent storage symptoms despite α-blocker treatment was conducted. Clinical outcomes included the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), IPSS storage subscore, nocturia, micturition, and urgency. A network meta-analysis was performed to estimate the effect size. Surface under cumulative ranking curves (SUCRAs) were used to rank the included treatments for each outcome.
RESULTS
A total of 15 RCTs were identified. Add-on imidafenacin and mirabegron resulted in significant improvement in all outcomes assessed. Other add-on medications such as desmopressin, tolterodine, solifenacin, fesoterodine, and propiverine showed positive benefits for most, but not all, outcomes. Based on the SUCRA rankings, add-on desmopressin was the best-ranked treatment for IPSS and nocturia, and add-on imidafenacin was the best for the IPSS storage subscore and micturition.
CONCLUSIONS
BPH patients presenting with persistent storage symptoms despite α-blocker administration are recommended to include additional treatment. Desmopressin and imidafenacin may be considered high-priority add-on treatments because of their superior efficacy compared with other medications.
Topics: Male; Humans; Muscarinic Antagonists; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Nocturia; Network Meta-Analysis; Deamino Arginine Vasopressin; Treatment Outcome; Drug Therapy, Combination; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms; Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists
PubMed: 37789333
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-023-01327-1 -
Biomedicines Sep 2023Major depressive disorder is one of the most severe mental disorders. It strongly impairs daily functioning, and, in extreme cases, it can lead to suicide. Although... (Review)
Review
Major depressive disorder is one of the most severe mental disorders. It strongly impairs daily functioning, and, in extreme cases, it can lead to suicide. Although different treatment options are available for patients with depression, there is an ongoing search for novel therapeutic agents, such as scopolamine (also known as hyoscine), that would offer higher efficacy, a more rapid onset of action, and a more favorable safety profile. The aim of our study was to review the current clinical evidence regarding the use of scopolamine, a promising therapeutic option in the treatment of depression. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases up to 5 June 2023. We included randomized placebo-controlled or head-to-head clinical trials that compared the clinical efficacy and safety of scopolamine in the treatment of major depressive disorder. Two reviewers independently conducted the search and study selection and rated the risk of bias for each study. Four randomized controlled trials were identified in the systematic review. The included studies investigated the use of scopolamine administered as an oral, intramuscular, or intravenous drug, alone or in combination with other antidepressants. The results indicated that scopolamine exerts antidepressant effects of varying intensity. We show that not all studies confirmed a statistically and clinically significant reduction of depressive symptoms vs. placebo. A broader perspective on scopolamine use in antidepressant treatment should be confirmed in subsequent large randomized controlled trials assessing both effectiveness and safety. Therefore, studies directly comparing the effectiveness of scopolamine depending on the route of administration are required.
PubMed: 37893010
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11102636