-
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics Jul 2024The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the clinical relevance of the different intra-articular corticosteroids (CS) effects in vivo for osteoarthritis... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare the clinical relevance of the different intra-articular corticosteroids (CS) effects in vivo for osteoarthritis (OA) treatment.
METHODS
The search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science in October 2023. The PRISMA guidelines were used. Inclusion criteria: animal or human randomized controlled trials (RCTs), English language and no time limitation, on the comparison of different intra-articular CS for OA treatment. The articles' quality was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 and GRADE guidelines for human RCTs, and SYRCLE's tool for animal RCTs.
RESULTS
Eighteen RCTs were selected (16 human and 2 animal studies), including 1577 patients (1837 joints) and 31 animals (51 joints). The CS used were triamcinolone (14 human and 2 animal studies), methylprednisolone (7 human and 1 animal study), betamethasone (3 human studies) and dexamethasone (1 human study). All studies addressed knee OA except for three human and one animal study. A meta-analysis was performed on the comparison of methylprednisolone and triamcinolone in humans with knee OA analysing VAS pain at very short- (≤2 weeks), short- (>2 and ≤4 weeks), mid- (>4 and ≤8 weeks), long- (>8 and ≤ 12 weeks), and very long-term (>12 and ≤24 weeks). Triamcinolone showed better post-injection values compared to methylprednisolone at very short-term ( = 0.028). No difference in terms of VAS improvement was observed at any follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
The available preclinical and clinical literature provides limited evidence on the comparison of different CS, hindering the possibility of determining the best CS approach in terms of molecule and dose for the intra-articular injection of OA joints.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level I.
PubMed: 38911187
DOI: 10.1002/jeo2.12060 -
Ear, Nose, & Throat Journal Jun 2024Evaluation of the effectiveness and posttreatment effects of intratympanic gentamicin and corticosteroids in treating patients with Ménière's disease (MD). Based on...
Evaluation of the effectiveness and posttreatment effects of intratympanic gentamicin and corticosteroids in treating patients with Ménière's disease (MD). Based on PubMed and Embase databases, randomized controlled trials using intratympanic injections of 4 drugs (gentamicin, methylprednisolone, dexamethasone, and placebo) for the treatment of MD were searched from 1995 to October 2023, and the literature was screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data were netted for meta-analysis using Stata 17. A total of 13 studies were selected, involving 559 participants, with follow-up time ranging from 3 to 28 months. Meta-analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in pure-tone average between gentamicin and dexamethasone [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-0.42, 0.24), < .05]. Compared to placebo, intratympanic injection of gentamicin [risk ratio (RR) = 1.18, 95% CI (0.43, 1.93)], methylprednisolone [RR = 0.88, 95% CI (0.07, 1.70)], and dexamethasone [RR = 0.70, 95% CI (-0.01, 1.41)] all showed better efficacy in treating vertigo. For the treatment of tinnitus, the SUCRA ranking results showed that dexamethasone was the most effective, followed by methylprednisolone and gentamicin. Pharmacological intervention is more effective than placebo in treating MD. Although gentamicin treatment shows significant effects in treating vertigo, corticosteroid combination therapy is markedly superior to gentamicin in controlling hearing loss and vertigo symptoms.
PubMed: 38907653
DOI: 10.1177/01455613241264421 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders May 2024Despite their continued use, the effectiveness and safety of vasopressors in post-cardiac arrest patients remain controversial. This study examined the efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE
Despite their continued use, the effectiveness and safety of vasopressors in post-cardiac arrest patients remain controversial. This study examined the efficacy of various vasopressors in cardiac arrest patients in terms of clinical, morbidity, and mortality outcomes.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was performed using online databases (MeSH terms: MEDLINE (Ovid), CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, Scopus, and Google Scholar) from 1997 to 2023 for relevant English language studies. The primary outcomes of interest for this study included short-term survival leading to death, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital discharge, neurological outcomes, survival to hospital admission, myocardial infarction, and incidence of arrhythmias.
RESULTS
In this meta-analysis, 26 studies, including 16 RCTs and ten non-RCTs, were evaluated. The focus was on the efficacy of epinephrine, vasopressin, methylprednisolone, dopamine, and their combinations in medical emergencies. Epinephrine treatment was associated with better odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 1.52, 95%CI [1.20, 1.94]; p < 0.001) and achieving ROSC (OR = 3.60, 95% CI [3.45, 3.76], P < 0.00001)) over placebo but not in other outcomes of interest such as short-term survival/ death at 28-30 days, survival to hospital admission, or neurological function. In addition, our analysis indicates non-superiority of vasopressin or epinephrine vasopressin-plus-epinephrine therapy over epinephrine monotherapy except for survival to hospital admission where the combinatorial therapy was associated with better outcome (0.76, 95%CI [0.64, 0.92]; p = 0.004). Similarly, we noted the non-superiority of vasopressin-plus-methylprednisolone versus placebo. Finally, while higher odds of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 3.35, 95%CI [1.81, 6.2]; p < 0.001) and ROSC (OR = 2.87, 95%CI [1.97, 4.19]; p < 0.001) favoring placebo over VSE therapy were observed, the risk of lethal arrhythmia was not statistically significant. There was insufficient literature to assess the effects of dopamine versus other treatment modalities meta-analytically.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis indicated that only epinephrine yielded superior outcomes among vasopressors than placebo, albeit limited to survival to hospital discharge and ROSC. Additionally, we demonstrate the non-superiority of vasopressin over epinephrine, although vasopressin could not be compared to placebo due to the paucity of data. The addition of vasopressin to epinephrine treatment only improved survival to hospital admission.
Topics: Humans; Vasoconstrictor Agents; Treatment Outcome; Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest; Risk Factors; Return of Spontaneous Circulation; Male; Middle Aged; Female; Aged; Time Factors; Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation; Epinephrine; Recovery of Function; Risk Assessment; Vasopressins; Patient Discharge; Adult
PubMed: 38816786
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-024-03962-4 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Apr 2024Short courses of adjunctive systemic corticosteroids are commonly used to treat acute urticaria and chronic urticaria flares (both with and without mast cell-mediated...
BACKGROUND
Short courses of adjunctive systemic corticosteroids are commonly used to treat acute urticaria and chronic urticaria flares (both with and without mast cell-mediated angioedema), but their benefits and harms are unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of treating acute urticaria or chronic urticaria flares with versus without systemic corticosteroids.
METHODS
We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and CBM databases from inception to July 8, 2023, for randomized controlled trials of treating urticaria with versus without systemic corticosteroids. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias with the Cochrane 2.0 tool. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of urticaria activity, itch severity, and adverse events. We assessed certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.
RESULTS
We identified 12 randomized trials enrolling 944 patients. For patients with low or moderate probability (17.5%-64%) to improve with antihistamines alone, add-on systemic corticosteroids likely improve urticaria activity by a 14% to 15% absolute difference (odds ratio [OR], 2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.43-3.31; number needed to treat [NNT], 7; moderate certainty). Among patients with a high chance (95.8%) for urticaria to improve with antihistamines alone, add-on systemic corticosteroids likely improved urticaria activity by a 2.2% absolute difference (NNT, 45; moderate certainty). Corticosteroids may improve itch severity (OR, 2.44; 95% CI: 0.87-6.83; risk difference, 9%; NNT, 11; low certainty). Systemic corticosteroids also likely increase adverse events (OR, 2.76; 95% CI: 1.00-7.62; risk difference, 15%; number needed to harm, 9; moderate certainty).
CONCLUSIONS
Systemic corticosteroids for acute urticaria or chronic urticaria exacerbations likely improve urticaria, depending on antihistamine responsiveness, but also likely increase adverse effects in approximately 15% more.
PubMed: 38642709
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2024.04.016 -
BMC Pediatrics Mar 2024Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is a first-line treatment for children with newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Higher doses of IVIg are associated with a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Can low-dose intravenous immunoglobulin be an alternative to high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin in the treatment of children with newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is a first-line treatment for children with newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Higher doses of IVIg are associated with a more insupportable financial burden to pediatric patients' families and may produce more adverse reactions. Whether low-dose IVIg (LD-IVIg) can replace high-dose IVIg (HD-IVIg) has yet to be established. We conducted a comprehensive literature search from the establishment of the database to May 1, 2023, and eventually included 22 RCTs and 3 cohort studies compared different dosages of IVIg. A total of 1989 patients were included, with 991 patients in the LD-IVIg group and 998 patients in the HD-IVIg group. Our results showed no significant differences between the two groups in the effective rate (LD-IVIg: 91% vs. HD-IVIg: 93%; RR: 0.99; 95%CI: 0.96-1.02) and the durable remission rate (LD-IVIg: 65% vs. HD-IVIg: 67%; RR: 0.97; 95%CI: 0.89-1.07). Similar results were also found in the time of platelet counts (PC) starting to rise (MD: 0.01, 95%CI: -0.06-0.09), rising to normal (MD: 0.16, 95%CI: -0.03-0.35), and achieving hemostasis (MD: 0.11, 95%CI: -0.02-0.23) between the two groups. Subgroup analysis showed the effective rate of 0.6 g/kg was equal to 1 g/kg subgroup (91%) but higher than 0.8 g/kg subgroup (82%), and a combination with glucocorticoid may contribute to effect enhancement (combined with glucocorticoid: 91% vs. IVIg alone: 86%) whether combined with dexamethasone (92%) or methylprednisolone (91%). Besides, the incidence rate of adverse reactions in the LD-IVIg group (3%) was significantly lower than the HD-IVIg group (6%) (RR: 0.61; 95%CI: 0.38-0.98). So low-dose IVIg (≤ 1 g/kg) is effective, safe, and economical, which can replace high-dose IVIg (2 g/kg) as an initial treatment. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022384604).
Topics: Child; Humans; Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Glucocorticoids; Platelet Count; Methylprednisolone
PubMed: 38515126
DOI: 10.1186/s12887-024-04677-3 -
Immunity, Inflammation and Disease Mar 2024Down syndrome (DS) is associated with multiple comorbid conditions and chronic immune dysfunction. Persons with DS who contract COVID-19 are at high risk for... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Down syndrome (DS) is associated with multiple comorbid conditions and chronic immune dysfunction. Persons with DS who contract COVID-19 are at high risk for complications and have a poor prognosis. We aimed to study the clinical symptoms, laboratory and biochemical profiles, radiologic findings, treatment, and outcomes of patients with DS and COVID-19.
METHOD
We systematically searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library using the keywords COVID-19 or coronavirus or SARS-CoV-2 and DS or trisomy 21. Seventeen articles were identified: eight case reports and nine case series published from December 2019 through March 2022, with a total of 55 cases.
RESULTS
Patients averaged 24.8 years (26 days to 60 years); 29 of the patients were male. The most common symptoms were fever, dyspnea, and cough. Gastrointestinal and upper respiratory tract symptoms were commonly reported for pediatric patients. The most common comorbidities present in patients with DS were obesity (49.0%), hypothyroidism (21.6%) and obstructive sleep apnea (15.6%). The patients were hospitalized for a mean of 14.8 days. When the patients were compared with the general COVID-19 population, the mean number of hospitalized days was higher. Most patients had leukopenia, lymphopenia, and elevated inflammatory markers (d-dimer and C-reactive protein). Bilateral infiltrations and bilateral ground-glass opacifications were frequently seen in chest radiographs and chest computed tomographic imaging. Most of the patients were treated with methylprednisolone, macrolides, and hydroxychloroquine. Of the 55 patients, 22 died. The mean age of the patients who died was 42.8 years. Mortality rate was higher in individuals with DS over 40 years of age.
CONCLUSION
More studies are needed to better understand COVID-19 infections among persons with DS. In addition, the study was limited by a lack of statistical analyses and a specific comparison group.
Topics: Adult; Child; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Cough; COVID-19; Down Syndrome; Lymphopenia; SARS-CoV-2; Infant, Newborn; Infant; Child, Preschool; Adolescent; Young Adult
PubMed: 38501534
DOI: 10.1002/iid3.1219 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Feb 2024IgA nephropathy (IgAN) represents the most prevalent form of primary glomerulonephritis, and, on a global scale, it ranks among the leading culprits behind end-stage...
IgA nephropathy (IgAN) represents the most prevalent form of primary glomerulonephritis, and, on a global scale, it ranks among the leading culprits behind end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Presently, the primary strategy for managing IgAN revolves around optimizing blood pressure and mitigating proteinuria. This is achieved through the utilization of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, namely, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). As outlined by the KDIGO guidelines, individuals who continue to show a persistent high risk of progressive ESKD, even with comprehensive supportive care, are candidates for glucocorticoid therapy. Despite these therapies, some patients have a disease refractory to treatment, defined as individuals that present a 24 h urinary protein persistently >1 g after at least two rounds of regular steroids (methylprednisolone or prednisone) and/or immunosuppressant therapy (e.g., mycophenolate mofetil), or who do not tolerate regular steroids and/or immunosuppressant therapy. The aim of this Systematic Review is to revise the current literature, using the biomedical database PubMed, to investigate possible therapeutic strategies, including SGLT2 inhibitors, endothelin receptor blockers, targeted-release budesonide, B cell proliferation and differentiation inhibitors, fecal microbiota transplantation, as well as blockade of complement components.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Glomerulonephritis, IGA; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Nephrologists; Antihypertensive Agents; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Steroids; Immunosuppressive Agents
PubMed: 38399561
DOI: 10.3390/medicina60020274 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Feb 2024Although corticosteroid injections are an effective treatment for musculoskeletal pathologies, they may not be suitable for all patients. The purpose of this systematic... (Review)
Review
Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Injections versus Steroid Injections in the Management of Upper and Lower Extremity Orthopedic Conditions: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
Although corticosteroid injections are an effective treatment for musculoskeletal pathologies, they may not be suitable for all patients. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare clinical outcomes between patients who received NSAID and corticosteroid injections for various orthopedic conditions.
METHODS
Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched, and meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model for outcomes presented in three or more studies. Other studies were qualitatively analyzed.
RESULTS
A total of 28 articles with 2113 patients were included. A meta-analysis of five studies in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome demonstrated that there was no significant difference in the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) between subacromial NSAID injections and corticosteroid injections at 1 month [weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.244; 95% CI, -1.232 to 0.745; I, 94.5%]. For patients with knee osteoarthritis, a meta-analysis of three studies demonstrated that there was no significant difference between intraarticular NSAID injections and corticosteroid injections in pain VAS at 1 month (WMD 0.754; 95% CI, -0.413 to 1.921; I, 90.2%) and 3 months (WMD-0.089; 95% CI, -0.345 to 0.166; I, 0%). A review of the studies assessing pain outcomes for hip osteoarthritis, adhesive capsulitis, and plantar fasciitis showed no significant differences between the NSAID and corticosteroid groups.
CONCLUSION
NSAID injections may be safe and effective alternatives to steroid injections, especially in shoulder impingement syndrome and knee osteoarthritis.
PubMed: 38398445
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13041132 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023This review of systematic reviews evaluated the effectiveness and safety of the preemptive use of anti-inflammatory and analgesic drugs in the management of...
This review of systematic reviews evaluated the effectiveness and safety of the preemptive use of anti-inflammatory and analgesic drugs in the management of postoperative pain, edema, and trismus in oral surgery. The databases searched included the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Epistemonikos, Scopus, Web of Science, and Virtual Health Library, up to March 2023. Pairs of reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and rated their methodological quality using the AMSTAR-2 tool. All of the 19 studies reviewed had at least two critical methodological flaws. Third molar surgery was the most common procedure ( = 15) and the oral route the most frequent approach ( = 14). The use of betamethasone (10, 20, and 60 mg), dexamethasone (4 and 8 mg), methylprednisolone (16, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 125 mg), and prednisolone (10 and 20 mg) by different routes and likewise of celecoxib (200 mg), diclofenac (25, 30, 50, 75, and 100 mg), etoricoxib (120 mg), ibuprofen (400 and 600 mg), ketorolac (30 mg), meloxicam (7.5, 10, and 15 mg), nimesulide (100 mg), and rofecoxib (50 mg) administered by oral, intramuscular, and intravenous routes were found to reduce pain, edema, and trismus in patients undergoing third molar surgery. Data on adverse effects were poorly reported. Further randomized clinical trials should be conducted to confirm these findings, given the wide variety of drugs, doses, and routes of administration used.
PubMed: 38328575
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1303382 -
BMJ Open Respiratory Research Jan 2024Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated conflicting results regarding the effects of corticosteroids on the treatment of severe community-acquired... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated conflicting results regarding the effects of corticosteroids on the treatment of severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of different corticosteroids on patients who were hospitalised for severe CAP.
METHODS
We performed a systematic search through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to May 2023. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Data analysis was performed using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
A total of 10 RCTs comprising 1962 patients were included. Corticosteroids were associated with a lower rate of all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR), 0.70 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.90); I=0.00%). When stratified into different corticosteroid types, hydrocortisone was associated with an approximately 50% lower mortality risk (RR, 0.48 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.72); I=0.00%). However, dexamethasone, methylprednisolone or prednisolone were not associated with an improvement in mortality. Furthermore, hydrocortisone was associated with a reduction in the rate of mechanical ventilation, acute respiratory distress syndrome, shock and duration of intensive care unit stay. These trends were not observed for dexamethasone, methylprednisolone or prednisolone. Corticosteroids were not associated with an increased risk of adverse events including gastrointestinal bleeding, secondary infection or hyperglycaemia.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of hydrocortisone, but not other types of corticosteroids, was associated with a reduction in mortality and improvement in pneumonia outcomes among patients hospitalised with severe CAP.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42023431360.
Topics: Humans; Hydrocortisone; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Methylprednisolone; Community-Acquired Infections; Pneumonia; Dexamethasone
PubMed: 38262670
DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2023-002141