-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2023Traumatic hyphema is the entry of blood into the anterior chamber, the space between the cornea and iris, following significant injury to the eye. Hyphema may be... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Traumatic hyphema is the entry of blood into the anterior chamber, the space between the cornea and iris, following significant injury to the eye. Hyphema may be associated with significant complications that uncommonly cause permanent vision loss. Complications include elevated intraocular pressure, corneal blood staining, anterior and posterior synechiae, and optic nerve atrophy. People with sickle cell trait or disease may be particularly susceptible to increases in intraocular pressure and optic atrophy. Rebleeding is associated with an increase in the rate and severity of complications.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of various medical interventions in the management of traumatic hyphema.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2022, Issue 3); MEDLINE Ovid; Embase.com; PubMed (1948 to March 2022); the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The last date of the search was 22 March 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Two review authors independently assessed the titles and abstracts of all reports identified by the electronic and manual searches. We included randomized and quasi-randomized trials that compared various medical (non-surgical) interventions versus other medical interventions or control groups for the treatment of traumatic hyphema following closed-globe trauma. We applied no restrictions on age, gender, severity of the closed-globe trauma, or level of visual acuity at time of enrollment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 23 randomized and seven quasi-randomized studies with a total of 2969 participants. Interventions included antifibrinolytic agents (systemic and topical aminocaproic acid, tranexamic acid, and aminomethylbenzoic acid), corticosteroids (systemic and topical), cycloplegics, miotics, aspirin, conjugated estrogens, traditional Chinese medicine, monocular versus bilateral patching, elevation of the head, and bed rest. We found no evidence of an effect on visual acuity for any intervention, whether measured within two weeks (short term) or for longer periods. In a meta-analysis of two trials, we found no evidence of an effect of aminocaproic acid on long-term visual acuity (RR 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.29) or final visual acuity measured up to three years after the hyphema (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.18). Oral tranexamic acid appeared to provide little to no benefit on visual acuity in four trials (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.25). The remaining trials evaluated the effects of various interventions on short-term visual acuity; none of these interventions was measured in more than one trial. No intervention showed a statistically significant effect (RRs ranged from 0.75 to 1.10). Similarly, visual acuity measured for longer periods in four trials evaluating different interventions was also not statistically significant (RRs ranged from 0.82 to 1.02). The evidence supporting these findings was of low or very low certainty. Systemic aminocaproic acid reduced the rate of recurrent hemorrhage (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.60), as assessed in six trials with 330 participants. A sensitivity analysis omitting two studies not using an intention-to-treat analysis reduced the strength of the evidence (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.08). We obtained similar results for topical aminocaproic acid (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.10) in two trials with 131 participants. We assessed the certainty of the evidence as low. Systemic tranexamic acid had a significant effect in reducing the rate of secondary hemorrhage (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.53) in seven trials with 754 participants, as did aminomethylbenzoic acid (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.41), as reported in one study. Evidence to support an associated reduction in risk of complications from secondary hemorrhage (i.e. corneal blood staining, peripheral anterior synechiae, elevated intraocular pressure, and development of optic atrophy) by antifibrinolytics was limited by the small number of these events. Use of aminocaproic acid was associated with increased nausea, vomiting, and other adverse events compared with placebo. We found no evidence of an effect on the number of adverse events with the use of systemic versus topical aminocaproic acid or with standard versus lower drug dose. The number of days for the primary hyphema to resolve appeared to be longer with the use of systemic aminocaproic acid compared with no use, but this outcome was not altered by any other intervention. The available evidence on usage of systemic or topical corticosteroids, cycloplegics, or aspirin in traumatic hyphema was limited due to the small numbers of participants and events in the trials. We found no evidence of an effect between a single versus binocular patch on the risk of secondary hemorrhage or time to rebleed. We also found no evidence of an effect on the risk of secondary hemorrhage between ambulation and complete bed rest.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no evidence of an effect on visual acuity of any of the interventions evaluated in this review. Although the evidence was limited, people with traumatic hyphema who receive aminocaproic acid or tranexamic acid are less likely to experience secondary hemorrhage. However, hyphema took longer to clear in people treated with systemic aminocaproic acid. There is no good evidence to support the use of antifibrinolytic agents in the management of traumatic hyphema, other than possibly to reduce the rate of secondary hemorrhage. The potentially long-term deleterious effects of secondary hemorrhage are unknown. Similarly, there is no evidence to support the use of corticosteroids, cycloplegics, or non-drug interventions (such as patching, bed rest, or head elevation) in the management of traumatic hyphema. As these multiple interventions are rarely used in isolation, further research to assess the additive effect of these interventions might be of value.
Topics: Humans; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Aminocaproic Acid; Antifibrinolytic Agents; Aspirin; Glaucoma; Hyphema; Mydriatics; Tranexamic Acid
PubMed: 36912744
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005431.pub5 -
European Journal of Translational... Sep 2022The aim of this study was to identify the efficacy of drug agents for pharmacological Treatment of Presbyopia. Published research papers were reviewed using the relevant...
The aim of this study was to identify the efficacy of drug agents for pharmacological Treatment of Presbyopia. Published research papers were reviewed using the relevant terms in PubMed, Science direct, Google scholar, Medline, Google patent, Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus. In the initial search, 2270 records were obtained. By removing duplicate articles and all articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria or were inappropriate due to indirect relevance to the subject, 44 studies were selected. It should be noted that all studies had inclusion criteria. There are a number of topical pharmacological agents available for treating presbyopia such as FOV Tears and PresbiDrop. They consist of parasympathetic agent and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), to contract the ciliary and pupil muscle and restore the accommodation. Another example of topical pharmacological agent is EV06. It is a lens-softening eye drop which can affect the rigid lens in presbyopia. Currently there is no pharmacological agent available to treat presbyopia. Although there are limited number of peer-reviewed articles available, the outcome for future agents under investigation are promising.
PubMed: 36121117
DOI: 10.4081/ejtm.2022.10781 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2022Salivary gland dysfunction (e.g., sialadenitis and xerostomia) is the most common complication of radioactive iodine (RAI) therapy for differentiated thyroid cancer...
INTRODUCTION
Salivary gland dysfunction (e.g., sialadenitis and xerostomia) is the most common complication of radioactive iodine (RAI) therapy for differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). Several methods have been used to reduce/prevent this adverse effect. We aimed to systematically review the effectiveness of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions in preventing RAI-induced salivary gland dysfunction in patients with DTC.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted, according to PRISMA guidelines. The protocol was registered (PROSPERO: CRD42022295229). PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library electronic databases were searched from inception to November 2021. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials of DTC patients who were older than 18 years and underwent RAI after thyroidectomy in which at least one studied group received an intervention to prevent salivary gland dysfunction.
RESULTS
Twelve studies (a total of 667 participants) were included. Among DTC patients who were treated with RAI, nonpharmacological treatment such as parotid gland massage and aromatherapy ameliorated salivary gland dysfunction. Antioxidants such as vitamin E and selenium demonstrated radioprotective effects on the salivary gland, while other antioxidants did not show radioprotective benefits. Vitamin C showed no significant effects on preventing salivary gland dysfunction. Amifostine had inconsistent outcomes among studies. Among cholinergic agonists, pilocarpine did not demonstrate the radioprotective effect on parotid glands, while bethanechol lowered salivary gland dysfunction. However, the negative results from pilocarpine may be explained by the strong sialorrheic effect of the Cincinnati regimen in both study arms.
CONCLUSION
Among non-pharmacological and pharmacological methods, parotid gland massage, aromatherapy, vitamin E, selenium, amifostine, and bethanechol may have benefits in minimizing RAI-induced salivary gland dysfunction in patients with DTC. The results are limited by a small number of patients and should be confirmed in future larger randomized controlled trials.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=295229, PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022295229.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Amifostine; Bethanechol; Humans; Iodine Radioisotopes; Pilocarpine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Salivary Glands; Selenium; Thyroid Neoplasms; Vitamin E
PubMed: 36105397
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.960265 -
The Ocular Surface Oct 2019We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment for Demodex blepharitis. Parameters studied were mites count,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment for Demodex blepharitis. Parameters studied were mites count, improvement of symptoms and mites' eradication, stratified on type of treatments and mode of delivery of treatments (local or systemic).
METHOD
The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Google scholar and Science Direct databases were searched for studies reporting an efficacy of treatments for Demodex blepharitis.
RESULTS
We included 19 studies (14 observational and 5 randomized clinical trials), for a total of 934 patients, 1741 eyes, and 13 different treatments. For mites count, eradication rate, and symptoms improvement, meta-analysis included fifteen, fourteen and thirteen studies, respectively. The overall effect sizes for efficiency of all treatments, globally, were 1.68 (95CI 1.25 to 2.12), 0.45 (0.26-0.64), and 0.76 (0.59-0.90), respectively. Except usual lid hygiene for mites count, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario ointment (CHEO) for both eradication rate and symptoms, and CHEO, 2% metronidazole ointment, and systemic metronidazole for eradication rate, all treatments were efficient. Stratified meta-analysis did not show significant differences between local and systemic treatments (1.22, 0.83 to 1.60 vs 2.24, 1.30 to 3.18 for mites count; 0.37, 0.21 to 0.54 vs 0.56, 0.06 to 0.99 for eradication rate; and 0.77, 0.58 to 0.92 vs 0.67, 0.25 to 0.98 for symptoms improvement).
CONCLUSION
We reported the efficiency of the different treatments of Demodex blepharitis. Because of less systemic side effects, local treatments seem promising molecules in the treatment of Demodex blepharitis.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Antiparasitic Agents; Blepharitis; Eye Infections, Parasitic; Humans; Ivermectin; Metronidazole; Miotics; Mite Infestations; Mites; Pilocarpine; Tea Tree Oil
PubMed: 31229586
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtos.2019.06.004 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2019Traumatic hyphema is the entry of blood into the anterior chamber (the space between the cornea and iris) subsequent to a blow or a projectile striking the eye. Hyphema... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Traumatic hyphema is the entry of blood into the anterior chamber (the space between the cornea and iris) subsequent to a blow or a projectile striking the eye. Hyphema uncommonly causes permanent loss of vision. Associated trauma (e.g. corneal staining, traumatic cataract, angle recession glaucoma, optic atrophy, etc.) may seriously affect vision. Such complications can lead to permanent impairment of vision. People with sickle cell trait/disease may be particularly susceptible to increases of elevated intraocular pressure. If rebleeding occurs, the rates and severity of complications increase.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of various medical interventions in the management of traumatic hyphema.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2018, Issue 6); MEDLINE Ovid; Embase.com; PubMed (1948 to June 2018); the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The date of the search was 28 June 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Two review authors independently assessed the titles and abstracts of all reports identified by the electronic and manual searches. In this review, we included randomized and quasi-randomized trials that compared various medical (non-surgical) interventions versus other medical intervention or control groups for the treatment of traumatic hyphema following closed-globe trauma. We applied no restrictions regarding age, gender, severity of the closed-globe trauma, or level of visual acuity at the time of enrollment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted the data for the primary outcomes, visual acuity and time to resolution of primary hemorrhage, and secondary outcomes including: secondary hemorrhage and time to rebleed; risk of corneal blood staining, glaucoma or elevated intraocular pressure, optic atrophy, or peripheral anterior synechiae; adverse events; and duration of hospitalization. We entered and analyzed data using Review Manager 5. We performed meta-analyses using a fixed-effect model and reported dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 20 randomized and seven quasi-randomized studies with a total of 2643 participants. Interventions included antifibrinolytic agents (systemic and topical aminocaproic acid, tranexamic acid, and aminomethylbenzoic acid), corticosteroids (systemic and topical), cycloplegics, miotics, aspirin, conjugated estrogens, traditional Chinese medicine, monocular versus bilateral patching, elevation of the head, and bed rest.We found no evidence of an effect on visual acuity for any intervention, whether measured within two weeks (short term) or for longer periods. In a meta-analysis of two trials, we found no evidence of an effect of aminocaproic acid on long-term visual acuity (RR 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.29) or final visual acuity measured up to three years after the hyphema (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.18). Eight trials evaluated the effects of various interventions on short-term visual acuity; none of these interventions was measured in more than one trial. No intervention showed a statistically significant effect (RRs ranged from 0.75 to 1.10). Similarly, visual acuity measured for longer periods in four trials evaluating different interventions was also not statistically significant (RRs ranged from 0.82 to 1.02). The evidence supporting these findings was of low or very low certainty.Systemic aminocaproic acid reduced the rate of recurrent hemorrhage (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.60) as assessed in six trials with 330 participants. A sensitivity analysis omitting two studies not using an intention-to-treat analysis reduced the strength of the evidence (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.08). We obtained similar results for topical aminocaproic acid (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.10) in two studies with 121 participants. We assessed the certainty of these findings as low and very low, respectively. Systemic tranexamic acid had a significant effect in reducing the rate of secondary hemorrhage (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.55) in five trials with 578 participants, as did aminomethylbenzoic acid as reported in one study (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.41). The evidence to support an associated reduction in the risk of complications from secondary hemorrhage (i.e. corneal blood staining, peripheral anterior synechiae, elevated intraocular pressure, and development of optic atrophy) by antifibrinolytics was limited by the small number of these events. Use of aminocaproic acid was associated with increased nausea, vomiting, and other adverse events compared with placebo. We found no evidence of an effect in the number of adverse events with the use of systemic versus topical aminocaproic acid or with standard versus lower drug dose. The number of days for the primary hyphema to resolve appeared to be longer with the use of systemic aminocaproic acid compared with no use, but this outcome was not altered by any other intervention.The available evidence on usage of systemic or topical corticosteroids, cycloplegics, or aspirin in traumatic hyphema was limited due to the small numbers of participants and events in the trials.We found no evidence of an effect between a single versus binocular patch or ambulation versus complete bed rest on the risk of secondary hemorrhage or time to rebleed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no evidence of an effect on visual acuity by any of the interventions evaluated in this review. Although evidence was limited, it appears that people with traumatic hyphema who receive aminocaproic acid or tranexamic acid are less likely to experience secondary hemorrhaging. However, hyphema took longer clear in people treated with systemic aminocaproic acid.There is no good evidence to support the use of antifibrinolytic agents in the management of traumatic hyphema other than possibly to reduce the rate of secondary hemorrhage. Similarly, there is no evidence to support the use of corticosteroids, cycloplegics, or non-drug interventions (such as binocular patching, bed rest, or head elevation) in the management of traumatic hyphema. As these multiple interventions are rarely used in isolation, further research to assess the additive effect of these interventions might be of value.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Aminocaproic Acid; Antifibrinolytic Agents; Aspirin; Bandages; Bed Rest; Child; Estrogens, Conjugated (USP); Eye Injuries; Humans; Hyphema; Mydriatics; Patient Positioning; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tranexamic Acid; Visual Acuity; Wounds, Nonpenetrating
PubMed: 30640411
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005431.pub4 -
Oral Diseases May 2019Systematic review with meta-analysis of interventions for dry mouth symptoms and hyposalivation of Sjögren's syndrome (SS). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Systematic review with meta-analysis of interventions for dry mouth symptoms and hyposalivation of Sjögren's syndrome (SS).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central and EMBASE up to February 2018 for randomized trials of interventions for dry mouth and hyposalivation of SS. The primary outcome was the mean change in xerostomia symptoms. The secondary outcomes included changes in salivary flow and quality of life. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool for individual studies and the GRADE method to summarize the quality of evidence across studies for the included outcomes.
RESULTS
Thirty-six studies (3,274 patients) were included in the systematic review. Results from the meta-analyses showed high-quality evidence that pilocarpine was superior to placebo in reducing dry mouth symptoms. We found moderate quality of evidence that pilocarpine, rituximab and interferon-alpha were more effective than placebo in increasing salivary flow, with the relevant effect size being large for pilocarpine, and notably smaller for rituximab and interferon-alpha.
CONCLUSION
Clinicians should be very confident in the beneficial effects of pilocarpine upon dry mouth symptoms of SS and moderately confident that pilocarpine, rituximab and interferon-alpha can have beneficial effects upon salivary flow. Adverse events are common. The use of other treatment modalities cannot be supported on the basis of current evidence.
Topics: Humans; Muscarinic Agonists; Pilocarpine; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Saliva; Sjogren's Syndrome; Xerostomia
PubMed: 30086205
DOI: 10.1111/odi.12952 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2017Salivary gland dysfunction is an 'umbrella' term for the presence of either xerostomia (subjective sensation of dryness), or salivary gland hypofunction (reduction in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Salivary gland dysfunction is an 'umbrella' term for the presence of either xerostomia (subjective sensation of dryness), or salivary gland hypofunction (reduction in saliva production). It is a predictable side effect of radiotherapy to the head and neck region, and is associated with a significant impairment of quality of life. A wide range of pharmacological interventions, with varying mechanisms of action, have been used for the prevention of radiation-induced salivary gland dysfunction.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of pharmacological interventions for the prevention of radiation-induced salivary gland dysfunction.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 14 September 2016); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 8) in the Cochrane Library (searched 14 September 2016); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 14 September 2016); Embase Ovid (1980 to 14 September 2016); CINAHL EBSCO (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; 1937 to 14 September 2016); LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; 1982 to 14 September 2016); Zetoc Conference Proceedings (1993 to 14 September 2016); and OpenGrey (1997 to 14 September 2016). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials, irrespective of their language of publication or publication status. Trials included participants of all ages, ethnic origin and gender, scheduled to receive radiotherapy on its own or in addition to chemotherapy to the head and neck region. Participants could be outpatients or inpatients. We included trials comparing any pharmacological agent regimen, prescribed prophylactically for salivary gland dysfunction prior to or during radiotherapy, with placebo, no intervention or an alternative pharmacological intervention. Comparisons of radiation techniques were excluded.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 39 studies that randomised 3520 participants; the number of participants analysed varied by outcome and time point. The studies were ordered into 14 separate comparisons with meta-analysis only being possible in three of those.We found low-quality evidence to show that amifostine, when compared to a placebo or no treatment control, might reduce the risk of moderate to severe xerostomia (grade 2 or higher on a 0 to 4 scale) at the end of radiotherapy (risk ratio (RR) 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.67; P = 0.001, 3 studies, 119 participants), and up to three months after radiotherapy (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.92; P = 0.01, 5 studies, 687 participants), but there is insufficient evidence that the effect is sustained up to 12 months after radiotherapy (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.23; P = 0.21, 7 studies, 682 participants). We found very low-quality evidence that amifostine increased unstimulated salivary flow rate up to 12 months after radiotherapy, both in terms of mg of saliva per 5 minutes (mean difference (MD) 0.32, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.55; P = 0.006, 1 study, 27 participants), and incidence of producing greater than 0.1 g of saliva over 5 minutes (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.86; P = 0.004, 1 study, 175 participants). However, there was insufficient evidence to show a difference when looking at stimulated salivary flow rates. There was insufficient (very low-quality) evidence to show that amifostine compromised the effects of cancer treatment when looking at survival measures. There was some very low-quality evidence of a small benefit for amifostine in terms of quality of life (10-point scale) at 12 months after radiotherapy (MD 0.70, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.20; P = 0.006, 1 study, 180 participants), but insufficient evidence at the end of and up to three months postradiotherapy. A further study showed no evidence of a difference at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months postradiotherapy. There was low-quality evidence that amifostine is associated with increases in: vomiting (RR 4.90, 95% CI 2.87 to 8.38; P < 0.00001, 5 studies, 601 participants); hypotension (RR 9.20, 95% CI 2.84 to 29.83; P = 0.0002, 3 studies, 376 participants); nausea (RR 2.60, 95% CI 1.81 to 3.74; P < 0.00001, 4 studies, 556 participants); and allergic response (RR 7.51, 95% CI 1.40 to 40.39; P = 0.02, 3 studies, 524 participants).We found insufficient evidence (that was of very low quality) to determine whether or not pilocarpine performed better or worse than a placebo or no treatment control for the outcomes: xerostomia, salivary flow rate, survival, and quality of life. There was some low-quality evidence that pilocarpine was associated with an increase in sweating (RR 2.98, 95% CI 1.43 to 6.22; P = 0.004, 5 studies, 389 participants).We found insufficient evidence to determine whether or not palifermin performed better or worse than placebo for: xerostomia (low quality); survival (moderate quality); and any adverse effects.There was also insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the following interventions: biperiden plus pilocarpine, Chinese medicines, bethanechol, artificial saliva, selenium, antiseptic mouthrinse, antimicrobial lozenge, polaprezinc, azulene rinse, and Venalot Depot (coumarin plus troxerutin).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is some low-quality evidence to suggest that amifostine prevents the feeling of dry mouth in people receiving radiotherapy to the head and neck (with or without chemotherapy) in the short- (end of radiotherapy) to medium-term (three months postradiotherapy). However, it is less clear whether or not this effect is sustained to 12 months postradiotherapy. The benefits of amifostine should be weighed against its high cost and side effects. There was insufficient evidence to show that any other intervention is beneficial.
Topics: Amifostine; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Female; Fibroblast Growth Factor 7; Humans; Male; Pilocarpine; Quality of Life; Radiation-Protective Agents; Radiotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Saliva, Artificial; Salivary Gland Diseases; Salivary Glands; Salivation; Xerostomia
PubMed: 28759701
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012744 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2017Glaucoma is the international leading cause of irreversible blindness. Intraocular pressure (IOP) is the only currently known modifiable risk factor; it can be reduced... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Glaucoma is the international leading cause of irreversible blindness. Intraocular pressure (IOP) is the only currently known modifiable risk factor; it can be reduced by medications, incisional surgery, or laser trabeculoplasty (LTP). LTP reduces IOP by 25% to 30% from baseline, but early acute IOP elevation after LTP is a common adverse effect. Most of these IOP elevations are transient, but temporarily elevated IOP may cause further optic nerve damage, worsening of glaucoma requiring additional therapy, and permanent vision loss. Antihypertensive prophylaxis with medications such as acetazolamide, apraclonidine, brimonidine, dipivefrin, pilocarpine, and timolol have been recommended to blunt and treat the postoperative IOP spike and associated pain and discomfort. Conversely, other researchers have observed that early postoperative IOP rise happens regardless of whether people receive perioperative glaucoma medications. It is unclear whether perioperative administration of antiglaucoma medications may be helpful in preventing or reducing the occurrence of postoperative IOP elevation.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of medications administered perioperatively to prevent temporarily increased intraocular pressure (IOP) after laser trabeculoplasty (LTP) in people with open-angle glaucoma (OAG).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 11), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 18 November 2016), Embase.com (1947 to 18 November 2016), PubMed (1948 to 18 November 2016), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database) (1982 to 18 November 2016), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com); last searched 17 September 2013, ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov); searched 18 November 2016 and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en); searched 18 November 2016. We did not use any date or language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which participants with OAG received LTP. We included trials which compared any antiglaucoma medication with no medication, one type of antiglaucoma medication compared with another type of antiglaucoma medication, or different timings of medication.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened records retrieved by the database searches, assessed the risk of bias, and abstracted data. We graded the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 22 trials that analyzed 2112 participants and identified no ongoing trials. We performed several comparisons of outcomes: one comparison of any antiglaucoma medication versus no medication or placebo, three comparisons of one antiglaucoma medication versus a different antiglaucoma mediation, and one comparison of antiglaucoma medication given before LTP to the same antiglaucoma medication given after LTP. Only one of the included trials used selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT); the remaining trials used argon laser trabeculoplasty (ALT). Risk of bias issues were primarily in detection bias, reporting bias, and other potential bias due to studies funded by industry. Two potentially relevant studies are awaiting classification due to needing translation.In the comparison of any medication versus no medication/placebo, there was moderate-certainty evidence that the medication group had a lower risk of IOP increase of 10 mmHg or greater within two hours compared with the no medication/placebo group (risk ratio (RR) 0.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 0.20). This trend favoring medication continued between two and 24 hours, but the evidence was of low and very low-certainty for an IOP increase of 5 mmHg or greater (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.31) and 10 mmHg or greater (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.42). Medication was favored over placebo/no medication with moderate-certainty in reducing IOP from the pre-LTP measurements for both within two hours and between two and 24 hours. At two hours, the mean difference (MD) in IOP between the medication group and the placebo/no medication group was -7.43 mmHg (95% CI -10.60 to -4.27); at between two and 24 hours, the medication group had a mean reduction in IOP of 5.32 mmHg more than the mean change in the placebo/no medication group (95% CI -7.37 to -3.28). Conjunctival blanching was an ocular adverse effect that was more common when brimonidine was given perioperatively compared with placebo in three studies.In our comparison of brimonidine versus apraclonidine, neither medication resulted in a lower risk of increased IOP of 5 mmHg or greater two hours of surgery; however, we were very uncertain about the estimate. There may be a greater mean decrease in IOP within two hours after LTP. We were unable to perform any meta-analyses for other review outcomes for this comparison.In our comparison of apraclonidine versus pilocarpine, we had insufficient data to perform meta-analyses to estimate effects on either of the primary outcomes. There was moderate-certainty evidence that neither medication was favored based on the mean change in IOP measurements from pre-LTP to two hours after surgery.In the comparison of medication given before LTP versus the same medication given after LTP, we had insufficient data for meta-analysis of IOP increase within two hours. For the risk of IOP increase of 5 mmHg or greater and 10 mmHg or greater at time points between two and 24 hours, there was no advantage of medication administration before or after LTP regarding the proportion of participants with an IOP spike (5 mmHg or greater: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.63; 10 mmHg or greater: RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.19 to 12.43). For an IOP increase of 10 mmHg or greater, we had very low-certainty in the estimate, it would likely change with data from new studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Perioperative medications are superior to no medication or placebo to prevent IOP spikes during the first two hours and up to 24 hours after LTP, but some medications can cause temporary conjunctival blanching, a short-term cosmetic effect. Overall, perioperative treatment was well tolerated and safe. Alpha-2 agonists are useful in helping to prevent IOP increases after LTP, but it is unclear whether one medication in this class of drugs is better than another. There was no notable difference between apraclonidine and pilocarpine in the outcomes we were able to assess. Future research should include participants who have been using these antiglaucoma medications for daily treatment of glaucoma before LTP was performed.
Topics: Adrenergic alpha-2 Receptor Agonists; Antihypertensive Agents; Brimonidine Tartrate; Clonidine; Conjunctiva; Glaucoma, Open-Angle; Humans; Intraocular Pressure; Ocular Hypertension; Pilocarpine; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Trabeculectomy
PubMed: 28231380
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010746.pub2 -
Sexual Medicine Reviews Jul 2016Despite improvements in the care of patients after spinal cord injury (SCI), permanent impairment of locomotion, sensation, and autonomic function remains a major... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Despite improvements in the care of patients after spinal cord injury (SCI), permanent impairment of locomotion, sensation, and autonomic function remains a major hurdle. After the acute stage of injury, recovering sexual function is a high priority.
AIM
To review the efficacy of intracavernous injections (ICIs) in men with SCI and to identify prognostic factors affecting the efficacy of ICIs in this population.
METHODS
Systematic review of the literature was conducted using the PubMed-Medline, Embase, EBSCO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. The literature search was restricted to articles published in English, French, and Spanish up to November 2014 using the key words alprostadil, papaverine, moxisylite, alpha-blocking agent, phentolamine, intracavernous injection, spinal cord injuries, paraplegia, quadriplegia, and erectile dysfunction. Studies involving patients with SCI and erectile dysfunction treated with ICIs of alprostadil, papaverine, and α-blocking agents, including retrospective and prospective cohorts, population studies, and randomized controlled trials, were included.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE
Overall response rate to ICI for erectile dysfunction in patients with SCI.
RESULTS
Of 283 studies identified, 23 involved 713 patients with SCI. ICIs resulted in successful erections in 88% of patients (n = 713, 95% CI = 83%-92%). Erections were obtained in 93% of patients (n = 101, 95% CI = 83%-99%) with the combination of papaverine and phentolamine, in 91% (n = 274, 95% CI = 78%-97%) with papaverine alone, and in 80% (n = 119, 95% CI = 64%-90%) with alprostadil. Type of injected drug, doses, level of injury (complete or incomplete), extent of injury, age, time since injury, and persistence or transience of erections were evaluated, but statistical analysis could not identify specific factors predictive of a response to ICI.
CONCLUSION
ICIs are an effective treatment of erectile dysfunction in men with SCI. No predictive factor for efficacy could be identified. Studies comparing the response to ICI in upper vs lower motor neuron lesions could improve our understanding of ICI failure.
Topics: Alprostadil; Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Male; Moxisylyte; Papaverine; Penile Erection; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Spinal Cord Injuries; Vasodilator Agents
PubMed: 27871959
DOI: 10.1016/j.sxmr.2016.02.005 -
International Journal of Radiation... Mar 2016To evaluate the efficacy of concomitant administration of pilocarpine on radiation-induced xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancers. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy of concomitant administration of pilocarpine on radiation-induced xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancers.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
The PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials were searched to identify randomized, controlled trials studying the effect of concomitant administration of pilocarpine for radiation-induced xerostomia. Included trials were systematically reviewed, and quantifiable outcomes were pooled for meta-analysis. Outcomes of interest included salivary flow, clinician-rated xerostomia grade, patient-reported xerostomia scoring, quality of life, and adverse effects.
RESULTS
Six prospective, randomized, controlled trials in 8 articles were included in this systematic review. The total number of patients was 369 in the pilocarpine group and 367 in the control group. Concomitant administration of pilocarpine during radiation could increase the unstimulated salivary flow rate in a period of 3 to 6 months after treatment, and also reduce the clinician-rated xerostomia grade. Patient-reported xerostomia was not significantly impacted by pilocarpine in the initial 3 months but was superior at 6 months. No significant difference of stimulated salivary flow rate could be confirmed between the 2 arms. Adverse effects of pilocarpine were mild and tolerable.
CONCLUSIONS
The concomitant administration of pilocarpine during radiation increases unstimulated salivary flow rate and reduces clinician-rated xerostomia grade after radiation. It also relieves patients' xerostomia at 6 months and possibly at 12 months. However, pilocarpine has no effect on stimulated salivary flow rate.
Topics: Cholinergic Agonists; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Pilocarpine; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Salivation; Xerostomia
PubMed: 26867879
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2015.11.012