-
Pain Physician Mar 2024Reducing postoperative pain is still a tremendous challenge for perioperative clinicians. Lidocaine is a local anesthetic that belongs to the amide class and has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Reducing postoperative pain is still a tremendous challenge for perioperative clinicians. Lidocaine is a local anesthetic that belongs to the amide class and has anti-inflammatory, anti-hyperalgesic, and analgesic effects. Extensive research has been conducted to determine the optimal route for its administration.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy of perioperative intravenous lidocaine with that of intraperitoneal lidocaine on postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.
STUDY DESIGN
EMBASE, PubMed, and The Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials published through December 2022 that compared patients receiving perioperative intravenous lidocaine with those receiving intraperitoneal lidocaine. The primary outcome measures included the pain score, as evaluated by the Visual Analog Scale, and opioid analgesia requirements. The secondary outcome measures were hospitalization length, gastrointestinal function recovery, etc. The data were acquired and recorded in electronic spreadsheets that had been designed for this purpose.
METHODS
This systematic review's design was based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to examine the certainty of the evidence. Furthermore, we examined the dependability of the calculated (favorable) treatment effects through considerations of information size and modified significance thresholds (trial sequential analysis).
RESULTS
Seven trials including 478 patients were included. Our meta-analysis demonstrates that compared with intravenous lidocaine, patients who received intraperitoneal lidocaine had lower pain scores at 4 hours (mean difference [MD] 1.40; 95% CI, 0.22 to 2.59); 12 hours (MD 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.30); and 24 hours (MD -0.12; 95% CI -0.40 to 0.17) postsurgery. However, no obvious difference in opioid consumption (P > 0.05) was found. In addition, the intraperitoneal lidocaine group had a longer postsurgery hospital stay than the intravenous lidocaine group (95%CI, -0.17 to -0.00; I2 = 0%). Intravenous lidocaine was more beneficial for achieving gastrointestinal return than intraperitoneal lidocaine (95% CI, -0.26 to -0.10; I2 = 2%).
LIMITATIONS
The sample size of enrolled RCTs was small, which could potentially result in an overestimation or underestimation of the treatment effect in the collected data. There was high heterogeneity among the studies.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis suggests that post-abdominal surgery intraperitoneal lidocaine administration has a better analgesic effect than intravenous lidocaine, with a lower pain score. However, intravenous lidocaine is more beneficial for gastrointestinal recovery after abdominal surgery.
Topics: Humans; Lidocaine; Analgesics, Opioid; Abdomen; Anesthetics, Local; Pain
PubMed: 38506678
DOI: No ID Found -
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and... Mar 2024Infections caused by Stenotrophomonas maltophilia are clinically important due to its intrinsic resistance to a broad range of antibiotics. Therefore, selecting the most... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Infections caused by Stenotrophomonas maltophilia are clinically important due to its intrinsic resistance to a broad range of antibiotics. Therefore, selecting the most appropriate antibiotic to treat S. maltophilia infection is a major challenge.
AIM
The current meta-analysis aimed to investigate the global prevalence of antibiotic resistance among S. maltophilia isolates to the develop more effective therapeutic strategies.
METHOD
A systematic literature search was performed using the appropriate search syntax after searching Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus databases (May 2023). Statistical analysis was performed using Pooled and the random effects model in R and the metafor package. A total of 11,438 articles were retrieved. After a thorough evaluation, 289 studies were finally eligible for inclusion in this systematic review and meta-analysis.
RESULT
Present analysis indicated that the highest incidences of resistance were associated with doripenem (97%), cefoxitin (96%), imipenem and cefuroxime (95%), ampicillin (94%), ceftriaxone (92%), aztreonam (91%) and meropenem (90%) which resistance to Carbapenems is intrinsic. The lowest resistance rates were documented for minocycline (3%), cefiderocol (4%). The global resistance rate to TMP-SMX remained constant in two periods before and after 2010 (14.4% vs. 14.6%). A significant increase in resistance to tigecycline and ceftolozane/tazobactam was observed before and after 2010.
CONCLUSIONS
Minocycline and cefiderocol can be considered the preferred treatment options due to low resistance rates, although regional differences in resistance rates to other antibiotics should be considered. The low global prevalence of resistance to TMP-SMX as a first-line treatment for S. maltophilia suggests that it remains an effective treatment option.
Topics: Humans; Trimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination; Minocycline; Stenotrophomonas maltophilia; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Cefiderocol; Drug Resistance, Microbial; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections
PubMed: 38504262
DOI: 10.1186/s12941-024-00685-4 -
Future Microbiology Mar 2024This study aimed to understand the current level of linezolid (LNZ) resistance in isolates reported over the past 10 years. An electronic search was conducted for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This study aimed to understand the current level of linezolid (LNZ) resistance in isolates reported over the past 10 years. An electronic search was conducted for the following keywords: (( [title/abstract]) OR ( [title/abstract]) OR (Pneumococci [title/abstract]) AND (linezolid [title/abstract]) OR (Zyvox [title/abstract])) OR (Zyvoxid [title/abstract])). Out of all the studies, 80 had a cross-sectional design, while 11 followed a cohort approach. The prevalence of LNZ resistance among isolates ranged from 0% to 4.86%. Urgent, high-powered, randomized, controlled trials with participants from endemic regions are needed to gain a comprehensive understanding of the impact on and significance of LNZ treatment to patients.
Topics: Humans; Linezolid; Streptococcus pneumoniae; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Prevalence; Cross-Sectional Studies; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Drug Resistance, Bacterial
PubMed: 38497912
DOI: 10.2217/fmb-2023-0170 -
European Review For Medical and... Mar 2024The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents in elderly with acute myeloid leukemia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents in elderly with acute myeloid leukemia.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A comprehensive literature search identified related studies from PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Overall complete remission (CR) and overall response rate (ORR) were applied to evaluate the efficacy of venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents in elderly with acute myeloid leukemia, and incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events were used to evaluate the safety.
RESULTS
10 studies, including a total of 930 patients, were identified in our study and analyzed using the random-effects model. Meta-analysis showed the pooled overall CR rate of 70% (95% CI: 63-77%), the pooled ORR rate of 53% (95% CI: 39-67%), and the median overall survival ranged from 7.7 to 16.9 months. A total of 6 studies reported related adverse events, mainly including thrombocytopenia, febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, and pneumonia. The pooled incidence of overall adverse events was 30% (95% CI: 22-38%), and all adverse events were tolerable and resolved with treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
The combination of venetoclax and demethylating drugs has a good therapeutic effect on elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia, but it also induces some adverse events. Although this therapy has a small impact on the quality of life, further attention is still needed to reduce the occurrence of such adverse events.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Quality of Life; Bridged Bicyclo Compounds, Heterocyclic; Sulfonamides; Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute; Pathologic Complete Response; Thrombocytopenia
PubMed: 38497866
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202403_35597 -
BMC Gastroenterology Mar 2024Both vonoprazan and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are currently used to treat artificial ulcers after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection. However, evidence-based... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparison of vonoprazan and proton pump inhibitors for the treatment of gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection-induced ulcer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Both vonoprazan and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are currently used to treat artificial ulcers after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection. However, evidence-based medicine proving the efficacy of vonoprazan is still lacking. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of vonoprazan and PPIs for the treatment of artificial ulcers after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection.
METHODS
The PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to September 2023 for related randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs that compared the efficacy of vonoprazan and PPIs in treating artificial gastric ulcers after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection were included. Two independent reviewers screened the included studies, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. The following outcomes were extracted for comparison: ulcer healing rate, ulcer shrinkage rate, delayed postoperative bleeding rate, and ulcer perforation rate.
RESULTS
Nine randomized controlled trials involving 926 patients were included. The pooled results showed that vonoprazan had a significantly lower rate of delayed postoperative bleeding than did PPIs (RR = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.23-0.91; P = 0.03). No significant differences were found in terms of ulcer healing, shrinkage rates, or ulcer perforation rates between vonoprazan and PPIs.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with PPIs, vonoprazan is superior at reducing delayed postoperative bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection. However, further studies are needed to prove the efficacy of vonoprazan.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
Identifier CRD42024509227.
Topics: Humans; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Stomach Ulcer; Ulcer; Endoscopic Mucosal Resection; Stomach Neoplasms; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pyrroles; Sulfonamides
PubMed: 38491413
DOI: 10.1186/s12876-024-03198-8 -
Medicine Mar 2024Local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) is rare, but fatal; the current widely used treatment is lipid emulsion (LE). The goal of this study was to analyze and review...
BACKGROUND
Local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) is rare, but fatal; the current widely used treatment is lipid emulsion (LE). The goal of this study was to analyze and review case reports on LE treatment for LAST in pediatric patients.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review using case reports on LE treatment for LAST in pediatric patients, searching PubMed and Scopus databases to March 2023 using the following keywords: ("local anesthetic toxicity" OR "local anesthetic systemic toxicity" OR LAST") AND ("newborn" OR "infant" OR "child" OR "children" OR "adolescent" OR "pediatric") AND ("lipid emulsion" OR "Intralipid").
RESULTS
Our search yielded 21 cases, revealing that nearly 43% patients with LAST were less than 1 year old, and most cases were caused by bupivacaine (approximately 67% cases). "Inadvertent intravascular injection" by anesthesiologists and "overdose of local anesthetics" mainly by surgeons were responsible for 52% and 24% cases of LAST, respectively. LAST occurred in the awake state (52%) and under general anesthesia (48%), mainly causing seizures and arrhythmia, respectively. Approximately 55% of patients received LE treatment in <10 minutes after LAST, mainly improving cardiovascular symptoms. A 20% LE (1.5 mL/kg) dose followed by 0.25 mL/kg/minutes dose was frequently used. LE and anticonvulsants were mainly used in the awake state, whereas LE with or without vasopressors was mainly used under general anesthesia. LE treatment led to full recovery from LAST in 20 cases; however, 1 patient died due to underlying disease.
CONCLUSION
Consequently, our findings reveal that LE is effective in treating pediatric LAST.
Topics: Humans; Child; Infant; Anesthetics, Local; Emulsions; Anesthesia, Local; Bupivacaine; Drug Overdose
PubMed: 38489714
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000037534 -
Hypertension in Pregnancy Dec 2024Preeclampsia (PE) is a pregnancy disorder that represents a major cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Preeclampsia (PE) is a pregnancy disorder that represents a major cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality.
METHODS
This network meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO. We searched the PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov. and Embase databases for studies published from inception to the 31 of March 2023. RevMan5.3 software provided by the Cochrane Collaboration was used for direct meta-analysis (DMA) statistical analysis. Funnel maps, network meta-analysis (NMA), the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to rank the different interventions and publication bias were generated by STATA 17.0 software.
RESULTS
We included eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving a total of 1192 women with PE; two studies were of high quality and six were of moderate quality. Eight interventions were addressed in the NMA. In the DMA, we found that blood pressure in the Ketanserin group were significantly higher than those in the Nicardipine group. NMA showed that blood pressure in the Dihydralazine group was significantly higher than that in the Methyldopa, Labetalol, Nicardipine and Diltiazem groups. And the blood pressure in the Labetalol group was significantly lower than that in the Nicardipine group. SUCRA values showed that Diltiazem was more effective in lowering blood pressure than other drugs looked at in this study.
CONCLUSION
According to the eight RCTs included in this study, Diltiazem was the most effective in reducing blood pressure in PE patients; Labetalol and Nicardipine also had good effects. Diltiazem is preferred for the treatment of patients with severe PE and high blood pressure.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Labetalol; Pre-Eclampsia; Diltiazem; Nicardipine; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 38488570
DOI: 10.1080/10641955.2024.2329068 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2024Leptospirosis is a disease transmitted from animals to humans through water, soil, or food contaminated with the urine of infected animals, caused by pathogenic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Leptospirosis is a disease transmitted from animals to humans through water, soil, or food contaminated with the urine of infected animals, caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are commonly prescribed for the management of leptospirosis. Despite the widespread use of antibiotic treatment for leptospirosis, there seems to be insufficient evidence to determine its effectiveness or to recommend antibiotic use as a standard practice. This updated systematic review evaluated the available evidence regarding the use of antibiotics in treating leptospirosis, building upon a previously published Cochrane review.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotics versus placebo, no intervention, or another antibiotic for the treatment of people with leptospirosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified randomised clinical trials following standard Cochrane procedures. The date of the last search was 27 March 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised clinical trials of various designs that examined the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis. We did not impose any restrictions based on the age, sex, occupation, or comorbidities of the participants involved in the trials. Our search encompassed trials that evaluated antibiotics, regardless of the method of administration, dosage, and schedule, and compared them with placebo or no intervention, or compared different antibiotics. We included trials regardless of the outcomes reported.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
During the preparation of this review, we adhered to the Cochrane methodology and used Review Manager. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and serious adverse events (nosocomial infection). Our secondary outcomes were quality of life, proportion of people with adverse events considered non-serious, and days of hospitalisation. To assess the risk of bias of the included trials, we used the RoB 2 tool, and for evaluating the certainty of evidence we used GRADEpro GDT software. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD), both accompanied by their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the random-effects model for all our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. For our primary outcome analyses, we included trial data from the longest follow-up period.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified nine randomised clinical trials comprising 1019 participants. Seven trials compared two intervention groups and two trials compared three intervention groups. Amongst the trials comparing antibiotics versus placebos, four trials assessed penicillin and one trial assessed doxycycline. In the trials comparing different antibiotics, one trial evaluated doxycycline versus azithromycin, one trial assessed penicillin versus doxycycline versus cefotaxime, and one trial evaluated ceftriaxone versus penicillin. One trial assessed penicillin with chloramphenicol and no intervention. Apart from two trials that recruited military personnel stationed in endemic areas or military personnel returning from training courses in endemic areas, the remaining trials recruited people from the general population presenting to the hospital with fever in an endemic area. The participants' ages in the included trials was 13 to 92 years. The treatment duration was seven days for penicillin, doxycycline, and cephalosporins; five days for chloramphenicol; and three days for azithromycin. The follow-up durations varied across trials, with three trials not specifying their follow-up periods. Three trials were excluded from quantitative synthesis; one reported zero events for a prespecified outcome, and two did not provide data for any prespecified outcomes. Antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus placebo on all-cause mortality (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.79; I = 8%; 3 trials, 367 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin or chloramphenicol versus placebo on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.17; I = 0%; 2 trials, 162 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials assessed serious adverse events. Antibiotics versus another antibiotic The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cephalosporin on all-cause mortality (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.47 to 4.04; I = 0%; 2 trials, 348 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus doxycycline (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.46; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of cefotaxime versus doxycycline on all-cause mortality (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.78; 1 trial, 169 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus doxycycline on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.62; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or versus cefotaxime (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of doxycycline versus cefotaxime on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cefotaxime (RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.13 to 73.47; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), versus doxycycline (RR 2.80, 95% CI 0.12 to 67.66; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus chloramphenicol on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 3.67; 1 trial, 52 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Funding Six of the nine trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources and three trials did not mention funding source. Four of the six trials mentioning sources received funds from public or governmental sources or from international charitable sources, and the remaining two, in addition to public or governmental sources, received support in the form of trial drug supply directly from pharmaceutical companies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
As the certainty of evidence is very low, we do not know if antibiotics provide little to no effect on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, or adverse events considered non-serious. There is a lack of definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis infection, and the absence of trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes further adds to this limitation.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Doxycycline; Azithromycin; Quality of Life; Chloramphenicol; Penicillins; Cephalosporins; Cefotaxime; Leptospirosis; Cross Infection
PubMed: 38483092
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014960.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2024Leptospirosis is a global zoonotic and waterborne disease caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are used as a strategy for prevention of leptospirosis, in... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Leptospirosis is a global zoonotic and waterborne disease caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are used as a strategy for prevention of leptospirosis, in particular in travellers and high-risk groups. However, the clinical benefits are unknown, especially when considering possible treatment-associated adverse effects. This review assesses the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in leptospirosis and is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Library (2009, Issue 3).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotic prophylaxis for human leptospirosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified randomised clinical trials through electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and other resources. We searched online clinical trial registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. We checked reference lists of the retrieved studies for further trials. The last date of search was 17 April 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised clinical trials of any trial design, assessing antibiotics for prevention of leptospirosis, and with no restrictions on age, sex, occupation, or comorbidity of trial participants. We looked for trials assessing antibiotics irrespective of route of administration, dosage, and schedule versus placebo or no intervention. We also included trials assessing antibiotics versus other antibiotics using these criteria, or the same antibiotic but with another dose or schedule.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed Cochrane methodology. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis regardless of the presence of an identified clinical syndrome (inclusive of asymptomatic cases), clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of the presence of laboratory confirmation, clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis confirmed by laboratory diagnosis (exclusive of asymptomatic cases), and serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were quality of life and the proportion of people with non-serious adverse events. We assessed the risk of bias of the included trials using the RoB 2 tool and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD), with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a random-effects model for our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. Our primary outcome analyses included trial data at the longest follow-up.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified five randomised clinical trials comprising 2593 participants that compared antibiotics (doxycycline, azithromycin, or penicillin) with placebo, or one antibiotic compared with another. Four trials assessed doxycycline with different durations, one trial assessed azithromycin, and one trial assessed penicillin. One trial had three intervention groups: doxycycline, azithromycin, and placebo. Three trials assessed pre-exposure prophylaxis, one trial assessed postexposure prophylaxis, and one did not report this clearly. Four trials recruited residents in endemic areas, and one trial recruited soldiers who experienced limited time exposure. The participants' ages in the included trials were 10 to 80 years. Follow-up ranged from one to three months. Antibiotics versus placebo Doxycycline compared with placebo may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.83; 1 trial, 782 participants; low-certainty evidence). Prophylactic antibiotics may have little to no effect on laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.26; 5 trials, 2593 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics may result in little to no difference in the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of laboratory confirmation (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.08; 4 trials, 1653 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis with laboratory confirmation (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.26; 4 trials, 1653 participants; low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics compared with placebo may increase non-serious adverse events, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 10.13, 95% CI 2.40 to 42.71; 3 trials, 1909 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One antibiotic versus another antibiotic One trial assessed doxycycline versus azithromycin but did not report mortality. Compared to azithromycin, doxycycline may have little to no effect on laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis regardless of the presence of an identified clinical syndrome (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.51 to 4.32; 1 trial, 137 participants), on the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of the presence of laboratory confirmation (RR 4.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 18.66; 1 trial, 137 participants), on the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis confirmed by laboratory diagnosis (RR 4.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 18.66; 1 trial, 137 participants), and on non-serious adverse events (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.48; 1 trial, 137 participants), but the evidence is very uncertain. The certainty of evidence for all the outcomes was very low. None of the five included trials reported serious adverse events or assessed quality of life. One study is awaiting classification. Funding Four of the five trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources, and the remaining trial did not include this. Three of the four trials that disclosed their supporting sources received the supply of trial drugs directly from the same pharmaceutical company, and the remaining trial received financial support from a governmental source.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We do not know if antibiotics versus placebo or another antibiotic has little or have no effect on all-cause mortality or leptospirosis infection because the certainty of evidence is low or very low. We do not know if antibiotics versus placebo may increase the overall risk of non-serious adverse events because of very low-certainty evidence. We lack definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for the prophylaxis of leptospirosis infection. We lack trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Doxycycline; Azithromycin; Quality of Life; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Penicillins; Leptospirosis
PubMed: 38483067
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014959.pub2 -
Journal of Toxicology and Environmental... May 2024The aim of this review was to explore the advances of nanoformulations as a strategy to optimize glioblastoma treatment, specifically focusing on targeting and... (Review)
Review
The aim of this review was to explore the advances of nanoformulations as a strategy to optimize glioblastoma treatment, specifically focusing on targeting and controlling drug delivery systems to the tumor. This review followed the PRISMA recommendations. The studies were selected through a literature search conducted in the electronic databases PubMed Central, Science Direct, Scopus and Web of Science, in April 2023, using the equation descriptors: (nanocapsule OR nanoformulation) AND (glioblastoma). Forty-seven investigations included were published between 2011 and 2023 to assess the application of different nanoformulations to optimize delivery of chemotherapies including temozolomide, carmustine, vincristine or cisplatin previously employed in brain tumor therapy, as well as investigating another 10 drugs. Data demonstrated the possible application of different matrices employed as nanocarriers and utilization of functionalizing agents to improve internalization of chemotherapeutics. Functionalization was developed with the application of peptides, micronutrients/vitamins, antibodies and siRNAs. Finally, this review demonstrated the practical and clinical application of nanocarriers to deliver multiple drugs in glioblastoma models. These nanomodels might ideally be developed using functionalizing ligand agents that preferably act synergistically with the drug these agents carry. The findings showed promising results, making nanoformulations one of the best prospects for innovation and improvement of glioblastoma treatment.
Topics: Humans; Glioblastoma; Temozolomide; Carmustine; Brain Neoplasms; Drug Delivery Systems
PubMed: 38480528
DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2024.2326679