-
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 -
Age and Ageing Oct 2020the long-term effect of the use of drugs with anticholinergic activity on cognitive function remains unclear. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
the long-term effect of the use of drugs with anticholinergic activity on cognitive function remains unclear.
METHODS
we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between anticholinergic drugs and risk of dementia, mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and cognitive decline in the older population. We identified studies published between January 2002 and April 2018 with ≥12 weeks follow-up between strongly anticholinergic drug exposure and the study outcome measurement. We pooled adjusted odds ratios (OR) for studies reporting any, and at least short-term (90+ days) or long-term (365+ days) anticholinergic use for dementia and MCI outcomes, and standardised mean differences (SMD) in global cognition test scores for cognitive decline outcomes. Statistical heterogeneity was measured using the I2 statistic and risk of bias using ROBINS-I.
RESULTS
twenty-six studies (including 621,548 participants) met our inclusion criteria. 'Any' anticholinergic use was associated with incident dementia (OR 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.32, I2 = 86%). Short-term and long-term use were also associated with incident dementia (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.17-1.29, I2 = 2%; and OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.22-1.85, I2 = 90%). 'Any' anticholinergic use was associated with cognitive decline (SMD 0.15; 95% CI 0.09-0.21, I2 = 3%) but showed no statistically significant difference for MCI (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.97-1.59, I2 = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
anticholinergic drug use is associated with increased dementia incidence and cognitive decline in observational studies. However, a causal link cannot yet be inferred, as studies were observational with considerable risk of bias. Stronger evidence from high-quality studies is needed to guide the management of long-term use.
Topics: Cholinergic Antagonists; Cognition; Cognitive Dysfunction; Dementia; Humans; Pharmaceutical Preparations
PubMed: 32603415
DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afaa090 -
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 -
Scientific Reports Jan 2021Cognitive side effects of anticholinergic medications in older adults are well documented. Whether these poor cognitive outcomes are observed in children has not been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Cognitive side effects of anticholinergic medications in older adults are well documented. Whether these poor cognitive outcomes are observed in children has not been systematically investigated. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the associations between anticholinergic medication use and cognitive performance in children. Systematic review was conducted using Medline, PsychInfo, and Embase, identifying studies testing cognitive performance relative to the presence versus absence of anticholinergic medication(s) in children. We assessed effects overall, as well as relative to drug class, potency (low and high), cognitive domain, and duration of administration. The systematic search identified 46 articles suitable for meta-analysis. For the most part, random effects meta-analyses did not identify statistically significant associations between anticholinergic exposure and cognitive performance in children; the one exception was a small effect of anticholinergic anti-depressants being associated with better cognitive function (Hedges' g = 0.24, 95% CI 0.06-0.42, p = 0.01). Anticholinergic medications do not appear to be associated with poor cognitive outcomes in children, as they do in older adults. The discrepancy in findings with older adults may be due to shorter durations of exposure in children, differences in study design (predominantly experimental studies in children rather than predominantly epidemiological in older adults), biological ageing (e.g. blood brain barrier integrity), along with less residual confounding due to minimal polypharmacy and comorbidity in children.
Topics: Child; Cholinergic Antagonists; Cognition; Humans
PubMed: 33420226
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-80211-6 -
Quality of anticholinergic burden scales and their impact on clinical outcomes: a systematic review.European Journal of Clinical... Feb 2021Older people are at risk of anticholinergic side effects due to changes affecting drug elimination and higher sensitivity to drug's side effects. Anticholinergic burden... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
PURPOSE
Older people are at risk of anticholinergic side effects due to changes affecting drug elimination and higher sensitivity to drug's side effects. Anticholinergic burden scales (ABS) were developed to quantify the anticholinergic drug burden (ADB). We aim to identify all published ABS, to compare them systematically and to evaluate their associations with clinical outcomes.
METHODS
We conducted a literature search in MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify all published ABS and a Web of Science citation (WoS) analysis to track validation studies implying clinical outcomes. Quality of the ABS was assessed using an adapted AGREE II tool. For the validation studies, we used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane tool Rob2.0. The validation studies were categorized into six evidence levels based on the propositions of the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine with respect to their quality. At least two researchers independently performed screening and quality assessments.
RESULTS
Out of 1297 records, we identified 19 ABS and 104 validations studies. Despite differences in quality, all ABS were recommended for use. The anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) scale and the German anticholinergic burden scale (GABS) achieved the highest percentage in quality. Most ABS are validated, yet validation studies for newer scales are lacking. Only two studies compared eight ABS simultaneously. The four most investigated clinical outcomes delirium, cognition, mortality and falls showed contradicting results.
CONCLUSION
There is need for good quality validation studies comparing multiple scales to define the best scale and to conduct a meta-analysis for the assessment of their clinical impact.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Aging; Cholinergic Antagonists; Cognition Disorders; Cost of Illness; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Metabolic Clearance Rate; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Validation Studies as Topic
PubMed: 33011824
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-020-02994-x -
Archivio Italiano Di Urologia,... Oct 2023Urinary incontinence and other urinary symptoms tend to be frequent at menopause because of hormonal modifications and aging. Urinary symptoms are associated with the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Urinary incontinence and other urinary symptoms tend to be frequent at menopause because of hormonal modifications and aging. Urinary symptoms are associated with the genitourinary syndrome of menopause which is characterized by physical changes of the vulva, vagina and lower urinary tract. The treatment strategies for postmenopausal urinary incontinence are various and may include estrogens, anticholinergics, and pelvic floor muscle training. A comparison of these treatments is difficult due to the heterogeneity of adopted protocols. We systematically reviewed the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on treatment of postmenopausal women with urge incontinence.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis by searching PubMed and EMBASE databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting results of treatments for postmenopausal urinary urge incontinence. Odds ratios for improvement of urinary incontinence were calculated using random effect Mantel-Haenszel statistics.
RESULTS
Out of 248 records retrieved, 35 eligible RCTs were assessed for risk of bias and included in the meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, systemic estrogens were associated with decreased odds of improving urinary incontinence in postmenopausal women (OR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.61-0.91, 7 series, 17132 participants, Z = 2.89, P = 0.004, I2 = 72%). In most studies, no significant improvement in urinary symptoms was observed in patients treated with local estrogens, although they showed to be helpful in improving vaginal symptoms. Vitamin D, phytoestrogens and estrogen modulators were not effective in improving symptoms of incontinence and other symptoms of genitourinary menopause syndrome or yielded contradictory results. A randomized controlled trial demonstrated that oxybutynin was significantly better than placebo at improving postmenopausal urgency and urge incontinence. The combination of anticholinergics with local estrogens has not been shown to be more effective than anticholinergics alone in improving urinary incontinence symptoms in postmenopausal women. Physical therapy showed an overall positive outcome on postmenopausal urinary incontinence symptoms, although such evidence should be further validated in the frame of quality RCTs.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence for effective treatment of postmenopausal urinary incontinence is still lacking. Welldesigned large studies having subjective and objective improvement primary endpoints in postmenopausal urinary incontinence are needed. At present, a combination of different treatments tailored to the characteristics of the individual patient can be suggested.
Topics: Female; Humans; Urinary Incontinence, Urge; Urinary Incontinence, Stress; Postmenopause; Pelvic Floor; Urinary Incontinence; Estrogens; Cholinergic Antagonists; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37791545
DOI: 10.4081/aiua.2023.11718 -
Journal of Asthma and Allergy 2023Asthma is the common chronic inflammatory disease affecting children. It is usually associated with airway hyper-responsiveness. Globally, the prevalence of asthma among... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Asthma is the common chronic inflammatory disease affecting children. It is usually associated with airway hyper-responsiveness. Globally, the prevalence of asthma among pediatrics population varies from 10% to 30%. Its symptoms range from chronic cough to life-threatening bronchospasm. At emergency department, all patients with acute severe asthma should initially receive oxygen, nebulized β2-agonists, nebulized anticholinergic agent, and corticosteroids. Though bronchodilators act within minutes, corticosteroids may require hours. Magnesium sulphate (MgSO) was first considered for treating asthma about 60 years ago. Several case reports were published on its usefulness in decreasing admission and endotracheal intubation. So far, evidence is conflicting to fully employ MgSO for asthma management in children under five.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review was aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of MgSO in the treatment of severe acute asthmatic attacks in children.
METHODS
A systematic and comprehensive search of literature was performed to identify controlled clinical trials conducted on IV and nebulized MgSO in pediatric patients with acute asthma.
RESULTS
Data generated from three randomized clinical trials were included in the final analysis. In this analysis, intravenous MgSO did not improve respiratory function (RR=1.09, 95%CI: 0.81-1.45) and not safer than conventional treatment (RR=0.38, 95%CI: 0.08-1.67). Similarly, use of nebulized MgSO showed no significant effect on respiratory function (RR=1.05, 95%CI: 0.68-1.64) and more tolerable (RR=0.31, 95%CI: 0.14-0.68).
CONCLUSION
Intravenous MgSO may not be superior to conventional treatment in moderate to severe acute asthma among children and neither have significant adverse effects. Similarly, nebulized MgSO showed no significant effect on respiratory function in moderate to severe acute asthma in children under five but it seems a safer alternative.
PubMed: 36895494
DOI: 10.2147/JAA.S390389 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2023The desmopressin combined with anticholinergic agents for the treatment of nocturnal enuresis (NE) remains controversial. This meta-analysis assesses the efficacy and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The desmopressin combined with anticholinergic agents for the treatment of nocturnal enuresis (NE) remains controversial. This meta-analysis assesses the efficacy and safety of desmopressin compared with desmopressin plus anticholinergic agents for the treatment of NE.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases for RCTs published for the treatment of NE. Systematic review was carried out using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. This meta-analysis used RevMan v.5.1.0 to analyze data.
RESULTS
Eight studies involving 600 patients (293 in the combination group and 307 in the desmopressin group) contained meaningful data. The results were as follows: after one month of treatment, compared with the desmopressin monotherapy group, the combination group was significantly better in treating NE in FR (full responders, = 0.003), FR + PR (partial responders) ( < 0.0001), and the mean number of wet nights ( = 0.004); also, the combination group had a better effect in FR ( < 0.00001), FR + PR ( = 0.02) and the mean number of wet nights ( = 0.04) after 3 months' treatment. For side effects, combination therapy does not cause more adverse events in treating NE ( = 0.42).
CONCLUSIONS
This study elucidates that desmopressin combined with the anticholinergic agent was demonstrated to be more effective in treating NE than desmopressin monotherapy, and the anticholinergic agent does not increase the risk of adverse events (AEs).
PubMed: 37928358
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2023.1242777 -
European Journal of Clinical... Oct 2022Asthma is a heterogeneous disease with a wide range of symptoms. Severe asthma exacerbations (SAEs) are characterized by worsening symptoms and bronchospasm requiring... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Asthma is a heterogeneous disease with a wide range of symptoms. Severe asthma exacerbations (SAEs) are characterized by worsening symptoms and bronchospasm requiring emergency department visits. In addition to conventional strategies for SAEs (inhaled β-agonists, anticholinergics, and systemic corticosteroids), another pharmacological option is represented by ketamine. We performed a systematic review to explore the role of ketamine in refractory SAEs.
METHODS
We performed a systematic search on PubMed and EMBASE up to August 12th, 2021. We selected prospective studies only, and outcomes of interest were oxygenation/respiratory parameters, clinical status, need for invasive ventilation and effects on weaning.
RESULTS
We included a total of seven studies, five being randomized controlled trials (RCTs, population range 44-92 patients). The two small prospective studies (n = 10 and n = 11) did not have a control group. Four studies focused on adults, and three enrolled a pediatric population. We found a large heterogeneity regarding sample size, age and gender distribution, inclusion criteria (different severity scores, if any) and ketamine dosing (bolus and/or continuous infusion). Of the five RCTs, three compared ketamine to placebo, while one used fentanyl and the other aminophylline. The outcomes evaluated by the included studies were highly variable. Despite paucity of data and large heterogeneity, an overview of the included studies suggests absence of clear benefit produced by ketamine in patients with refractory SAE, and some signals towards side effects.
CONCLUSION
Our systematic review does not support the use of ketamine in refractory SAE. A limited number of prospective studies with large heterogeneity was found. Well-designed multicenter RCTs are desirable.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Aminophylline; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Child; Cholinergic Antagonists; Fentanyl; Humans; Ketamine; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 36008492
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-022-03374-3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2022Respiratory disease is the main cause of morbidity and mortality in cystic fibrosis (CF), and many different therapies are used by people with CF in the management of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Respiratory disease is the main cause of morbidity and mortality in cystic fibrosis (CF), and many different therapies are used by people with CF in the management of respiratory problems. Bronchodilator therapy is used to relieve symptoms of shortness of breath and to open the airways to allow clearance of mucus. Despite the widespread use of inhaled bronchodilators in CF, there is little objective evidence of their efficacy. A Cochrane Review looking at both short- and long-acting inhaled bronchodilators for CF was withdrawn from the Cochrane Library in 2016. That review has been replaced by two separate Cochrane Reviews: one on long-acting inhaled bronchodilators for CF, and this review on short-acting inhaled bronchodilators for CF. For this review 'inhaled' includes the use of pressurised metered dose inhalers (MDIs), with or without a spacer, dry powder devices and nebulisers.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate short-acting inhaled bronchodilators in children and adults with CF in terms of clinical outcomes and safety.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books on 28 March 2022 and searched trial registries for any new or ongoing trials on 12 April 2022. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs that looked at the effect of any short-acting inhaled bronchodilator delivered by any device, at any dose, at any frequency and for any duration compared to either placebo or another short-acting inhaled bronchodilator in people with CF. We screened references as per standard Cochrane methodology.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool. Where we were not able to enter data into our analyses we reported results directly from the papers. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 trials from our systematic search, with 191 participants meeting our inclusion criteria; three of these trials had three treatment arms. Eight trials compared short-acting inhaled beta-2 agonists to placebo and four trials compared short-acting inhaled muscarinic antagonists to placebo. Three trials compared short-acting inhaled beta-2 agonists to short-acting inhaled muscarinic antagonists. All were cross-over trials with only small numbers of participants. We were only able to enter data into the analysis from three trials comparing short-acting inhaled beta-2 agonists to placebo. Short-acting inhaled beta-2 agonists versus placebo All eight trials (six single-dose trials and two longer-term trials) reporting on this comparison reported on forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV), either as per cent predicted (% predicted) or L. We were able to combine the data from two trials in a meta-analysis which showed a greater per cent change from baseline in FEV L after beta-2 agonists compared to placebo (mean difference (MD) 6.95%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.88 to 12.02; 2 trials, 82 participants). Only one of the longer-term trials reported on exacerbations, as measured by hospitalisations and courses of antibiotics. Only the second longer-term trial presented results for participant-reported outcomes. Three trials narratively reported adverse events, and these were all mild. Three single-dose trials and the two longer trials reported on forced vital capacity (FVC), and five trials reported on peak expiratory flow, i.e. forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% (FEF). One trial reported on airway clearance in terms of sputum weight. We judged the certainty of evidence for each of these outcomes to be very low, meaning we are very uncertain about the effect of short-acting inhaled beta-2 agonists on any of the outcomes we assessed. Short-acting inhaled muscarinic antagonists versus placebo All four trials reporting on this comparison looked at the effects of ipratropium bromide, but in different doses and via different delivery methods. One trial reported FEV % predicted; three trials measured this in L. Two trials reported adverse events, but these were few and mild. One trial reported FVC and three trials reported FEF. None of the trials reported on quality of life, exacerbations or airway clearance. We judged the certainty of evidence for each of these outcomes to be very low, meaning we are very uncertain about the effect of short-acting inhaled muscarinic antagonists on any of the outcomes we assessed. Short-acting inhaled beta-2 agonists versus short-acting inhaled muscarinic antagonists None of the three single-dose trials reporting on this comparison provided data we could analyse. The original papers from three trials report that both treatments lead to an improvement in FEV L. Only one trial reported on adverse events; but none were experienced by any participant. No trial reported on any of our other outcomes. We judged the certainty of evidence to be very low, meaning we are very uncertain about the effect of short-acting inhaled beta-2 agonists compared to short-acting inhaled muscarinic antagonists on any of the outcomes we assessed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
All included trials in this review are small and of a cross-over design. Most trials looked at very short-term effects of inhaled bronchodilators, and therefore did not measure longer-term outcomes. The certainty of evidence across all outcomes was very low, and therefore we have been unable to describe any effects with certainty.
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Adult; Bronchodilator Agents; Child; Cystic Fibrosis; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Muscarinic Antagonists
PubMed: 35749226
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013666.pub2