-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2020Cesarean delivery is one of the most common surgical procedures performed by obstetricians. Infectious morbidity after cesarean delivery can have a tremendous impact on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Cesarean delivery is one of the most common surgical procedures performed by obstetricians. Infectious morbidity after cesarean delivery can have a tremendous impact on the postpartum woman's return to normal function and her ability to care for her baby. Despite the widespread use of prophylactic antibiotics, postoperative infectious morbidity still complicates cesarean deliveries. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2010 and subsequently updated in 2012, twice in 2014, in 2017 and 2018.
OBJECTIVES
To determine if cleansing the vagina with an antiseptic solution before a cesarean delivery decreases the risk of maternal infectious morbidities, including endometritis and wound complications. We also assessed the side effects of vaginal cleansing solutions to determine adverse events associated with the intervention.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (7 July 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs assessing the impact of vaginal cleansing immediately before cesarean delivery with any type of antiseptic solution versus a placebo solution/standard of care on post-cesarean infectious morbidity. Cluster-RCTs were eligible for inclusion, but we did not identify any. We excluded trials that utilized vaginal preparation during labor or that did not use antibiotic surgical prophylaxis. We also excluded any trials using a cross-over design. We included trials published in abstract form only if sufficient information was present in the abstract on methods and outcomes to analyze.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least three of the review authors independently assessed eligibility of the studies. Two review authors were assigned to extract study characteristics, quality assessments, and data from eligible studies.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 21 trials, reporting results for 7038 women evaluating the effects of vaginal cleansing (17 using povidone-iodine, 3 chlorhexidine, 1 benzalkonium chloride) on post-cesarean infectious morbidity. Trials used vaginal preparations administered by sponge sticks, douches, or soaked gauze wipes. The control groups were typically no vaginal preparation (17 trials) or the use of a saline vaginal preparation (4 trials). One trial did not report on any outcomes of interest. Trials were performed in 10 different countries (Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Thailand, Turkey, USA, Egypt, UK, Kenya and India). The overall risk of bias was low for areas of attrition, reporting, and other bias. About half of the trials had low risk of selection bias, with most of the remainder rated as unclear. Due to lack of blinding, we rated performance bias as high risk in nearly one-third of the trials, low risk in one-third, and unclear in one-third. Vaginal preparation with antiseptic solution immediately before cesarean delivery probably reduces the incidence of post-cesarean endometritis from 7.1% in control groups to 3.1% in vaginal cleansing groups (average risk ratio (aRR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.58; 20 trials, 6918 women; moderate-certainty evidence). This reduction in endometritis was seen for both iodine-based solutions and chlorhexidine-based solutions. Risks of postoperative fever and postoperative wound infection are also probably reduced by vaginal antiseptic preparation (fever: aRR 0.64, 0.50 to 0.82; 16 trials, 6163 women; and wound infection: RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.77; 18 trials, 6385 women; both moderate-certainty evidence). Two trials found that there may be a lower risk of a composite outcome of wound complication or endometritis in women receiving preoperative vaginal preparation (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.82; 2 trials, 499 women; low-certainty evidence). No adverse effects were reported with either the povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine vaginal cleansing. Subgroup analysis suggested a greater effect with vaginal preparations for those women in labour versus those not in labour for four out of five outcomes examined (post-cesarean endometritis; postoperative fever; postoperative wound infection; composite wound complication or endometritis). This apparent difference needs to be investigated further in future trials. We did not observe any subgroup differences between women with ruptured membranes and women with intact membranes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Vaginal preparation with povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine solution compared to saline or not cleansing immediately before cesarean delivery probably reduces the risk of post-cesarean endometritis, postoperative fever, and postoperative wound infection. Subgroup analysis found that these benefits were typically present whether iodine-based or chlorhexidine-based solutions were used and when women were in labor before the cesarean. The suggested benefit in women in labor needs further investigation in future trials. There was moderate-certainty evidence using GRADE for all reported outcomes, with downgrading decisions based on limitations in study design or imprecision. As a simple intervention, providers may consider implementing preoperative vaginal cleansing with povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine before performing cesarean deliveries. Future research on this intervention being incorporated into bundles of care plans for women receiving cesarean delivery will be needed.
Topics: Administration, Intravaginal; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Benzalkonium Compounds; Cesarean Section; Chlorhexidine; Disinfection; Endometritis; Female; Fever; Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Pregnancy; Preoperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 32335895
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007892.pub7 -
Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia Sep 2019This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of using preservative-free artificial tears versus preserved lubricants for the treatment of dry eyes in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of using preservative-free artificial tears versus preserved lubricants for the treatment of dry eyes in Universidade Federal de Alagoas (PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018089933). Online databases were searched (LILACS, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL) from inception to April 2018; references from included papers were also searched. The following keywords were used: lubricants OR artificial tears OR artificial tears, lubricants AND dry eye OR dry eye syndrome OR syndromes, dry eye OR dry eyes. Among the 2028 electronic search results, 29 full papers were retrieved and four were considered relevant. The number of participants from these studies ranged from 15 to 76. Meta-analysis was possible for the following outcomes: score of symptoms according to the Ocular Surface Disease Index - Allergan (OSDI), tear secretion rate using the Schirmer test, tear evaporation rate using the tear film breakup time test, burning, foreign body sensation, and photophobia. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups, and no side effects were attributed to the interventions. Evidence proving that preservative-free artificial tears are more effective than preserved artificial tears is lacking.
Topics: Bias; Dry Eye Syndromes; Female; Humans; Lubricant Eye Drops; Male; Ophthalmic Solutions; Preservatives, Pharmaceutical; Tears
PubMed: 31508669
DOI: 10.5935/0004-2749.20190097 -
Genes & Nutrition 2019Culinary herbs and spices have been used as both food flavoring and food preservative agents for centuries. Moreover, due to their known and presumptive health benefits,... (Review)
Review
Culinary herbs and spices have been used as both food flavoring and food preservative agents for centuries. Moreover, due to their known and presumptive health benefits, herbs and spices have also been used in medical practices since ancient times. Some of the health effects attributed to herbs and spices include antioxidant, anti-microbial, and anti-inflammatory effects as well as potential protection against cardiovascular disease, neurodegeneration, type 2 diabetes, and cancer. While interest in herbs and spices as medicinal agents remains high and their use in foods continues to grow, there have been remarkably few studies that have attempted to track the dietary intake of herbs and spices and even fewer that have tried to find potential biomarkers of food intake (BFIs). The aim of the present review is to systematically survey the global literature on herbs and spices in an effort to identify and evaluate specific intake biomarkers for a representative set of common herbs and spices in humans. A total of 25 herbs and spices were initially chosen, including anise, basil, black pepper, caraway, chili pepper, cinnamon, clove, cumin, curcumin, dill, fennel, fenugreek, ginger, lemongrass, marjoram, nutmeg, oregano, parsley, peppermint and spearmint, rosemary, saffron, sage, tarragon, and thyme. However, only 17 of these herbs and spices had published, peer-reviewed studies describing potential biomarkers of intake. In many studies, the herb or spice of interest was administrated in the form of a capsule or extract and very few studies were performed with actual foods. A systematic assessment of the candidate biomarkers was also performed. Given the limitations in the experimental designs for many of the published studies, further work is needed to better evaluate the identified set of BFIs. Although the daily intake of herbs and spices is very low compared to most other foods, this important set of food seasoning agents should not be underestimated, especially given their potential benefits to human health.
PubMed: 31143299
DOI: 10.1186/s12263-019-0636-8 -
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology :... Nov 2018Pyroligneous extract is applied in diverse areas as an antioxidant, an antimicrobial, and an anti-inflammatory agent. The discovery of new cost-effective antimicrobial...
Pyroligneous extract is applied in diverse areas as an antioxidant, an antimicrobial, and an anti-inflammatory agent. The discovery of new cost-effective antimicrobial agents of natural origin remains a challenge for the scientific community. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and a technological forecasting of the existent evidence regarding the use of pyroligneous extract as a potential antimicrobial agent. Studies were identified through an investigation of various electronic databases: PubMed, SciFinder, Web of Science, Scopus, Scielo, Google scholar, and ProQuest. Patents were searched through INPI, Google patents, Espacenet, Patents online, USPTO, and WIPO. The literature on antimicrobial activity of pyroligneous extract are limited given the short duration of studies and variability in study design, use of pyroligneous preparations, and reports on results. However, evidence suggests the potential of pyroligneous extract as a natural antimicrobial agent. The most studied activity was the role of PE as a food preservative. However, pyroligneous extracts are also effective against pathogenic bacteria in the oral microflora and treatment of candidal infections. Further research is needed using standardized preparations of pyroligneous extracts to determine their long-term effectiveness and ability as antimicrobial agents.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Infective Agents; Bacteria; Food Preservatives; Fungi; Humans; Plant Extracts; Wood
PubMed: 30150086
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjm.2018.07.001 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2018Ear wax (cerumen) is a normal bodily secretion that can become a problem when it obstructs the ear canal. Symptoms attributed to wax (such as deafness and pain) are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ear wax (cerumen) is a normal bodily secretion that can become a problem when it obstructs the ear canal. Symptoms attributed to wax (such as deafness and pain) are among the commonest reasons for patients to present to primary care with ear trouble.Wax is part of the ear's self-cleaning mechanism and is usually naturally expelled from the ear canal without causing problems. When this mechanism fails, wax is retained in the canal and may become impacted; interventions to encourage its removal may then be needed. Application of ear drops is one of these methods. Liquids used to remove and soften wax are of several kinds: oil-based compounds (e.g. olive or almond oil); water-based compounds (e.g. sodium bicarbonate or water itself); a combination of the above or non-water, non-oil-based solutions, such as carbamide peroxide (a hydrogen peroxide-urea compound) and glycerol.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of ear drops (or sprays) to remove or aid the removal of ear wax in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; Cochrane Register of Studies; PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 23 March 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which a 'cerumenolytic' was compared with no treatment, water or saline, an alternative liquid treatment (oil or almond oil) or another 'cerumenolytic' in adults or children with obstructing or impacted ear wax.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were 1) the proportion of patients (or ears) with complete clearance of ear wax and 2) adverse effects (discomfort, irritation or pain). Secondary outcomes were: extent of wax clearance; proportion of people (or ears) with relief of symptoms due to wax; proportion of people (or ears) requiring further intervention to remove wax; success of mechanical removal of residual wax following treatment; any other adverse effects recorded and cost. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 studies, with 623 participants (900 ears). Interventions included: oil-based treatments (triethanolamine polypeptide, almond oil, benzocaine, chlorobutanol), water-based treatments (docusate sodium, carbamide peroxide, phenazone, choline salicylate, urea peroxide, potassium carbonate), other active comparators (e.g. saline or water alone) and no treatment. Nine of the studies were more than 15 years old.The overall risk of bias across the 10 included studies was low or unclear.
PRIMARY OUTCOME
proportion of patients (or ears) with complete clearance of ear waxSix studies (360 participants; 491 ears) contributed quantitative data and were included in our meta-analyses.Active treatment versus no treatmentOnly one study addressed this comparison. The proportion of ears with complete clearance of ear wax was higher in the active treatment group (22%) compared with the no treatment group (5%) after five days of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 4.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 16.80); one study; 117 ears; NNTB = 8) (low-quality evidence).Active treatment versus water or salineWe found no evidence of a difference in the proportion of patients (or ears) with complete clearance of ear wax when the active treatment group was compared to the water or saline group (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.75; three studies; 213 participants; 257 ears) (low-quality evidence). Two studies applied drops for five days, but one study only applied the drops for 15 minutes. When we excluded this study in a sensitivity analysis it did not change the result.Water or saline versus no treatmentThis comparison was only addressed in the single study cited above (active versus no treatment) and there was no evidence of a difference in the proportion of ears with complete wax clearance when comparing water or saline with no treatment after five days of treatment (RR 4.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 17.62; one study; 76 ears) (low-quality evidence).Active treatment A versus active treatment BSeveral single studies evaluated 'head-to-head' comparisons between two active treatments. We found no evidence to show that one was superior to any other.Subgroup analysis of oil-based active treatments versus non-oil based active treatmentsWe found no evidence of a difference in this outcome when oil-based treatments were compared with non-oil-based active treatments.
PRIMARY OUTCOME
adverse effects: discomfort, irritation or painOnly seven studies planned to measure and did report this outcome. Only two (141 participants;176 ears) provided useable data. There was no evidence of a significant difference in the number of adverse effects between the types of ear drops in these two studies. We summarised the remaining five studies narratively. All events were mild and reported in fewer than 30 participants across the seven studies (low-quality evidence).Secondary outcomesThree studies reported 'other' adverse effects (how many studies planned to report these is unclear). The available information was limited and included occasional reports of dizziness, unpleasant smell, tinnitus and hearing loss. No significant differences between groups were reported. There were no emergencies or serious adverse effects reported in any of the 10 studies.There was very limited or no information available on our remaining secondary outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although a number of studies aimed to evaluate whether or not one type of cerumenolytic is more effective than another, there is no high-quality evidence to allow a firm conclusion to be drawn and the answer remains uncertain.A single study suggests that applying ear drops for five days may result in a greater likelihood of complete wax clearance than no treatment at all. However, we cannot conclude whether one type of active treatment is more effective than another and there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy between oil-based and water-based active treatments.There is no evidence to show that using saline or water alone is better or worse than commercially produced cerumenolytics. Equally, there is also no evidence to show that using saline or water alone is better than no treatment.
Topics: Adult; Antipyrine; Benzocaine; Carbamide Peroxide; Carbonates; Cerumen; Child; Chlorobutanol; Choline; Dioctyl Sulfosuccinic Acid; Drug Combinations; Ear Canal; Ethanolamines; Humans; Hygiene; Peroxides; Pharmaceutical Solutions; Plant Oils; Potassium; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Salicylates; Sodium Chloride; Surface-Active Agents; Urea; Water
PubMed: 30043448
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012171.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2018Cesarean delivery is one of the most common surgical procedures performed by obstetricians. Infectious morbidity after cesarean delivery can have a tremendous impact on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cesarean delivery is one of the most common surgical procedures performed by obstetricians. Infectious morbidity after cesarean delivery can have a tremendous impact on the postpartum woman's return to normal function and her ability to care for her baby. Despite the widespread use of prophylactic antibiotics, postoperative infectious morbidity still complicates cesarean deliveries. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2010 and subsequently updated in 2012, and twice in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To determine if cleansing the vagina with an antiseptic solution before a cesarean delivery decreases the risk of maternal infectious morbidities, including endometritis and wound complications. We also assessed the side effects of vaginal cleansing solutions to determine adverse events associated with the intervention.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (10 July 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized trials and one quasi-randomized trial assessing the impact of vaginal cleansing immediately before cesarean delivery with any type of antiseptic solution versus a placebo solution/standard of care on post-cesarean infectious morbidity. Cluster-randomized trials were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. We excluded trials that utilized vaginal preparation during labor or that did not use antibiotic surgical prophylaxis. We also excluded any trials using a cross-over design.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least three of the review authors independently assessed eligibility of the studies. Two review authors were assigned to extract study characteristics, quality assessments, and data from eligible studies.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 trials reporting results for 3403 women evaluating the effects of vaginal cleansing (eight using povidone-iodine, two chlorhexidine, one benzalkonium chloride) on post-cesarean infectious morbidity. Additionally, some trials used vaginal preparations using sponge sticks, douches, or soaked gauze wipes. The control groups were typically no vaginal preparation (eight trials) or the use of a saline vaginal preparation (three trials). The risk of bias in the studies reduced our confidence in the results for endometritis outcomes.Vaginal preparation with antiseptic solution immediately before cesarean delivery probably reduces the incidence of post-cesarean endometritis from 8.7% in control groups to 3.8% in vaginal cleansing groups (average risk ratio (RR) 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.63, 10 trials, 3283 women, moderate quality of evidence). Subgroup analysis could not rule out larger reductions in endometritis with antiseptics in women who were in labor or in women whose membranes had ruptured when antiseptics were used. Risks of postoperative fever and postoperative wound infection may be slightly lowered by antiseptic preparation, but the confidence intervals around the effects for both outcomes are consistent with a large reduction in risk and no difference between groups (fever: RR 0.87 (0.72 to 1.05; wound infection: RR 0.74 (95% CI 0.49 to 1.11), both moderate-quality evidence). Two trials reported a lower risk of a composite outcome of wound complication or endometritis in women receiving preoperative vaginal preparation (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.82, two trials, 499 women, moderate-quality evidence). No adverse effects were reported with either the povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine vaginal cleansing.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Vaginal preparation with povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine solution compared to saline or not cleansing immediately before cesarean delivery probably reduces the risk of post-cesarean endometritis. Subgroup analysis could not rule out larger reductions in endometritis with antiseptics in women who were in labor or in women whose membranes had ruptured when antiseptics were used.The quality of the evidence using GRADE was moderate for all reported outcomes. We downgraded the outcome of post-cesarean endometritis and composite of wound complications or endometritis for risk of bias and postoperative fever and postoperative wound infections for wide CIs.As a simple, generally inexpensive intervention, providers may consider implementing preoperative vaginal cleansing with povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine before performing cesarean deliveries.
Topics: Administration, Intravaginal; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Benzalkonium Compounds; Cesarean Section; Chlorhexidine; Disinfection; Endometritis; Female; Fever; Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Pregnancy; Preoperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical Wound Infection; Vagina
PubMed: 30016540
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007892.pub6 -
Central European Journal of Public... Sep 2016Over the last decade, the possible association between underarm deodorants/ antiperspirants use and breast cancer risk has raised important interest in the scientific... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Over the last decade, the possible association between underarm deodorants/ antiperspirants use and breast cancer risk has raised important interest in the scientific community. The objective of our systematic review is to estimate the pooled risk of deodorants/antiperspirants use for breast cancer.
METHODS
All observational studies that evaluated the association between breast cancer risk and deodorants/antiperspirants use were reviewed. We have only identified two case-control studies, carried out between 2002 and 2006.
RESULTS
The first study was conducted in USA and investigated the possible relationship between use of products applied for underarm perspiration and the risk for breast cancer in women aged 20-74 years. This population-based case-control study gathered information by in-person interview. The second study was conducted in Iraq and investigated the possible relationship between use of antiperspirants and the risk for breast cancer in women attending a teaching hospital. This study also gathered information by in-person interview. There was no risk of antiperspirants use in the pooled risk (odds ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.46).
CONCLUSION
Our comprehensive search has identified an insufficient number of studies to conduct a quantitative review and obtain reliable results. Further prospective studies are strongly needed.
Topics: Aluminum Compounds; Antiperspirants; Breast Neoplasms; Deodorants; Female; Humans; Parabens; Risk Factors
PubMed: 27755864
DOI: 10.21101/cejph.a4475 -
Clinical Microbiology Reviews Jan 2016Urinary tract infection (UTI) in the United States is the most common bacterial infection, and urine cultures often make up the largest portion of workload for a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Effectiveness of Preanalytic Practices on Contamination and Diagnostic Accuracy of Urine Cultures: a Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Urinary tract infection (UTI) in the United States is the most common bacterial infection, and urine cultures often make up the largest portion of workload for a hospital-based microbiology laboratory. Appropriately managing the factors affecting the preanalytic phase of urine culture contributes significantly to the generation of meaningful culture results that ultimately affect patient diagnosis and management. Urine culture contamination can be reduced with proper techniques for urine collection, preservation, storage, and transport, the major factors affecting the preanalytic phase of urine culture.
OBJECTIVES
The purposes of this review were to identify and evaluate preanalytic practices associated with urine specimens and to assess their impact on the accuracy of urine culture microbiology. Specific practices included collection methods for men, women, and children; preservation of urine samples in boric acid solutions; and the effect of refrigeration on stored urine. Practice efficacy and effectiveness were measured by two parameters: reduction of urine culture contamination and increased accuracy of patient diagnosis. The CDC Laboratory Medicine Best Practices (LMBP) initiative's systematic review method for assessment of quality improvement (QI) practices was employed. Results were then translated into evidence-based practice guidelines.
SEARCH STRATEGY
A search of three electronic bibliographic databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, and CINAHL), as well as hand searching of bibliographies from relevant information sources, for English-language articles published between 1965 and 2014 was conducted.
SELECTION CRITERIA
The search contained the following medical subject headings and key text words: urinary tract infections, UTI, urine/analysis, urine/microbiology, urinalysis, specimen handling, preservation, biological, preservation, boric acid, boric acid/borate, refrigeration, storage, time factors, transportation, transport time, time delay, time factor, timing, urine specimen collection, catheters, indwelling, urinary reservoirs, continent, urinary catheterization, intermittent urethral catheterization, clean voided, midstream, Foley, suprapubic, bacteriological techniques, and microbiological techniques.
MAIN RESULTS
Both boric acid and refrigeration adequately preserved urine specimens prior to their processing for up to 24 h. Urine held at room temperature for more than 4 h showed overgrowth of both clinically significant and contaminating microorganisms. The overall strength of this body of evidence, however, was rated as low. For urine specimens collected from women, there was no difference in rates of contamination for midstream urine specimens collected with or without cleansing. The overall strength of this evidence was rated as high. The levels of diagnostic accuracy of midstream urine collection with or without cleansing were similar, although the overall strength of this evidence was rated as low. For urine specimens collected from men, there was a reduction in contamination in favor of midstream clean-catch over first-void specimen collection. The strength of this evidence was rated as high. Only one study compared midstream collection with cleansing to midstream collection without cleansing. Results showed no difference in contamination between the two methods of collection. However, imprecision was due largely to the small event size. The diagnostic accuracy of midstream urine collection from men compared to straight catheterization or suprapubic aspiration was high. However, the overall strength of this body of evidence was rated as low. For urine specimens collected from children and infants, the evidence comparing contamination rates for midstream urine collection with cleansing, midstream collection without cleansing, sterile urine bag collection, and diaper collection pointed to larger reductions in the odds of contamination in favor of midstream collection with cleansing over the other methods of collection. This body of evidence was rated as high. The accuracy of diagnosis of urinary tract infection from midstream clean-catch urine specimens, sterile urine bag specimens, or diaper specimens compared to straight catheterization or suprapubic aspiration was varied.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
No recommendation for or against is made for delayed processing of urine stored at room temperature, refrigerated, or preserved in boric acid. This does not preclude the use of refrigeration or chemical preservatives in clinical practice. It does indicate, however, that more systematic studies evaluating the utility of these measures are needed. If noninvasive collection is being considered for women, midstream collection with cleansing is recommended, but no recommendation for or against is made for midstream collection without cleansing. If noninvasive collection is being considered for men, midstream collection with cleansing is recommended and collection of first-void urine is not recommended. No recommendation for or against is made for collection of midstream urine without cleansing. If noninvasive collection is being considered for children, midstream collection with cleansing is recommended and collection in sterile urine bags, from diapers, or midstream without cleansing is not recommended. Whether midstream collection with cleansing can be routinely used in place of catheterization or suprapubic aspiration is unclear. The data suggest that midstream collection with cleansing is accurate for the diagnosis of urinary tract infections in infants and children and has higher average accuracy than sterile urine bag collection (data for diaper collection were lacking); however, the overall strength of evidence was low, as multivariate modeling could not be performed, and thus no recommendation for or against can be made.
Topics: Bacterial Infections; Bacteriological Techniques; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Specimen Handling; United States; Urinary Tract Infections; Urine
PubMed: 26598386
DOI: 10.1128/CMR.00030-15 -
The Journal of Clinical Pediatric... 2014Methods of systematic review and meta analysis were employed to compare the success rate of pulpotomy of primary molars using mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and ferric... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Methods of systematic review and meta analysis were employed to compare the success rate of pulpotomy of primary molars using mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and ferric sulfate (FS) as two regenerative and preservative agents, respectively.
STUDY DESIGN
After raising a PICO question (In pulpotomy of vital carious-exposed primary molars, how does MTA compare to FS in terms of clinical and radiographic outcomes?) and determining the search strategy, MeSH-matching keywords were searched in four electronic databases and retrieved papers were examined in titles, and if necessary abstracts and full texts, to be relevant. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating pulpotomy of vital primary molars after carious/traumatic exposure conducted with either FS or MTA, with at least a 6-month recall, tooth restorability, and those considering clinical and radiographic signs/symptoms, were included. The nonrandomized allocation and absence of comparison between the treatment groups caused the exclusion of the article. The quality of the RCTs and also their risk of bias (low, moderate, high), were assessed using a modification of van Tulder list; for meta-analysis of the matching studies, the extracted data were analyzed by Mantel Hanszel analysis.
RESULTS
A total number of 620 articles were found. After exclusion of the common titles and application of the eligibility criteria, 4 RCTs [12-month follow-up: n=3, 24-month follow-up: n=4, in total: 264 teeth) comparing MTA and FS, were selected. It was showed that the 12-month outcome of both materials were similar [RR= 0.642 (CI 95%: 0.225-1.833, P=0.407)], while the two-year follow-up results revealed significant differences in treatment outcome, in favor of MTA [RR was 0.300 (CI 95%: 0.132-0.683, P=0.004)].
CONCLUSION
MTA demonstrated superior long-term treatment outcomes in pulpotomy of primary molars than FS.
Topics: Aluminum Compounds; Calcium Compounds; Dental Pulp Exposure; Drug Combinations; Ferric Compounds; Humans; Molar; Oxides; Pulp Capping and Pulpectomy Agents; Pulpotomy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Silicates; Tooth, Deciduous; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25631717
DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.39.1.b454r616m2582373 -
TheScientificWorldJournal 2014Caffeic acid phenethyl ester (CAPE), an active component of propolis, has been attracting the attention of different medical and pharmaceutical disciplines in recent... (Review)
Review
Caffeic acid phenethyl ester (CAPE), an active component of propolis, has been attracting the attention of different medical and pharmaceutical disciplines in recent years because of its antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antiproliferative, cytotoxic, antiviral, antifungal, and antineoplastic properties. One of the most studied organs for the effects of CAPE is the kidney, particularly in the capacity of this ester to decrease the nephrotoxicity induced by several drugs and the oxidative injury after ischemia/reperfusion (I/R). In this review, we summarized and critically evaluated the current knowledge regarding the protective effect of CAPE in nephrotoxicity induced by several special medicines such as cisplatin, doxorubicin, cyclosporine, gentamycin, methotrexate, and other causes leading to oxidative renal injury, namely, I/R models and senility.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Animals; Antineoplastic Agents; Antioxidants; Caffeic Acids; Humans; Oxidative Stress; Phenylethyl Alcohol
PubMed: 25003138
DOI: 10.1155/2014/561971