-
Obstetrics and Gynecology Jan 2024To estimate the effect of medical management on the size of ovarian endometriomas. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the effect of medical management on the size of ovarian endometriomas.
DATA SOURCE
Online databases were searched from inception to October 2022, including Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, PubMed, EBM Reviews-Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ClinicalTrials.gov , and Web of Science.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
Following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we included all English-language, full-text articles that reported on change in endometrioma size (either diameter or volume) after medical interventions. Studies evaluating surgical interventions or postoperative recurrence were excluded. All screening and data extraction were performed independently by two authors. Risk of bias assessment was performed with either the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials or a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS
After removal of duplicates, 9,332 studies were screened, with 33 full-text articles deemed eligible for inclusion. In the meta-analysis, dienogest showed significant reduction in cyst diameter (reduction 1.32 cm, 95% CI, 0.91-1.73, eight studies, n=418 cysts) and volume (mean difference of log-transformed volume 1.35, 95% CI, 0.87-1.83, seven studies, n=282 cysts). Similarly, significant reductions were seen with the oral contraceptive pill (OCP) (1.06 cm, 95% CI, 0.59-1.53, nine studies, n=455), gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists (1.17 cm, 95% CI, 0.42-1.92, four studies, n=128 cysts), norethindrone acetate (0.6 cm, 95% CI, 0.27-0.94, two studies, n=88 cysts), and danazol (1.95 cm, 95% CI, 1.18-2.73, two studies, n=34 cysts). Norethindrone acetate with aromatase inhibitor was also effective in reducing endometrioma volume (mean difference of log-transformed volume 1.47, 95% CI, 0.16-2.78, two studies, n=34 cysts).
CONCLUSION
Medical management with dienogest, OCPs, GnRH agonists, norethindrone acetate, norethindrone acetate with aromatase inhibitor, or danazol can reduce the size of ovarian endometriomas.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, CRD 42022363319.
Topics: Female; Humans; Endometriosis; Danazol; Norethindrone Acetate; Aromatase Inhibitors; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone; Cysts
PubMed: 37944155
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005444 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Asthma affects 350 million people worldwide including 45% to 70% with mild disease. Treatment is mainly with inhalers containing beta₂-agonists, typically taken as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Asthma affects 350 million people worldwide including 45% to 70% with mild disease. Treatment is mainly with inhalers containing beta₂-agonists, typically taken as required to relieve bronchospasm, and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as regular preventive therapy. Poor adherence to regular therapy is common and increases the risk of exacerbations, morbidity and mortality. Fixed-dose combination inhalers containing both a steroid and a fast-acting beta₂-agonist (FABA) in the same device simplify inhalers regimens and ensure symptomatic relief is accompanied by preventative therapy. Their use is established in moderate asthma, but they may also have potential utility in mild asthma.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of single combined (fast-onset beta₂-agonist plus an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)) inhaler only used as needed in people with mild asthma.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal. We contacted trial authors for further information and requested details regarding the possibility of unpublished trials. The most recent search was conducted on 19 March 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cross-over trials with at least one week washout period. We included studies of a single fixed-dose FABA/ICS inhaler used as required compared with no treatment, placebo, short-acting beta agonist (SABA) as required, regular ICS with SABA as required, regular fixed-dose combination ICS/long-acting beta agonist (LABA), or regular fixed-dose combination ICS/FABA with as required ICS/FABA. We planned to include cluster-randomised trials if the data had been or could be adjusted for clustering. We excluded trials shorter than 12 weeks. We included full texts, abstracts and unpublished data.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (OR) or rate ratios (RR) and continuous data as mean difference (MD). We reported 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used Cochrane's standard methodological procedures of meta-analysis. We applied the GRADE approach to summarise results and to assess the overall certainty of evidence. Primary outcomes were exacerbations requiring systemic steroids, hospital admissions/emergency department or urgent care visits for asthma, and measures of asthma control.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six studies of which five contributed results to the meta-analyses. All five used budesonide 200 μg and formoterol 6 μg in a dry powder formulation as the combination inhaler. Comparator fast-acting bronchodilators included terbutaline and formoterol. Two studies included children aged 12+ and adults; two studies were open-label. A total of 9657 participants were included, with a mean age of 36 to 43 years. 2.3% to 11% were current smokers. FABA / ICS as required versus FABA as required Compared with as-required FABA alone, as-required FABA/ICS reduced exacerbations requiring systemic steroids (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.60, 2 RCTs, 2997 participants, high-certainty evidence), equivalent to 109 people out of 1000 in the FABA alone group experiencing an exacerbation requiring systemic steroids, compared to 52 (95% CI 40 to 68) out of 1000 in the FABA/ICS as-required group. FABA/ICS as required may also reduce the odds of an asthma-related hospital admission or emergency department or urgent care visit (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.60, 2 RCTs, 2997 participants, low-certainty evidence). Compared with as-required FABA alone, any changes in asthma control or spirometry, though favouring as-required FABA/ICS, were small and less than the minimal clinically-important differences. We did not find evidence of differences in asthma-associated quality of life or mortality. For other secondary outcomes FABA/ICS as required was associated with reductions in fractional exhaled nitric oxide, probably reduces the odds of an adverse event (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.95, 2 RCTs, 3002 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and may reduce total systemic steroid dose (MD -9.90, 95% CI -19.38 to -0.42, 1 RCT, 443 participants, low-certainty evidence), and with an increase in the daily inhaled steroid dose (MD 77 μg beclomethasone equiv./day, 95% CI 69 to 84, 2 RCTs, 2554 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). FABA/ICS as required versus regular ICS plus FABA as required There may be little or no difference in the number of people with asthma exacerbations requiring systemic steroid with FABA/ICS as required compared with regular ICS (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.07, 4 RCTs, 8065 participants, low-certainty evidence), equivalent to 81 people out of 1000 in the regular ICS plus FABA group experiencing an exacerbation requiring systemic steroids, compared to 65 (95% CI 49 to 86) out of 1000 FABA/ICS as required group. The odds of an asthma-related hospital admission or emergency department or urgent care visit may be reduced in those taking FABA/ICS as required (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.91, 4 RCTs, 8065 participants, low-certainty evidence). Compared with regular ICS, any changes in asthma control, spirometry, peak flow rates (PFR), or asthma-associated quality of life, though favouring regular ICS, were small and less than the minimal clinically important differences (MCID). Adverse events, serious adverse events, total systemic corticosteroid dose and mortality were similar between groups, although deaths were rare, so confidence intervals for this analysis were wide. We found moderate-certainty evidence from four trials involving 7180 participants that FABA/ICS as required was likely associated with less average daily exposure to inhaled corticosteroids than those on regular ICS (MD -154.51 μg/day, 95% CI -207.94 to -101.09).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found FABA/ICS as required is clinically effective in adults and adolescents with mild asthma. Their use instead of FABA as required alone reduced exacerbations, hospital admissions or unscheduled healthcare visits and exposure to systemic corticosteroids and probably reduces adverse events. FABA/ICS as required is as effective as regular ICS and reduced asthma-related hospital admissions or unscheduled healthcare visits, and average exposure to ICS, and is unlikely to be associated with an increase in adverse events. Further research is needed to explore use of FABA/ICS as required in children under 12 years of age, use of other FABA/ICS preparations, and long-term outcomes beyond 52 weeks.
Topics: Adolescent; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists; Adult; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Beclomethasone; Budesonide; Child; Disease Progression; Drug Combinations; Formoterol Fumarate; Hospitalization; Humans; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Prednisolone; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Terbutaline
PubMed: 33945639
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013518.pub2 -
International Forum of Allergy &... Jan 2022Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) are used in the management of sinonasal conditions. Use of exogenous steroids can be associated with hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) are used in the management of sinonasal conditions. Use of exogenous steroids can be associated with hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis dysfunction and adrenal insufficiency (AI). We aimed to estimate the rate of AI after INCS use in a meta-analysis, stratified by steroid type and treatment duration.
METHODS
Ovid Medline, Embase Classic, PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were searched following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify studies investigating INCS use and AI. AI was defined as morning serum cortisol <550 nmol/L and <80 nmol/L with and without adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation. INCS were classified as first (beclomethasone dipropionate, triamcinolone acetonide, beclomethasone, budesonide, dexamethasone) and second (ciclesonide, mometasone furoate, and fluticasone propionate) generation. Duration of treatment was classified as short (<1 month), medium (1-12 months), and long-term (>12 months) time periods.
RESULTS
This search identified 3668 articles. A total of 39 studies (1678 patients) were included in the final analysis. The pooled percentage of AI for routinely utilized first- and second-generation INCS was 0.70% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-1.12%). Stratified by type, AI was observed in 0.78% (95% CI, 0.25-1.30%) of first-generation and 0.58% (95% CI, -0.1% to 1.26%) of second-generation steroids. AI was seen in 0.48% (95% CI, -0.01% to 0.96%) of short-term, 1.13% (95% CI, 0.2-2.1%) of medium-term, and 1.67% (95% CI, 0.37-2.9%) of long-term use of INCS.
CONCLUSION
Overall, the use of INCS carries a low risk for AI. Although modest, this risk may differ depending on the length of duration and type of INCS used. Informing patients of these risks is of importance for the treatment of chronic sinonasal conditions.
Topics: Administration, Intranasal; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Humans; Hypothalamo-Hypophyseal System; Mometasone Furoate; Pituitary-Adrenal System
PubMed: 34260153
DOI: 10.1002/alr.22863 -
Clinical Rheumatology Dec 2014The comparative efficacy of various Corticosteroid (CS) injections commonly used to treat musculoskeletal conditions has not been systematically studied. Our objective... (Review)
Review
The comparative efficacy of various Corticosteroid (CS) injections commonly used to treat musculoskeletal conditions has not been systematically studied. Our objective is to synthesize data about comparative efficacy of various CS used for intra-articular and periarticular soft tissue injections. Online databases were searched including MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, and bibliographies of studies till November 2013. We included all randomized controlled trials comparing two CS for intra-articular and periarticular injections, selected according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses methodology. Seven good quality trials were selected for qualitative data synthesis. Two trials comparing triamcinolone hexacetonide (TH) and methylprednisolone (MP) for knee arthritis suggested faster pain relief with TH for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) at day 7 (p < 0.05) and osteoarthritis (OA) at week 3 (visual analogue scale, 33 mm vs 14 mm, p < 0.01) but a similar long-term efficacy. One trial suggested faster pain relief with MP compared to triamcinolone acetonide (TA) for rotator cuff tendonitis at 2 weeks (percentage of patients improving 92 % vs. 50 %; p = 0.02) but similar long-term efficacy, while another trial suggested no difference between TA and MP for knee OA. Two trials for knee arthritis suggested a substantially better efficacy for TH than TA (response rate at 24 months 77 % vs 39 %; p = 0.001) and betamethasone (BM) at day 42 (p < 0.01). There is paucity of data regarding comparative efficacy of various CS injections. Limited number of studies favored TH over other CS (TA, MP, BM).
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Animals; Betamethasone; Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Injections, Intra-Articular; Joint Diseases; Methylprednisolone; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Tendinopathy; Triamcinolone Acetonide
PubMed: 24651914
DOI: 10.1007/s10067-014-2572-8 -
Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology Jan 2024Higher prevalence of depression in females might be associated with sex-specific cortisol levels. Evidence exists that cortisol levels differ between healthy females and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Higher prevalence of depression in females might be associated with sex-specific cortisol levels. Evidence exists that cortisol levels differ between healthy females and males, however a sex-specific association in depression has not been systematically assessed. Thus, the current study quantifies the existing literature on different cortisol parameters, i.e., basal cortisol, hair cortisol, cortisol awakening response (CAR), and cortisol stress reactivity comparing depressed females and males as well as sex-specific comparisons with healthy controls. Following an extensive literature research, fifty original articles were included. Depressed females had significantly higher hair cortisol, higher CAR, and lower cortisol stress reactivity compared to depressed males. In comparison with sex-matched controls, female patients had significantly higher evening basal cortisol, higher CAR and lower cortisol stress reactivity, and male patients had significantly higher general, morning and evening basal cortisol. Overall, sex as a fundamental driver of cortisol levels in depression needs to be taken into account.
Topics: Humans; Male; Female; Hydrocortisone; Depression; Sex Characteristics; Health Status; Hypothalamo-Hypophyseal System; Pituitary-Adrenal System
PubMed: 38176541
DOI: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2023.101118 -
Archives of Women's Mental Health Feb 2018Timing of cortisol collection during pregnancy is an important factor within studies reporting on the association between maternal cortisol and depression during... (Review)
Review
Timing of cortisol collection during pregnancy is an important factor within studies reporting on the association between maternal cortisol and depression during pregnancy. Our objective was to further examine the extent to which reported associations differed across studies according to time of maternal cortisol collection during pregnancy. On December 15, 2016, records were identified using PubMed/MEDLINE (National Library of Medicine), EMBASE (Elsevier; 1974-), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL, EBSCO), PsycINFO (EBSCO), and Web of Science Core Collection (Thomson Reuters). Unique abstracts were screened using the following inclusion criteria: (1) maternal cortisol assessed during pregnancy; (2) antepartum depression assessed during pregnancy using a screening instrument; (3) reports on the association between maternal cortisol and antepartum depression; (4) provides information on timing of cortisol assessment during pregnancy, including time of day and gestation; and (5) not a review article or a case study. One thousand three hundred seventy-five records were identified, resulting in 826 unique abstracts. Twenty-nine articles met all inclusion criteria. On balance, most studies reported no association between maternal cortisol and antepartum depression (N = 17), and saliva and blood were the most common reported matrices. Morning and second and third trimesters were the most common times of collection during pregnancy. Among studies reporting an association (N = 12), second-trimester and third-trimester cortisol assessments more consistently reported an association and elevated cortisol concentrations were observed in expected recovery periods. Our review adds to the existing literature on the topic, highlighting gaps and strategic next steps.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Depression; Female; Humans; Hydrocortisone; Middle Aged; Mothers; Pregnancy; Saliva; Young Adult
PubMed: 28942465
DOI: 10.1007/s00737-017-0777-y -
Biological Psychology Jul 2022Sedentary behaviour, physical activity, and psychobiological reactivity to acute psychological stress are independent risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Sedentary... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Sedentary behaviour, physical activity, and psychobiological reactivity to acute psychological stress are independent risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Sedentary behaviour and physical activity influence autonomic, haemodynamic, and inflammatory pathways under resting conditions, and these pathways become activated under acute psychological stress. However, it is unclear whether sedentary behaviour and physical activity relate to psychobiological responses to stress. Thus, the aim of this study is to systematically review sedentary behaviour and physical activity in the context of psychobiological reactivity to acute psychological stress.
METHODS
Sedentary behaviour, physical activity and psychobiological stress reactivity search terms were combined, and several databases were searched in duplicate. Eligibility criteria included: (1) a validated measure of sedentary behaviour/physical activity; (2) cardiovascular, inflammatory, neuroendocrine, or respiratory markers measured at rest and in response to laboratory-induced acute psychological stress.
RESULTS
6084 articles were screened, with 11 included in a narrative synthesis. No studies measured postural components of sedentary behaviour, but 2/4 studies found that markers of sedentary behaviour (e.g., physical inactivity) were associated with elevated heart rate, dysregulated heart rate variability, or lowered cortisol responses to stress. Higher volumes of physical activity were linked to lower HR, cortisol, or immune responses to stress in 4/7 studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Extensive methodological variability precludes conclusions from being drawn. This review should be used to guide a more homogeneous and gold-standard literature, which accounts for postural components of sedentary behaviour using inclinometery, and the whole physical activity intensity spectrum using universal and reproducible approaches.
Topics: Exercise; Humans; Hydrocortisone; Sedentary Behavior; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 35667480
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2022.108374 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Dec 2023Currently, some meta-analyses on COVID-19 have suggested that glucocorticoids use can reduce the mortality rate of COVID-19 patients, utilization rate of invasive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Currently, some meta-analyses on COVID-19 have suggested that glucocorticoids use can reduce the mortality rate of COVID-19 patients, utilization rate of invasive ventilation, and improve the prognosis of patients. However, optimal regimen and dosages of glucocorticoid remain unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this network meta-analysis is to analyze the efficacy and safety of glucocorticoids in treating COVID-19 at regimens.
METHODS
This meta-analysis retrieved randomized controlled trials from the earliest records to December 30, 2022, published in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI Database and Wanfang Database, which compared glucocorticoids with placebos for their efficacy and safety in the treatment of COVID-19, Effects of different treatment regimens, types and dosages (high-dose methylprednisolone, very high-dose methylprednisolone, Pulse therapy methylprednisolone, medium-dose hydrocortisone, high-dose hydrocortisone, high-dose dexamethasone, very high-dose dexamethasone and placebo) on 28-day all-caused hospitalization mortality, hospitalization duration, mechanical ventilation requirement, ICU admission and safety outcome were compared.
RESULTS
In this network meta-analysis, a total of 10,544 patients from 19 randomized controlled trials were finally included, involving a total of 9 glucocorticoid treatment regimens of different types and dosages. According to the analysis results, the 28-day all-cause mortality rate was the lowest in the treatment with pulse therapy methylprednisolone (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02, 0.42), but the use of high-dose methylprednisolone (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.59, 1.22), very high-dose dexamethasone (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.67, 1.35), high-dose hydrocortisone (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.34, 1.22), medium-dose hydrocortisone (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.49, 1.31) showed no benefit in prolonging the 28-day survival of patient. Compared with placebo, the treatment with very high-dose methylprednisolone (MD = -3.09;95%CI: -4.10, -2.08) had the shortest length of hospital stay, while high-dose dexamethasone (MD = -1.55;95%CI: -3.13,0.03) and very high-dose dexamethasone (MD = -1.06;95%CI: -2.78,0.67) did not benefit patients in terms of length of stay.
CONCLUSIONS
Considering the available evidence, this network meta‑analysis suggests that the prognostic impact of glucocorticoids in patients with COVID-19 may depend on the regimens of glucocorticoids. It is suggested that pulse therapy methylprednisolone is associated with lower 28-day all-cause mortality, very high-dose methylprednisolone had the shortest length of hospital stay in patients with COVID-19.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42022350407 (22/08/2022).
Topics: Humans; Glucocorticoids; COVID-19; Hydrocortisone; Network Meta-Analysis; Methylprednisolone; Dexamethasone
PubMed: 38124031
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08874-w -
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Feb 2024The optimal dose of dexamethasone for severe/critical COVID-19 is uncertain. We compared higher versus standard doses of dexamethasone in adults with COVID-19 and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The optimal dose of dexamethasone for severe/critical COVID-19 is uncertain. We compared higher versus standard doses of dexamethasone in adults with COVID-19 and hypoxia.
METHODS
We searched PubMed and trial registers until 23 June 2023 for randomised clinical trials comparing higher (>6 mg) versus standard doses (6 mg) of dexamethasone in adults with COVID-19 and hypoxia. The primary outcome was mortality at 1 month. Secondary outcomes were mortality closest to 90 days; days alive without life support; and the occurrence of serious adverse events/reactions (SAEs/SARs) closest to 1 month. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB2 tool, risk of random errors using trial sequential analysis, and certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
RESULTS
We included eight trials (2478 participants), of which four (1293 participants) had low risk of bias. Higher doses of dexamethasone probably resulted in little to no difference in mortality at 1 month (relative risk [RR] 0.97, 95% CI: 0.79-1.19), mortality closest to Day 90 (RR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.86-1.20), and SAEs/SARs (RR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.97-1.02). Higher doses of dexamethasone probably increased the number of days alive without invasive mechanical ventilation and circulatory support but had no effect on days alive without renal replacement therapy.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on low to moderate certainty evidence, higher versus standard doses of dexamethasone probably result in little to no difference in mortality, SAEs/SARs, and days alive without renal replacement therapy, but probably increase the number of days alive without invasive mechanical ventilation and circulatory support.
Topics: Adult; Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Patients; Dexamethasone; Hypoxia
PubMed: 37881881
DOI: 10.1111/aas.14346 -
Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) Aug 2022Confirmatory tests are recommended for diagnosing primary aldosteronism, but the supporting evidence is unclear. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Confirmatory tests are recommended for diagnosing primary aldosteronism, but the supporting evidence is unclear.
METHODS
We searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Studies evaluating any guideline-recommended confirmatory test (ie, saline infusion test, salt loading test, fludrocortisone suppression test, and captopril challenge test), compared with a reference standard were included. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic models.
RESULTS
Fifty-five studies were included, comprising 26 studies (3654 participants) for the recumbent saline infusion test, 4 studies (633 participants) for the seated saline infusion test, 2 studies (99 participants) for the salt loading test, 7 studies (386 participants) for the fludrocortisone suppression test, and 25 studies (2585 participants) for the captopril challenge test. Risk of bias was high, affecting more than half of studies, and across all domains. Studies with case-control sampling overestimated accuracy by 7-fold (relative diagnostic odds ratio, 7.26 [95% CI, 2.46-21.43]) and partial verification or use of inconsistent reference standards overestimated accuracy by 5-fold (5.12 [95% CI, 1.48-17.77]). There were large variations in how confirmatory tests were conducted, interpreted, and verified. Under most scenarios, confirmatory testing resulted in an excess of missed cases. The certainty of evidence underlying each test (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) was very low.
CONCLUSIONS
Recommendations for confirmatory testing in patients with abnormal screening tests and high probability features of primary aldosteronism are based on very low-quality evidence and their routine use should be reconsidered.
Topics: Captopril; Fludrocortisone; Humans; Hyperaldosteronism; ROC Curve; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 35652330
DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.122.19377