-
BJS Open Mar 2023Symptomatic gallstones are common. Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is a bile acid that dissolves gallstones. There is increasing interest in UDCA for symptomatic gallstones,...
BACKGROUND
Symptomatic gallstones are common. Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is a bile acid that dissolves gallstones. There is increasing interest in UDCA for symptomatic gallstones, particularly in those unfit for surgery.
METHOD
A UK clinician survey of use and opinions about UDCA in symptomatic gallstones was performed, assessing clinicians' beliefs and perceptions of UDCA effectiveness. A systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases were searched for studies of UDCA for symptomatic gallstones (key terms included 'ursodeoxycholic acid'; 'UDCA'; 'biliary pain'; and 'biliary colic'). Information was assessed by two authors, including bias assessment, with independent review of conflicts.
RESULTS
Overall, 102 clinicians completed the survey, and 42 per cent had previous experience of using UDCA. Survey responses demonstrated clinical equipoise surrounding the benefit of UDCA for the management of symptomatic gallstones, with no clear consensus for benefit or non-benefit; however, 95 per cent would start using UDCA if there was a randomized clinical trial (RCT) demonstrating a benefit. Eight studies were included in the review: four RCTs, three prospective studies, and one retrospective study. Seven of eight studies were favourable of UDCA for biliary pain. Outcomes and follow-up times were heterogenous, as well as comparator type, with only four of eight studies comparing with placebo.
CONCLUSION
Evidence for UDCA in symptomatic gallstones is scarce and heterogenous. Clinicians currently managing symptomatic gallstone disease are largely unaware of the benefit of UDCA, and there is clinical equipoise surrounding the benefit of UDCA. Level 1 evidence is required by clinicians to support UDCA use in the future.
Topics: Humans; Ursodeoxycholic Acid; Gallstones; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Pain; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36952251
DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrac152 -
Indian Journal of Urology : IJU :... 2023Tamsulosin is the most commonly used medical expulsive therapy (MET). However, it does not alleviate ureteral colic. It is important to develop MET that can reduce... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Tamsulosin is the most commonly used medical expulsive therapy (MET). However, it does not alleviate ureteral colic. It is important to develop MET that can reduce ureteral colic while maintaining a high stone clearance rate. Silodosin is an α1A adrenoceptor with high affinity and selectivity for the distal ureter, which may reduce ureteral colic and enable stone expulsion for distal ureteral stones. Therefore, we performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of silodosin as MET and its role in reducing ureteral colic among patients with distal ureteral stones.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This research was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review and Intervention, in adherence with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, and was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42021249003). A comprehensive literature search was performed in several databases including Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus up to July 2021 for randomized trials comparing silodosin with placebo for MET. RevMan 5.4 was used for data analysis.
RESULTS
A total of six randomized controlled trials were included in this analysis with a total of 907 patients. Our analysis revealed that the patients who received silodosin had significantly higher stone expulsion rate (SER) (odds ratio [OR] 3.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.34, 4.76, P < 0.01), significantly shorter stone expulsion time (SET) (mean difference -3.79, 95% CI -4.51, -3.06, P < 0.01), and lower analgesic use (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.23, 0.69, P < 0.01) compared to the group receiving placebo.
CONCLUSION
Silodosin showed significantly higher SER, lower SET and lower analgesic use in patients with distal ureteral stones as compared to a placebo.
PubMed: 36824112
DOI: 10.4103/iju.iju_115_22 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2022This meta-analysis aimed at investigating the efficacy of acupuncture for relieving renal colic and reducing the risk of analgesic-related complications.
BACKGROUND
This meta-analysis aimed at investigating the efficacy of acupuncture for relieving renal colic and reducing the risk of analgesic-related complications.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of acupuncture (acupuncture group) with conventional interventions (control group) were screened from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library databases, China Knowledge Network (CNKI), and Airiti Library till July 15, 2022. The primary outcome was the rate of effective pain relief (response rate), while secondary outcomes included the time of onset of pain relief, visual analog scale (VAS) at 30-60 min and risk of side effects.
RESULTS
Thirteen eligible studies involving 1,212 participants published between 1992 and 2021 were analyzed. Compared with the control group, patients receiving acupuncture had a higher overall response rate [risk ratio (RR) = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.05-1.19, = 0.0002, = 41%, 1,136 patients] (primary outcome) and a faster pain relief [MD = -10.74 min, 95% CI: -12.65 to -8.82, < 0.00001, = 87%, 839 patients]. Patients receiving acupuncture had a lower pain score [MD = -0.65, 95% CI: -1.09 to -0.21, = 0.21, = 55%, 327 patients] and risk of side effects (RR = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.04-0.26, < 0.00001, = 0, 314 patients) compared to those receiving conventional interventions. Results from trial sequence analysis revealed sufficient evidence supporting the beneficial effects of acupuncture on response rate, time to pain relief, and pain score at 30-60 min.
CONCLUSION
Compared with conventional analgesic-based interventions, acupuncture can more efficiently relieve renal colic with fewer adverse effects. The limited number and quality of included studies warrant more clinical RCTs to support our findings.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022346714.
PubMed: 36698826
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.1100014 -
Cureus Dec 2022is the most common type of helminth infection in humans. It affects more than one billion of the world's population. Children living in developing nations are prone to... (Review)
Review
is the most common type of helminth infection in humans. It affects more than one billion of the world's population. Children living in developing nations are prone to ascariasis, presenting with obstructive biliary illnesses. Migration of worms through the major duodenal papilla to the hepatobiliary system leads to symptoms of biliary colic and complications along the biliary tree. In April 2022, we performed a systematic review of case reports to identify and examine cases of gallbladder ascariasis worldwide. A methodical search using PubMed, Semantic Scholar, ScienceDirect, and Directory of Open Access Journals yielded 2773 studies. After duplicate removal, title, abstract, and content screening, retrieval, and quality assessment, 13 studies met the criteria for this systematic review of case reports. The cases and results from these 13 studies revealed gallbladder ascariasis in different age groups worldwide. This systematic review discusses ascariasis, explicitly highlighting its presence in the gallbladder, symptomatic presentation, laboratory/imaging findings, complications, and approach to management.
PubMed: 36654632
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.32545 -
Systematic Reviews Dec 2022Symptomatic cholelithiasis is a common surgical disease and accounts for half of the over one million cholecystectomies performed in the USA annually. Despite its...
BACKGROUND
Symptomatic cholelithiasis is a common surgical disease and accounts for half of the over one million cholecystectomies performed in the USA annually. Despite its prevalence, only one prior systematic review has examined the evidence around treatment strategies and it contained a narrow scope. The goal of this systematic review was to analyze the clinical effectiveness of treatment options for symptomatic cholelithiasis, including surgery, non-surgical therapies, and ED pain management strategies.
METHODS
Literature search was performed from January 2000 through June 2020, and a narrative analysis was performed as studies were heterogeneous.
RESULTS
We identified 12 publications reporting on 10 trials (9 randomized controlled trials and 1 observational study) comparing treatment methods. The studies assessed surgery, observation, lithotripsy, ursodeoxycholic acid, electro-acupuncture, and pain-management strategies in the emergency department. Only one compared surgery to observation.
CONCLUSION
This work presents the existing data and underscores the current gap in knowledge regarding treatment for patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis. We use these results to suggest how future trials may guide comparisons between the timing of surgery and watchful waiting to create a set of standardized guidelines. Providing appropriate and timely treatment for symptomatic cholelithiasis is important to streamline care for a costly and prevalent disease.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO Protocol Number: CRD42020153153.
Topics: Humans; Cholelithiasis; Treatment Outcome; Emergency Service, Hospital; Prevalence; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36510302
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-022-02135-8 -
Nutrients Dec 2022Supplementation of infant and follow-up formula with probiotics or synbiotics has become a common practice. In 2011 and 2017, the evidence regarding the impact of these... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Supplementation of infant and follow-up formula with probiotics or synbiotics has become a common practice. In 2011 and 2017, the evidence regarding the impact of these interventions was analysed systematically. Recently new evidence was published. To evaluate through a systematic review with network meta-analysis the evidence on the impact of infant formula supplemented with probiotics or synbiotics for healthy infants and 36-month-old toddlers. RCTs published between 1999-2019 for infant formulas supplemented with probiotics alone or synbiotics in healthy infants and toddlers were identified. Data analysis included clinical (gastrointestinal symptoms, risk reduction of infectious diseases, use of antibiotics, weight/height gain and frequency of adverse events) and non-clinical outcomes (changes in faecal microbiota and immune parameters). A random effect model was used. Hedges' standard mean difference (SMD) and risk ratio (RR) were calculated. Rank analysis was performed to evaluate the superiority of each intervention. Twenty-six randomised controlled trials with 35 direct comparisons involving 1957 children receiving probiotic-supplemented formula and 1898 receiving control formula were reviewed. The mean duration of intervention was 5.6 ± 2.84 months. Certain strains demonstrated a reduction in episodes of colic, number of days with fever and use of antibiotics; however, there was considerable heterogeneity which reduced the level of certainty of effect. No significant effects were observed on weight, height or changes in faecal proportions of or . Although there is some evidence that may support a potential benefit of probiotic or synbiotic supplementation of infant formulas, variation in the quality of existing trials and the heterogeneity of the data preclude the establishment of robust recommendations.
Topics: Infant; Humans; Child, Preschool; Infant Formula; Network Meta-Analysis; Probiotics; Synbiotics; Bifidobacterium; Weight Gain; Anti-Bacterial Agents
PubMed: 36501205
DOI: 10.3390/nu14235175 -
Journal of the American College of... Dec 2022The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical signs, symptoms, laboratory investigations,...
STUDY OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical signs, symptoms, laboratory investigations, and imaging modalities commonly used in patients with clinically suspected renal colic.
METHODS
We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis according to an a priori, registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD42017055153). A literature search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to July 2, 2020. We assessed the risk of bias using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2, calculated likelihood ratios (LRs), and applied a random-effects model for meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Among 7641 references screened, 76 were included in the systematic review and 53 were included in the meta-analyis. The overall pooled prevalence for ureteral stones was 63% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58%-67%). No individual demographic feature, symptom, or sign when present had an LR+ ≥2.0 for identifying ureterolithiasis. A (Sex, Timing and Origin of pain, race, presence or absence of Nausea, and Erythrocytes) STONE score ≥10 increased (sensitivity 0.49, specificity 0.91, LR 5.3 [95% CI, 4.1-6.7]) and a STONE score <6 reduced the likelihood of ureteral stones (sensitivity 0.94, specificity 0.43, LR 0.15 [95% CI, 0.10-0.22]). Standard-dose (sensitivity 0.96, specificity 0.94, LR+ 16 [95% CI, 11-23], LR- 0.05 [95% CI, 0.03-0.07]) and low-dose computed tomography (CT) scanning (sensitivity 0.93, specificity 0.94, LR+ 17 [95% CI, 8.8-31], LR- 0.08 [95% CI, 0.03-0.19]) were the most useful imaging techniques for identifying patients with or without ureteral stones.
CONCLUSIONS
Individual signs, symptoms, or the presence of microscopic hematuria do not substantially impact the likelihood of ureteral stones in patients with clinically suspected renal colic. The STONE score at high and low thresholds and a modified STONE score at a high threshold may sufficiently guide physicians' decisions to obtain imaging. Low-dose, non-contrast CT imaging provides superior diagnostic accuracy compared with all other imaging index tests that are comparable with standard CT imaging. Limitations of the evidence include methodological shortcomings and considerable heterogeneity of the included studies.
PubMed: 36474707
DOI: 10.1002/emp2.12831 -
The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine Jul 2023Spinal cord injury (SCI) is associated with several gastrointestinal disorders, and the prevalence of cholelithiasis is high in this population. Because individuals with...
CONTEXT
Spinal cord injury (SCI) is associated with several gastrointestinal disorders, and the prevalence of cholelithiasis is high in this population. Because individuals with SCI may have atypical symptoms and more advanced disease, some treatment centers advocate prophylactic cholecystectomy for patients with SCI and gallstone disease.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the existence and quality of studies on prophylactic cholecystectomy in individuals with SCI and cholelithiasis.
METHODS
A systematic search of literature up to July 10, 2022 was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines using the Medline, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases. Keywords used were "cholecystectomy," "gallbladder," "cholelithiasis," "gallstone," and "spinal cord injury."
RESULTS
The search identified 118 articles, of which 4 met the inclusion criteria. All these were retrospective observational studies. Prophylactic cholecystectomy was performed in 4-16.5% of the participants. The causes of cholecystectomy were chronic cholecystitis with biliary colic (44.5-63.5%), acute cholecystitis (4-26%), choledocholithiasis (6-11%) and pancreatitis (2-6%). Operative times, conversion rates, estimated blood loss, severity of complications, morbidity and mortality did not differ significantly between individuals with SCI and neurologically able individuals.
CONCLUSION
No prospective cohort studies comparing prophylactic cholecystectomy with conservative management in individuals with SCI and gallstone disease have been conducted. Therefore, there is no robust evidence to support prophylactic cholecystectomy and further studies are required.
Topics: Humans; Spinal Cord Injuries; Retrospective Studies; Cholecystectomy; Cholelithiasis
PubMed: 36355833
DOI: 10.1080/10790268.2022.2144026 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2022Caesarean section and early exposure to antibiotics disrupt the developing gastrointestinal microbiome, which is associated with long-term health effects. (Review)
Review
Clinical outcomes following pre-, pro- and synbiotic supplementation after caesarean birth or antibiotic exposure in the first week of life in term born infants: A systematic review of the literature.
BACKGROUND
Caesarean section and early exposure to antibiotics disrupt the developing gastrointestinal microbiome, which is associated with long-term health effects.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the impact of prebiotics, probiotics, or synbiotics supplementation on clinical health outcomes of term infants born by caesarean section or exposed to antibiotics in the first week of life.
DESIGN
A systematic search was performed in Medline and Embase from inception to August 2021. Title and abstract screening ( = 11,248), full text screening ( = 48), and quality assessment were performed independently by two researchers.
RESULTS
Six RCTs studying caesarean born infants were included, group sizes varied between 32-193 with in total 752 children. No studies regarding supplementation after neonatal antibiotic exposure were found. Three studies administered a probiotic, one a prebiotic, one a synbiotic, and one study investigated a prebiotic and synbiotic. Several significant effects were reported at follow-up varying between 10 days and 13 years: a decrease in atopic diseases ( = 2 studies), higher immune response to tetanus and polio vaccinations ( = 2), lower response to influenza vaccination ( = 1), fewer infectious diseases ( = 2), and less infantile colic ( = 1), although results were inconsistent.
CONCLUSIONS
Supplementation of caesarean-born infants with prebiotics, probiotics, or synbiotics resulted in significant improvements in some health outcomes as well as vaccination responses. Due to the variety of studied products and the paucity of studies, no recommendations can be given yet on the routine application of prebiotics, probiotics, or synbiotics to improve health outcomes after caesarean section or neonatal antibiotic exposure.
PubMed: 36299694
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2022.974608 -
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) Aug 2022The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) for gastrointestinal disorders in term... (Review)
Review
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) for gastrointestinal disorders in term and preterm infants. Eligible studies were searched on PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, Cinahl, and PEDro. Two reviewers independently assessed if the studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies with OMT compared with any kind of control in term or preterm infants to improve gastrointestinal disorders. Nine articles met the eligibility criteria, investigating OMT compared with no intervention, five involving term infants, and the remaining treating preterm infants. Five studies showed low risk of bias. In the meta-analysis, two studies were included to analyze the hours of crying due to infantile colic, showing statistically significant results (ES = −2.46 [−3.05, −1.87]; p < 0.00001). The quality of evidence was “moderate”. The other outcomes, such as time to oral feeding, meconium excretion, weight gain, and sucking, were presented in a qualitative synthesis. OMT was substantially safe, and showed efficacy in some cases, but the conflicting evidence and lack of high-quality replication studies prevent generalization. High-quality RCTs are recommended to produce better-quality evidence.
PubMed: 36011182
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10081525