-
PloS One 2020Conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the impact of pharmacy-supported interventions on the proportion of patients discharged from the hospital on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Impact of pharmacy-supported interventions on proportion of patients receiving non-indicated acid suppressive therapy upon discharge: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
Conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the impact of pharmacy-supported interventions on the proportion of patients discharged from the hospital on inappropriate acid suppressive therapy (AST).
METHODS
To identify studies, the following databases were systematically searched on October 14th, 2018 and repeated on September 12th, 2019: Ovid MEDLINE(R) and In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Embase.com, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL (EBSCO), and ClinicalTrials.gov. Eligible studies consisted of adults, intervention and historical/usual care groups, description of active pharmacy-supported intervention, and proportion of patients discharged on inappropriate AST. Qualitative assessments and quantitative analyses were performed. Modified funnel plot analysis assessed heterogeneity. Preferred reporting items of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) methodology was used to evaluate studies in this review.
RESULTS
Seventeen publications resulting in 16 studies were included in the review. Using random effects model, meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in the odds of being discharged on inappropriate AST from the hospital in the pharmacist-supported intervention arm versus comparator (Odds Ratio 0.33 [95%CI 0.20 to 0.53]), with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 86%). Eleven studies favored pharmacy-supported interventions, four were inconclusive and one favored usual care. Using modified funnel plot analysis, our final evaluation was distilled to 11 studies and revealed a similar outcome (OR 0.36 [95%CI 0.27 to 0.48]), but with less heterogeneity (I2 = 36%).
CONCLUSION
This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that pharmacy-supported interventions were associated with a significantly reduced probability of patients discharged on inappropriate AST. However, heterogeneity was high and may affect interpretation of results. Using funnel plot optimization method, three positive and two negative studies were objectively removed from analyses, resulting in a similar effect size, but with less heterogeneity. To improve study quality, future researchers should consider utilizing a pre-post, multi-arm, prospective design with sampling randomization, training of data extractors (preferably two extractors), re-evaluating a small dataset to check for agreement and providing a comprehensive methodology in subsequent publications.
Topics: Antacids; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Patient Discharge; Pharmacies; Pharmacists; Proton Pump Inhibitors
PubMed: 33270710
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243134 -
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... Feb 2021To compare the effectiveness and safety of Foley catheter and oral misoprostol for induction of labor (IOL). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness and safety of Foley catheter and oral misoprostol for induction of labor (IOL).
METHODS
The Cochrane Review on Mechanical Methods for Induction of Labour and Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE via Ovid, Ovid Emcare, CINAHL Plus, ClinicalTrials.gov and Scopus, from inception to April 2019, were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Foley catheter to oral misoprostol for IOL in viable singleton gestations. Eligible trials for which raw data were obtained were included and individual participant data meta-analysis was performed. Primary outcomes were vaginal birth, a composite of adverse perinatal outcome (including stillbirth, neonatal death, neonatal seizures, admission to the neonatal intensive care unit, severe respiratory compromise or meconium aspiration syndrome) and a composite of adverse maternal outcome (including admission to the intensive care unit, maternal infection, severe postpartum hemorrhage, maternal death or uterine rupture). The quality of the included RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. A two-stage random-effects model was used for meta-analysis according to the intention-to-treat principle and interactions between treatment and baseline characteristics were assessed.
RESULTS
Of seven eligible trials, four provided individual participant data for a total of 2815 participants undergoing IOL, of whom 1399 were assigned to Foley catheter and 1416 to oral misoprostol. All four trials provided data for each of the primary outcomes in all 2815 women. Compared with those receiving oral misoprostol, Foley catheter recipients had a slightly decreased chance of vaginal birth (risk ratio (RR), 0.95 (95% CI, 0.91-0.99); I , 2.0%; moderate-certainty evidence). A trend towards a lower rate of composite adverse perinatal outcome was found in women undergoing IOL using a Foley catheter compared with oral misoprostol (RR, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.48-1.05); I , 14.9%; low-certainty evidence). Composite adverse maternal outcome did not differ between the groups (RR, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.97-1.03); I , 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Meta-analyses of effect modifications did not show significant interactions between intervention and parity or gestational age for any of the primary outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
For women undergoing IOL, Foley catheter is less effective than oral misoprostol, as it was associated with fewer vaginal births. However, while we found no significant difference in maternal safety, Foley catheter induction may reduce adverse perinatal outcomes. Copyright © 2020 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Catheters; Female; Humans; Labor, Induced; Misoprostol; Oxytocics; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Urinary Catheterization
PubMed: 33258514
DOI: 10.1002/uog.23563 -
Medicine Nov 2020Kangfuxin (KFX), a well-known Chinese patent medicine which extracted from Periplaneta americana, is widely used as an adjuvant in the treatment of peptic ulcers (PUs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Kangfuxin (KFX), a well-known Chinese patent medicine which extracted from Periplaneta americana, is widely used as an adjuvant in the treatment of peptic ulcers (PUs) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) such as rabeprazole, in China. However, no clear consensus has been reached on the efficacy for PU treatment.
METHODS
We searched in 7 electronic databases to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) completed before May 31, 2020 to explore the clinical efficiency of KFX plus rabeprazole in the treatment of PU. Risk ratio (RR) corresponding to 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated to estimate the outcomes. Publication bias was assessed by both Egger's and Begg's tests. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4 and Stata version 10.0.
RESULTS
Twenty-five RCTs, comprising 2555 PU patients, were included in this study. Meta-analysis showed that, when compared with rabeprazole-based treatment alone, KFX plus rabeprazole significantly improved the healing rate (RR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.25-1.44) and overall response rate of ulcers (RR = 1.16, 95% CI 1.13-1.20), alleviated the clinical symptoms of PU (RR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.08-1.21), and reduced the recurrence of PU (RR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.24-0.61) without an increase in the occurrence of adverse events (RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.66-1.28).
CONCLUSION
Our study suggests that KFX combined with rabeprazole showed positive therapeutic effects and is safe for treating PU, which may provide more reliable evidence for the clinical use of KFX in the treatment of PU.
Topics: Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Materia Medica; Peptic Ulcer; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Rabeprazole; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33235070
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023103 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2020Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), defined as a blood loss of 500 mL or more after birth, is the leading cause of maternal death worldwide. The World Health Organization... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), defined as a blood loss of 500 mL or more after birth, is the leading cause of maternal death worldwide. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that all women giving birth should receive a prophylactic uterotonic agent. Despite the routine administration of a uterotonic agent for prevention, PPH remains a common complication causing one-quarter of all maternal deaths globally. When prevention fails and PPH occurs, further administration of uterotonic agents as 'first-line' treatment is recommended. However, there is uncertainty about which uterotonic agent is best for the 'first-line' treatment of PPH.
OBJECTIVES
To identify the most effective uterotonic agent(s) with the least side-effects for PPH treatment, and generate a meaningful ranking among all available agents according to their relative effectiveness and side-effect profile.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (5 May 2020), and the reference lists of all retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials or cluster-randomised trials comparing the effectiveness and safety of uterotonic agents with other uterotonic agents for the treatment of PPH were eligible for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed all trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed each trial for risk of bias. Our primary outcomes were additional blood loss of 500 mL or more after recruitment to the trial until cessation of active bleeding and the composite outcome of maternal death or severe morbidity. Secondary outcomes included blood loss-related outcomes, morbidity outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and indirect comparisons, where possible, but due to the limited number of included studies, we were unable to conduct the planned network meta-analysis. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
Seven trials, involving 3738 women in 10 countries, were included in this review. All trials were conducted in hospital settings. Randomised women gave birth vaginally, except in one small trial, where women gave birth either vaginally or by caesarean section. Across the seven trials (14 trial arms) the following agents were used: six trial arms used oxytocin alone; four trial arms used misoprostol plus oxytocin; three trial arms used misoprostol; one trial arm used Syntometrine® (oxytocin and ergometrine fixed-dose combination) plus oxytocin infusion. Pairwise meta-analysis of two trials (1787 participants), suggests that misoprostol, as first-line treatment uterotonic agent, probably increases the risk of blood transfusion (risk ratio (RR) 1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 2.14, moderate-certainty) compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol administration may increase the incidence of additional blood loss of 1000 mL or more (RR 2.57, 95% CI 1.00 to 6.64). The data comparing misoprostol with oxytocin is imprecise, with a wide range of treatment effects for the additional blood loss of 500 mL or more (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.69 to 4.02, low-certainty), maternal death or severe morbidity (RR 1.98, 95% CI 0.36 to 10.72, low-certainty, based on one study n = 809 participants, as the second study had zero events), and the use of additional uterotonics (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.94, low-certainty). The risk of side-effects may be increased with the use of misoprostol compared with oxytocin: vomiting (2 trials, 1787 participants, RR 2.47, 95% CI 1.37 to 4.47, high-certainty) and fever (2 trials, 1787 participants, RR 3.43, 95% CI 0.65 to 18.18, low-certainty). According to pairwise meta-analysis of four trials (1881 participants) generating high-certainty evidence, misoprostol plus oxytocin makes little or no difference to the use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05) and to blood transfusion (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.17) compared with oxytocin. We cannot rule out an important benefit of using the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination over oxytocin alone, for additional blood loss of 500 mL or more (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.06, moderate-certainty). We also cannot rule out important benefits or harms for additional blood loss of 1000 mL or more (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.34, moderate-certainty, 3 trials, 1814 participants, one study reported zero events), and maternal mortality or severe morbidity (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.39, moderate-certainty). Misoprostol plus oxytocin increases the incidence of fever (4 trials, 1866 participants, RR 3.07, 95% CI 2.62 to 3.61, high-certainty), and vomiting (2 trials, 1482 participants, RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.95, high-certainty) compared with oxytocin alone. For all outcomes of interest, the available evidence on the misoprostol versus Syntometrine® plus oxytocin combination was of very low-certainty and these effects remain unclear. Although network meta-analysis was not performed, we were able to compare the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination with misoprostol alone through the common comparator of oxytocin. This indirect comparison suggests that the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination probably reduces the risk of blood transfusion (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.99, moderate-certainty) and may reduce the risk of additional blood loss of 1000 mL or more (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.89, low-certainty) compared with misoprostol alone. The combination makes little or no difference to vomiting (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.59, high-certainty) compared with misoprostol alone. Misoprostol plus oxytocin compared to misoprostol alone are compatible with a wide range of treatment effects for additional blood loss of 500 mL or more (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.26, low-certainty), maternal mortality or severe morbidity (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.07 to 4.24, low-certainty), use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.73, low-certainty), and fever (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.17 to 4.77, low-certainty).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence suggests that oxytocin used as first-line treatment of PPH probably is more effective than misoprostol with less side-effects. Adding misoprostol to the conventional treatment of oxytocin probably makes little or no difference to effectiveness outcomes, and is also associated with more side-effects. The evidence for most uterotonic agents used as first-line treatment of PPH is limited, with no evidence found for commonly used agents, such as injectable prostaglandins, ergometrine, and Syntometrine®.
Topics: Bias; Blood Transfusion; Confidence Intervals; Drug Therapy, Combination; Ergonovine; Female; Humans; Misoprostol; Network Meta-Analysis; Oxytocics; Oxytocin; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33232518
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012754.pub2 -
Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica... Apr 2021The safety and acceptability of medical abortion using mifepristone and misoprostol at home at ≤9 weeks' gestation is well established. However, the upper... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The safety and acceptability of medical abortion using mifepristone and misoprostol at home at ≤9 weeks' gestation is well established. However, the upper gestational limit at which the procedure remains safe and acceptable at home is not known. To inform a national guideline on abortion care we conducted a systematic review to determine what gestational limit for expulsion at home offers the best balance of benefits and harms for women who are having medical abortion.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Cinahl Plus and Web-of-Science on 2 January 2020 for prospective and retrospective cohort studies with ≥50 women per gestational age group, published in English from 1995 onwards, that included women undergoing medical abortion and compared home expulsion of pregnancies of ≤9 weeks' gestational age with pregnancies of 9 -10 weeks or >10 weeks' gestational age, or compared the latter two gestational age groups. We assessed risk-of-bias using the Newcastle-Ottowa scale. All outcomes were meta-analyzed as risk ratios (RR) using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.
RESULTS
Six studies (n = 3381) were included. The "need for emergency care/admission to hospital" (RR = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-1.4), "hemorrhage requiring transfusion/≥500 mL blood loss" (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.11-3.55), patient satisfaction (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.03), pain (RR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.82-1.02), and "complete abortion without the need for surgical intervention" (RR = 1.03, 95% CI 1-1.05) did not differ statistically significantly between the ≤9 and >9 weeks' gestation groups. The rates of vomiting (RR = 0.8, 95% CI 0.69-0.93) and diarrhea (RR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.99) were statistically significantly lower in the ≤9 weeks group but these differences were not considered clinically important. We found no studies comparing pregnancies of 9 -10 weeks' gestation with pregnancies of >10 weeks' gestation. The certainty of this evidence was predominantly low and mainly compromised by low event rates and loss to follow up.
CONCLUSIONS
Women who are having a medical abortion and will be taking mifepristone up to and including 10 weeks' gestation should be offered the option of expulsion at home after they have taken the misoprostol. Further research needs to determine whether the gestational limit for home expulsion can be extended beyond 10 weeks.
Topics: Abortifacient Agents; Abortion, Induced; Female; Gestational Age; Home Care Services; Humans; Mifepristone; Misoprostol; Pregnancy
PubMed: 33063314
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14025 -
Nutrients Sep 2020The consumption of plant-based food is important for health promotion, especially concerning the prevention and management of chronic diseases. Flavonoids are the main...
The consumption of plant-based food is important for health promotion, especially concerning the prevention and management of chronic diseases. Flavonoids are the main bioactive compounds in citrus fruits, with multiple beneficial effects, especially antidiabetic effects. We systematically review the potential antidiabetic action and molecular mechanisms of citrus flavonoids based on in vitro and in vivo studies. A search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases for articles published since 2010 was carried out using the keywords citrus, flavonoid, and diabetes. All articles identified were analyzed, and data were extracted using a standardized form. The search identified 38 articles, which reported that 19 citrus flavonoids, including 8-prenylnaringenin, cosmosiin, didymin, diosmin, hesperetin, hesperidin, isosiennsetin, naringenin, naringin, neohesperidin, nobiletin, poncirin, quercetin, rhoifolin, rutin, sineesytin, sudachitin, tangeretin, and xanthohumol, have antidiabetic potential. These flavonoids regulated biomarkers of glycemic control, lipid profiles, renal function, hepatic enzymes, and antioxidant enzymes, and modulated signaling pathways related to glucose uptake and insulin sensitivity that are involved in the pathogenesis of diabetes and its related complications. Citrus flavonoids, therefore, are promising antidiabetic candidates, while their antidiabetic effects remain to be verified in forthcoming human studies.
Topics: Animals; Antioxidants; Citrus; Diabetes Mellitus; Disaccharides; Flavanones; Flavones; Flavonoids; Glycosides; Hesperidin; Humans; Inflammation; Phytochemicals; Polyphenols; Propiophenones
PubMed: 32977511
DOI: 10.3390/nu12102907 -
Advances in Nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) Mar 2021Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has become the most common cause of liver dysfunction worldwide. Recently, some natural compounds have attracted growing...
Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has become the most common cause of liver dysfunction worldwide. Recently, some natural compounds have attracted growing interest in the treatment of NAFLD. In this context, most attention has been paid to natural products derived from fruits, vegetables, and medicinal herbs. Naringenin, a natural flavanone, has been revealed to have pharmacological effects in the treatment of obesity and associated metabolic disorders such as NAFLD. The aim of this study was to examine the therapeutic effects of naringenin and its possible mechanisms of action in the management of NAFLD and related risk factors. The current systematic review was performed according to the guidelines of the 2015 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) statements. We searched PubMed/Medline, Science Direct, Scopus, ProQuest, and Google Scholar databases up until February 2020. Of 1217 full-text articles assessed, 36 studies met the inclusion criteria. The evidence reviewed in the present study indicates that naringenin modulates several biological processes related to NAFLD including energy balance, lipid and glucose metabolism, inflammation, and oxidative stress by different mechanisms. Overall, the favorable effects of naringenin along with its more potency and efficacy, compared with other antioxidants, indicate that naringenin may be a promising therapeutic approach for the management of NAFLD and associated complications. However, due to the lack of clinical trials, future robust human randomized clinical trials that address the effects of naringenin on NAFLD and other liver-related diseases are crucial. Further careful human pharmacokinetic studies are also needed to establish dosage ranges, as well as addressing preliminary safety and tolerability of naringenin, before proceeding to larger-scale endpoint trials.
Topics: Citrus; Flavanones; Flavonoids; Humans; Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease; Risk Factors
PubMed: 32879962
DOI: 10.1093/advances/nmaa106 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2020Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common and progressive disease characterised by chronic cough, airflow limitation and recurrent exacerbations. Since...
BACKGROUND
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common and progressive disease characterised by chronic cough, airflow limitation and recurrent exacerbations. Since COPD exacerbations are linked to rising mortality and reduced quality of life, the condition poses a substantial burden on individuals, society and the healthcare system. Effective management of COPD exacerbations that includes treatment of related conditions in people with COPD is thus recognised as a relevant clinical question and an important research topic. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a known comorbidity of COPD, and pulmonary microaspiration of gastric acid is thought to be a possible cause of COPD exacerbations. Therefore, reducing gastric acid secretion may lead to a reduction in COPD exacerbations. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are one of the most commonly prescribed medications and are recommended as first-line therapy for people with GERD because of their inhibitory effects on gastric acid secretion. Treatment with PPIs may present a viable treatment option for people with COPD.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PPI administration for people with COPD, focusing on COPD-specific outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Register of Trials and conventional clinical trial registers from inception to 22 May 2020. We also screened bibliographies of relevant studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Parallel-group and cluster-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared oral PPIs versus placebo, usual care or low-dose PPIs in adults with COPD were eligible for inclusion. We excluded cross-over RCTs, as well as studies with a duration of less than two months.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two independent review authors screened search results, selected studies for inclusion, extracted study characteristics and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias according to standard Cochrane methodology. We resolved discrepancies by involving a third review author. Primary outcomes of interest were COPD exacerbations, pneumonia and other serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, lung function test indices, acute respiratory infections and disease-specific adverse events. We extracted data on these outcome measures and entered into them into Review Manager software for analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
The search identified 99 records, and we included one multicentre RCT that randomised 103 adults with COPD. The 12-month RCT compared an oral PPI (lansoprazole) and usual care versus usual care alone. It was conducted at one tertiary care hospital and three secondary care hospitals in Japan. This study recruited participants with a mean age of 75 years, and excluded people with symptoms or history of GERD. No placebo was used in the usual care arm. Among the primary and secondary outcomes of this review, the study only reported data on COPD exacerbations and acute respiratory infections (the common cold). As we only included one study, we could not conduct a meta-analysis. The included study reported that 12 of the 50 people on lansoprazole had at least one exacerbation over a year, compared to 26 out of 50 on usual care (risk ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.81). The frequency of COPD exacerbations per person in a year was also lower in the PPI plus usual care group than in the usual care alone group(0.34 ± 0.72 vs 1.18 ± 1.40; P < 0.001). The number of people with at least one cold over the year was similar in both groups: 26 people on lansoprazole and 27 people in the usual care group. We judged the evidence to be of low to very low certainty, according to GRADE criteria. The study reported no data on pneumonia and other serious adverse events, quality of life, lung function test indices or disease-specific adverse events. The risk of bias was largely low or unclear for the majority of domains, though the performance bias was a high risk, as the study was not blinded.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence identified by this review is insufficient to determine whether treatment with PPIs is a potential option for COPD. The sample size of the included trial is small, and the evidence is low to very low-certainty. The efficacy and safety profile of PPIs for people with COPD remains uncertain. Future large-scale, high-quality studies are warranted, which investigate major clinical outcomes such as COPD exacerbation rate, serious adverse events and quality of life.
Topics: Aged; Disease Progression; Humans; Lansoprazole; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Tract Infections
PubMed: 32844430
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013113.pub2 -
BMC Women's Health Jul 2020A wide range of drugs have been studied for first trimester medical abortion. Studies evaluating different regimens, including combination mifepristone and misoprostol...
BACKGROUND
A wide range of drugs have been studied for first trimester medical abortion. Studies evaluating different regimens, including combination mifepristone and misoprostol and misoprostol alone regimens, show varying results related to safety, efficacy and other outcomes. Thus, the objectives of this systematic review were to compare the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of medical abortion and to compare medical with surgical methods of abortion ≤63 days of gestation.
METHODS
Pubmed and EMBASE were systematically searched from database inception through January 2019 using a combination of MeSH, keywords and text words. Randomized controlled trials on induced abortion at ≤63 days that compared different regimens of medical abortion using mifepristone and/or misoprostol and trials that compared medical with surgical methods of abortion were included. We extracted data into a pre-designed form, calculated effect estimates, and performed meta-analyses where possible. The primary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy and successful abortion.
RESULTS
Thirty-three studies composed of 22,275 participants were included in this review. Combined regimens using mifepristone and misoprostol had lower rates of ongoing pregnancy, higher rates of successful abortion and satisfaction compared to misoprostol only regimens. In combined regimens, misoprostol 800 μg was more effective than 400 μg. There was no significant difference in dosing intervals between mifepristone and misoprostol and routes of misoprostol administration in combination or misoprostol alone regimens. The rate of serious adverse events was generally low.
CONCLUSION
In this systematic review, we find that medical methods of abortion utilizing combination mifepristone and misoprostol or misoprostol alone are effective, safe and acceptable. More robust studies evaluating both the different combination and misoprostol alone regimens are needed to strengthen existing evidence as well as assess patient perspectives towards a particular regimen.
Topics: Abortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal; Abortifacient Agents, Steroidal; Abortion, Induced; Female; Humans; Mifepristone; Misoprostol; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First
PubMed: 32635921
DOI: 10.1186/s12905-020-01003-8 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2020Gastric cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death worldwide. Individuals infected with Helicobacter pylori have a higher likelihood of developing gastric... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Gastric cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death worldwide. Individuals infected with Helicobacter pylori have a higher likelihood of developing gastric cancer than individuals who are not infected. Eradication of H. pylori in healthy asymptomatic individuals in the general population may reduce the incidence of gastric cancer, but the magnitude of this effect is unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of eradication of H. pylori in healthy asymptomatic individuals in the general population in reducing the incidence of gastric cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified trials by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2020, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1946 to February 2020), and EMBASE (1974 to February 2020). We handsearched reference lists from trials selected by electronic searching to identify further relevant trials. We handsearched published abstracts from conference proceedings from the United European Gastroenterology Week (published in Gut) and Digestive Disease Week (published in Gastroenterology) between 2001 and 2019. We contacted members of the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Review Group and experts in the field and asked them to provide details of outstanding clinical trials and any relevant unpublished materials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We analysed randomised controlled trials comparing at least one week of H. pylori therapy with placebo or no treatment in preventing subsequent development of gastric cancer in otherwise healthy and asymptomatic H. pylori-positive adults. Trials had to follow up participants for at least two years and needed to have at least two participants with gastric cancer as an outcome. We defined gastric cancer as any gastric adenocarcinoma, including intestinal (differentiated) or diffuse (undifferentiated) type, with or without specified histology.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We collected data on incidence of gastric cancer, incidence of oesophageal cancer, deaths from gastric cancer, deaths from any cause, and adverse effects arising due to therapy.
MAIN RESULTS
Six trials met all our eligibility criteria and provided extractable data in the previous version. Following our updated search, one new RCT was identified, meaning that seven trials were included in this updated review. In addition, one previously included trial provided fully published data out to 10 years, and another previously included trial provided fully published data out to 22 years of follow-up. Four trials were at low risk of bias, one trial was at unclear risk, and two trials were at high risk of bias. Six trials were conducted in Asian populations. In preventing development of subsequent gastric cancer, H. pylori eradication therapy was superior to placebo or no treatment (RR 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.72, 7 trials, 8323 participants, moderate certainty evidence). Only two trials reported the effect of eradication of H. pylori on the development of subsequent oesophageal cancer. Sixteen (0.8%) of 1947 participants assigned to eradication therapy subsequently developed oesophageal cancer compared with 13 (0.7%) of 1941 participants allocated to placebo (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.54, moderate certainty evidence). H. pylori eradication reduced mortality from gastric cancer compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.92, 4 trials, 6301 participants, moderate certainty evidence). There was little or no evidence in all-cause mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.12, 5 trials, 7079 participants, moderate certainty evidence). Adverse events data were poorly reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found moderate certainty evidence that searching for and eradicating H. pylori reduces the incidence of gastric cancer and death from gastric cancer in healthy asymptomatic infected Asian individuals, but we cannot necessarily extrapolate this data to other populations.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Ulcer Agents; Asymptomatic Infections; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Drug Therapy, Combination; Esophageal Neoplasms; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Incidence; Precancerous Conditions; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 32628791
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005583.pub3