-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2019Alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) is a distressing and life-threatening condition that usually affects people who are alcohol dependent when they discontinue or decrease... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) is a distressing and life-threatening condition that usually affects people who are alcohol dependent when they discontinue or decrease their alcohol consumption. Baclofen shows potential for rapidly reducing symptoms of severe AWS in people with alcoholism. Treatment with baclofen is easy to manage and rarely produces euphoria or other pleasant effects, or craving for the drug. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review first published in 2011 and last updated in 2017.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of baclofen for people with AWS.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated our searches of the following databases to June 2019: the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL. We also searched registers of ongoing trials. We handsearched the references quoted in the identified trials, and sought information from researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and relevant trial authors about unpublished or uncompleted trials. We placed no restrictions on language.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating baclofen versus placebo or any other treatment for people with AWS. We excluded uncontrolled, non-randomised, or quasi-randomised trials. We included both parallel group and cross-over studies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four RCTs with 189 randomised participants (one RCT new for this update). None of the included studies reported the primary outcomes of alcohol withdrawal seizures, alcohol withdrawal delirium, or craving. For the comparison of baclofen and placebo (1 study, 31 participants), there was no evidence of a difference in Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised (CIWA-Ar) scores in eight-hour periods from days one to five (very low-quality evidence). For the comparison of baclofen and diazepam (2 studies, 85 participants), there was no evidence of a difference in change from baseline to days 10 to 15 on CIWA-Ar scores (very low-quality evidence, meta-analysis was not performed due to insufficient data). In one study (37 participants), there was no evidence of a difference in participants with at least one adverse event (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.10 to 0.10; very low-quality evidence), dropouts (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.10; very low-quality evidence), and dropouts due to adverse events (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.10; very low-quality evidence). For the comparison of baclofen and chlordiazepoxide (1 study, 60 participants), there was no evidence of a difference in difference from baseline to nine-day decremental fixed-dose intervention: CIWA-Ar scores (mean difference (MD) 1.00, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.30; very low-quality evidence), global improvement (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.23; very low-quality evidence), 14/60 participants with adverse events (RD 2.50, 95% CI 0.88 to 7.10; very low-quality of evidence), dropouts (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; very low-quality evidence), and dropouts due to adverse events (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; very low-quality evidence). None of the RCTs provided information on random sequence generation or allocation concealment, therefore, we assessed them at unclear risk of bias. Two RCTs were not of double-blind design and had a high risk of bias in blinding (Addolorato 2006; Girish 2016). One RCT had more than 5% dropouts with high risk of attrition bias (Lyon 2011). We could not assess reporting bias as none of the prepublished protocols were available.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
No conclusions can be drawn about the efficacy and safety of baclofen for the management of alcohol withdrawal because we found insufficient and very low-quality evidence.
Topics: Alcoholism; Baclofen; Craving; GABA Agonists; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Substance Withdrawal Syndrome
PubMed: 31689723
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008502.pub6 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2022Seizures after stroke are an important clinical problem and may result in poor outcomes. The indications of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for seizure prophylaxis after... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Seizures after stroke are an important clinical problem and may result in poor outcomes. The indications of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for seizure prophylaxis after stroke remain unclear. This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of AEDs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke. For primary prevention, we aimed to assess whether AEDs reduce the likelihood of seizures in people who have a stroke but do not have a seizure. For secondary prevention, we aimed to assess whether AEDs reduce the likelihood of further seizures in people who have a stroke and at least one post-stroke seizure.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases on 9 March 2021: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to March 08, 2021). CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Epilepsy and Stroke. We also checked the reference lists of articles retrieved from these searches.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised and quasi-randomised controlled studies that recruited participants with a clinical diagnosis of stroke, either ischaemic or haemorrhagic. We excluded studies that only recruited participants with subarachnoid haemorrhage, subdural haemorrhage, extradural haemorrhage, or other non-stroke diagnoses such as tumour- or infection-related infarction or haemorrhage. We also excluded studies that recruited only participants who had undergone neurosurgery. We included participants of all ages suffering any seizure type who were assigned to AEDs or placebo groups.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
In accordance with standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration, two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion before evaluating trial risk of bias and extracting relevant data. The primary outcome assessed was the proportion of participants who experienced seizures in the follow-up period. We presented results as summary risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. Where we had sufficient data, we calculated random-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) meta-analyses for dichotomous outcomes; otherwise, we reported results narratively. We used the I statistic to analyse statistical heterogeneity. We planned to use funnel plots to assess publication bias in meta-analyses with at least 10 included studies. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
Two studies with a total of 856 subjects were included. AEDs were not shown to be effective in primary prophylaxis of post-stroke seizure (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.26; 2 studies, 856 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The first study was a randomised double-blind study comparing valproic acid with placebo for primary seizure prevention up to one year after stroke. The study included 72 adults with intracerebral haemorrhage. There was no difference in the risk of post-stroke seizures (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.16) or of death (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.58). The second study was a substudy on the use of diazepam in acute stroke. It was a randomised double-blind study, comparing a three-day diazepam treatment versus placebo for primary seizure prevention up to three months after stroke in 784 adults with acute stroke. There was no evidence of a difference in the risk of post-stroke seizures for all stroke or subgroups of haemorrhagic or ischaemic stroke (RR for all stroke 0.47, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.22). In a subgroup analysis of anterior circulation cortical infarcts, primary prophylaxis with diazepam was associated with a reduced risk of post-stroke seizures (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.95). Risks of mortality did not differ between the diazepam and the placebo group at two weeks (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.26) and three months follow-up (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.26). We assessed both studies to be at a low overall risk of bias. Using the GRADE approach, we assessed the overall certainty of the evidence as low to moderate.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of AEDs on the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke. Further well-conducted studies are warranted for this important clinical problem.
Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Brain Ischemia; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Secondary Prevention; Seizures; Stroke
PubMed: 35129214
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005398.pub4 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2020Still circa 25% to 30% of patients with epilepsy cannot be efficiently controlled with available antiepileptic drugs so newer pharmacological treatment options have been...
Still circa 25% to 30% of patients with epilepsy cannot be efficiently controlled with available antiepileptic drugs so newer pharmacological treatment options have been continuously searched for. In this context, a group of endogenous or exogenous neurosteroids allosterically positively modulating GABA-A receptors may offer a promising approach. Among endogenous neurosteroids synthesized in the brain, allopregnanolone or allotetrahydrodeoxycorticosterone have been documented to exert anticonvulsant activity in a number of experimental models of seizures-pentylenetetrazol-, bicuculline- pilocarpine-, or 6 Hz-induced convulsions in rodents. Neurosteroids can also inhibit fully kindled seizures and some of them have been reported to counteract maximal electroshock-induced convulsions. An exogenous neurosteroid, alphaxalone, significantly elevated the threshold for maximal electroconvulsions in mice but it did not potentiate the anticonvulsive action of a number of conventional antiepileptic drugs against maximal electroshock-induced seizures. Androsterone not only elevated the threshold but significantly enhanced the protective action of carbamazepine, gabapentin and phenobarbital against maximal electroshock in mice, as well. Ganaxolone (a 3beta-methylated analog of allopregnanolone) needs special consideration for two reasons. First, it performed better than conventional antiepileptic drugs, diazepam or valproate, in suppressing convulsive and lethal effects of pentylenetetrazol in pentylenetetrazol-kindled mice. Second, ganaxolone has been evaluated in the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial in patients with intractable partial seizures, taking maximally 3 antiepileptic drugs. The initial results indicate that add-on therapy with ganaxolone resulted in reduced seizure frequency with adverse effect being mainly mild to moderate. Possibly, ganaxolone may be also considered against catamenial seizures. Some positive effects of ganaxolone as an adjuvant were also observed in children with refractory seizures and its use may also prove efficient for the management of neonatal seizures associated with hypoxic injury. Neurosteroids positively modulating GABA-A receptor complex exert anticonvulsive activity in many experimental models of seizures. Their interactions with antiepileptic drugs seem ambiguous in mice. Initial clinical data indicate that ganaxolone may provide a better seizure control in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.
Topics: Allosteric Regulation; Animals; Anticonvulsants; Epilepsy; GABA-A Receptor Agonists; Humans; Neurosteroids; Seizures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33117274
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2020.541802 -
Epilepsia Jan 2023The performance of prognostic scores of status epilepticus (SE) has been reported in very heterogeneous cohorts. We aimed to provide a summary of the available evidence... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The performance of prognostic scores of status epilepticus (SE) has been reported in very heterogeneous cohorts. We aimed to provide a summary of the available evidence on their respective performance. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for relevant articles. Studies were reviewed for eligibility for meta-analysis of the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and for meta-analysis of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) in predicting in-hospital mortality with scores in which at least two external evaluations had been published. This study was registered with PROSPERO (international prospective register of systematic reviews) (CRD42022325766). Study quality was assessed using Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). In the meta-analysis of AUC, 21 studies were pooled for STESS (Status Epilepticus Severity Score), five for EMSE-EAC (Epidemiology-based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus - Etiology, Age, level of Consciousness), five for EMSE-EACE (EMSE - Etiology, Age, level of Consciousness, EEG), and two for ENDIT (Encephalitis, nonconvulsive status epilepticus, Diazepam resistance, Imaging abnormalities, Tracheal intubation). The pooled AUC of STESS, EMSE-EAC, EMSE-EACE, and ENDIT was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.71-0.78), 0.68 (95% CI 0.63-0.72), 0.77 (95% CI: 0.72-0.81), and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.70-0.87), respectively. The pooled sensitivity of STESS-3, STESS-4, EMSE-EACE-64, and ENDIT-4 was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80-0.86), 0.60 (95% CI: 0.55-0.65), 0.76 (95% CI: 0.67-0.83), and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.55-0.82), respectively. Their pooled specificity was 0.50 (95% CI: 0.48-0.52), 0.74 (95% CI: 0.72-0.76), 0.63 (95% CI: 0.59-0.67), and 0.65 (95% CI: 0.61-0.70), respectively. Their pooled PPV was 0.27 (95% CI: 0.24-0.30), 0.35 (95% CI: 0.29-0.41), 0.33 (95% CI: 0.24-0.43), and 0.20 (95% CI: 0.13-0.27). Their pooled NPV was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.93-0.96), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.89-0.92), 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80-0.98), and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92-0.98). Variations in performance were observed in patients' subgroups, such as critically ill patients and refractory cases. Investigated scores only have acceptable AUC, sensitivity, and specificity for predicting in-hospital mortality, with the EMSE-EAC having a lower discriminative power. STESS-3 has the highest sensitivity, and STESS-4 the highest specificity, but neither combines acceptable sensitivity and specificity. All these scores had high NPV but very low PPV. Caution should be exercised in their clinical use. Further studies are required to develop more accurate scores.
Topics: Humans; Prognosis; Severity of Illness Index; Sensitivity and Specificity; Predictive Value of Tests; Status Epilepticus
PubMed: 36271624
DOI: 10.1111/epi.17442 -
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences... 2023Febrile convulsion (FC) is the most common and preventable seizure in children. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the diazepam and phenobarbital for... (Review)
Review
Comparing the effect of intermittent diazepam and continuous phenobarbital in preventing recurrent febrile seizures among children under 6 years old: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Febrile convulsion (FC) is the most common and preventable seizure in children. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the diazepam and phenobarbital for preventing recurrent FC.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In this systematic review study, literature published in English language were carefully searched in biological databases (Cochrane Library, Medline, Scopus, CINHAL, Psycoinfo, and Proquest) by February 2020.Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and Quasi randomized trial were included in the review. Two researchers checked the literature independently. The quality of studies was assessed using the JADAD score. The potential risk for publication bias was assessed by Funnel plot and Egger's test. Meta regression test and sensitivity analysis were used to identify the reasons for heterogeneity. Given the results of assessing heterogeneity, the random effect model in RevMan5.1 software was used for meta analysis.
RESULTS
Four out of 17 studies had compared the effect of diazepam and phenobarbital in preventing recurrent FC. The result of the meta analysis showed that the use of diazepam in comparison with phenobarbital reduces the risk of recurrence FC by 34% (risk ratio = 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.36-1.21]), but the relationship was not statistically significant. In assessing the effect of diazepam or phenobarbital versus placebo, the results showed that the use of diazepam and phenobarbital has reduced the risk of recurrent FC by 49% (risk ratio = 0.51, 95% CI = [0.32-0.79]) and 37% (risk ratio = 0.63, 95% CI = [0.42-0.96)]), respectively, and these relationships were statistically significant ( < 0.05). Results of the meta regression test showed that the follow up time can be a reason for the heterogeneity between trials with the comparison of diazepam versus phenobarbital ( = 0.047, = 0.049) and Phenobarbital versus placebo ( = 0.022, = 0.016). According to the results of Funnel plot and Egger's test, there was evidence of publication bias ( = 0.0584 for comparison of diazepam vs. phenobarbital; = 0.0421 for comparison of diazepam vs. placebo; = 0.0402 for comparison of phenobarbital vs. placebo).
CONCLUSION
The results of this meta analysis indicated that preventive anticonvulsants can be useful in preventing recurrent convulsions in cases of febrile seizures.
PubMed: 37213451
DOI: 10.4103/jrms.jrms_1114_21 -
Journal of the Academy of... 2024Acute disturbance is a broad term referring to escalating behaviors secondary to a change in mental state, such as agitation, aggression, and violence. Available... (Review)
Review
Effectiveness and Safety of Intravenous Medications for the Management of Acute Disturbance (Agitation and Other Escalating Behaviors): A Systematic Review of Prospective Interventional Studies.
Acute disturbance is a broad term referring to escalating behaviors secondary to a change in mental state, such as agitation, aggression, and violence. Available management options include de-escalation techniques and rapid tranquilization, mostly via parenteral formulations of medication. While the intramuscular route has been extensively studied in a range of clinical settings, the same cannot be said for intravenous (IV); this is despite potential benefits, including rapid absorption and complete bioavailability. This systematic review analyzed existing evidence for effectiveness and safety of IV medication for management of acute disturbances. It followed a preregistered protocol (PROSPERO identification CRD42020216456) and is reported following the guidelines set by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. APA PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases were searched for eligible interventional studies up until May 30th, 2023. Data analysis was limited to narrative synthesis since primary outcome measures varied significantly. Results showed mixed but positive results for the effectiveness of IV dexmedetomidine, lorazepam, droperidol, and olanzapine. Evidence was more limited for IV haloperidol, ketamine, midazolam, chlorpromazine, and valproate. There was no eligible data on the use of IV clonazepam, clonidine, diazepam, diphenhydramine, propranolol, ziprasidone, fluphenazine, carbamazepine, or promethazine. Most studies reported favorable adverse event profiles, though they are unlikely to have been sufficiently powered to pick up rare serious events. In most cases, evidence was of low or mixed quality, accentuating the need for further standardized, large-scale, multi-arm randomized controlled trials with homogeneous outcome measures. Overall, this review suggests that IV medications may offer an effective alternative parenteral route of administration in acute disturbance, particularly in general hospital settings.
Topics: Humans; Administration, Intravenous; Psychomotor Agitation; Aggression; Antipsychotic Agents; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 38309683
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaclp.2024.01.004 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2020As a retained placenta is a potential life-threatening obstetrical complication, effective and timely management is important. The estimated mortality rates from a...
BACKGROUND
As a retained placenta is a potential life-threatening obstetrical complication, effective and timely management is important. The estimated mortality rates from a retained placenta in developing countries range from 3% to 9%. One possible factor contributing to the high mortality rates is a delay in initiating manual removal of the placenta. Effective anaesthesia or analgesia during this procedure will provide adequate uterine relaxation and pain control, enabling it to be carried out effectively.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of general, regional, and local anaesthesia or analgesia during manual removal of a retained placenta.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to 30 September 2019, and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We sought randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomised controlled trials, and cluster-randomised trials that compared different methods of preoperative or intraoperative anaesthetic or analgesic, administered during the manual removal of a retained placenta.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the study reports for inclusion, and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We followed standard Cochrane methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified only one randomised controlled trial (N = 30 women) that evaluated the effect of paracervical block on women undergoing manual removal of a retained placenta compared with intravenous pethidine and diazepam. The study was conducted in a hospital in Papua New Guinea. The study was at high risk of bias of performance bias and detection bias, low risk of attrition bias, and an unclear risk of selection bias, reporting bias, and other bias. The included study did not measure this review's primary outcomes of pain intensity and adverse events. The study reported that there were no women, in either group, who experienced an estimated postpartum blood loss of more than 500 mL. We are uncertain about the providers' satisfaction with the procedure, defined as their perception of achieving good pain relief during the procedure (risk ratio (RR) 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 3.16, one study, 30 women; very low quality evidence). We are also uncertain about the women's satisfaction with the procedure, defined as their perception of achieving good pain relief during the procedure (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.37; one study, 30 women; very low quality evidence). The included study did not report on any of our other outcomes of interest.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence from one small study to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of anaesthesia or analgesia during the manual removal of a retained placenta. The quality of the available evidence was very low. We downgraded based on issues of limitations in study design (risk of bias) and imprecision (single study with small sample size, few or no events, and wide confidence intervals). There is a need for well-designed, multi-centre, randomised, controlled trials to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different types of anaesthesia and analgesia during manual removal of a retained placenta. These studies could report on the important outcomes outlined in this review.
Topics: Analgesia, Obstetrical; Anesthesia, Obstetrical; Female; Humans; Job Satisfaction; Nerve Block; Pain, Procedural; Patient Satisfaction; Placenta, Retained; Pregnancy
PubMed: 32529658
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013013.pub2 -
Surgical Technology International Dec 2023To systematically evaluate cases of local anaesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) in adult urological patients.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically evaluate cases of local anaesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) in adult urological patients.
METHODS
A search of the Cochrane, Embase, and Medline databases as well as grey literature from 1 January 1974 to 1 February 2023 was performed using reported methods. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines. Eligible studies were published in English, described LAST secondary to local anaesthetic administration by urological medical staff to an adult patient, and reported >1 symptom of LAST.
RESULTS
One hundred fifty-seven publications were screened, and six eligible studies (all case reports) were identified, representing six cases of LAST in adult urological patients. Patients were aged 29-54 years and one was female. Cases occurred secondary to penile dorsal nerve block (two cases), scrotal self-injection (two), circumcision (one) or trans-vaginal tape insertion (one). Causative drugs were lidocaine (three patients; median dose 600mg) and bupivacaine (three; 200mg). While one patient was found deceased at home and received no treatment, five experienced LAST as inpatients and were discharged with no deficit. Three patients (50%) experienced a state of reduced consciousness or seizures, one experienced psychosis and one had asymptomatic tachyarrhythmia. Management consisted of supportive management (five patients), intravenous lipid emulsion (three) or intravenous thiopental and diazepam (one). Recommended tools suggested that two of these studies were at moderate or high risk of bias.
CONCLUSION
LAST is seen only rarely in adult urology. Most iatrogenic cases occur due to penile dorsal nerve block and most patients have no long-term sequelae. Urologists should be familiar with its presentation and management, and minimise risk by adhering to local anaesthetic maximum safe dose ranges.
PubMed: 38237111
DOI: 10.52198/23.STI.43.UR1725 -
Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Dec 2020This systematic review evaluates the efficacy of intravaginal diazepam in treating chronic pelvic pain and sexual dysfunction associated with high-tone pelvic floor...
This systematic review evaluates the efficacy of intravaginal diazepam in treating chronic pelvic pain and sexual dysfunction associated with high-tone pelvic floor dysfunction. A literature search was conducted in Medline and Web of Science, including articles from the database's inception to July 2019. The search identified 126 articles, and 5 articles met study inclusion criteria: 2 observational reviews and 3 small randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating intravaginal diazepam for high-tone pelvic floor dysfunction. The 2 observational studies identified subjective reports of improvement in sexual function for a majority of women, 96% and 71%, in each study. However, there were no statistical differences between Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for pain identified. One RCT found no significant changes between groups in median FSFI or VAS scores, and a second RCT found no significant changes between groups in 100-mm VAS scores. The third RCT demonstrated that compared with placebo, treatment with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and intravaginal diazepam for women with vestibulodynia and high-tone pelvic floor dysfunction yielded significant differences in reduction of dyspareunia (P ≤ .05), ability to relax pelvic floor muscles after contraction (P ≤.05), and current perception threshold values at a 5-Hz stimulation related to C fibers (P < .05), but no significant changes in 10-cm VAS scores. Intravaginal diazepam may be helpful in women with a specific diagnosis of high-tone pelvic floor dysfunction, but more and larger studies are needed to confirm these potential effects.
Topics: Administration, Intravaginal; Diazepam; Female; GABA Modulators; Humans; Muscle Hypertonia; Off-Label Use; Pelvic Floor; Pelvic Floor Disorders; Pelvic Pain; Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological
PubMed: 33274514
DOI: 10.1002/jcph.1775 -
Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Jan 2021Postoperative delirium (POD) is a condition of cerebral dysfunction and a common complication after surgery. This study aimed to compare and determine the relative...
BACKGROUND
Postoperative delirium (POD) is a condition of cerebral dysfunction and a common complication after surgery. This study aimed to compare and determine the relative efficacy of pharmacological interventions for preventing POD using a network meta-analysis.
METHODS
We performed a systematic and comprehensive search to identify and analyze all randomized controlled trials until June 29, 2020, comparing two or more pharmacological interventions, including placebo, to prevent or reduce POD. The primary outcome was the incidence of POD. We performed a network meta-analysis and used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values and rankograms to present the hierarchy of the pharmacological interventions evaluated.
RESULTS
According to the SUCRA value, the incidence of POD decreased in the following order: the combination of propofol and acetaminophen (86.1%), combination of ketamine and dexmedetomidine (86.0%), combination of diazepam, flunitrazepam, and pethidine (84.8%), and olanzapine (75.6%) after all types of anesthesia; combination of propofol and acetaminophen (85.9%), combination of ketamine and dexmedetomidine (83.2%), gabapentin (82.2%), and combination of diazepam, flunitrazepam, and pethidine (79.7%) after general anesthesia; and ketamine (87.1%), combination of propofol and acetaminophen (86.0%), and combination of dexmedetomidine and acetaminophen (66.3%) after cardiac surgery. However, only the dexmedetomidine group showed a lower incidence of POD than the control group after all types of anesthesia and after general anesthesia.
CONCLUSIONS
Dexmedetomidine reduced POD compared with the control group. The combination of propofol and acetaminophen and the combination of ketamine and dexmedetomidine seemed to be effective in preventing POD. However, further studies are needed to determine the optimal pharmacological intervention to prevent POD.
PubMed: 33445233
DOI: 10.17085/apm.20079