-
JAMAMetformin is widely viewed as the best initial pharmacological option to lower glucose concentrations in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, the drug is... (Review)
Review
IMPORTANCE
Metformin is widely viewed as the best initial pharmacological option to lower glucose concentrations in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, the drug is contraindicated in many individuals with impaired kidney function because of concerns of lactic acidosis.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the risk of lactic acidosis associated with metformin use in individuals with impaired kidney function.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
In July 2014, we searched the MEDLINE and Cochrane databases for English-language articles pertaining to metformin, kidney disease, and lactic acidosis in humans between 1950 and June 2014. We excluded reviews, letters, editorials, case reports, small case series, and manuscripts that did not directly pertain to the topic area or that met other exclusion criteria. Of an original 818 articles, 65 were included in this review, including pharmacokinetic/metabolic studies, large case series, retrospective studies, meta-analyses, and a clinical trial.
RESULTS
Although metformin is renally cleared, drug levels generally remain within the therapeutic range and lactate concentrations are not substantially increased when used in patients with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rates, 30-60 mL/min per 1.73 m2). The overall incidence of lactic acidosis in metformin users varies across studies from approximately 3 per 100,000 person-years to 10 per 100,000 person-years and is generally indistinguishable from the background rate in the overall population with diabetes. Data suggesting an increased risk of lactic acidosis in metformin-treated patients with chronic kidney disease are limited, and no randomized controlled trials have been conducted to test the safety of metformin in patients with significantly impaired kidney function. Population-based studies demonstrate that metformin may be prescribed counter to prevailing guidelines suggesting a renal risk in up to 1 in 4 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus--use which, in most reports, has not been associated with increased rates of lactic acidosis. Observational studies suggest a potential benefit from metformin on macrovascular outcomes, even in patients with prevalent renal contraindications for its use.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Available evidence supports cautious expansion of metformin use in patients with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease, as defined by estimated glomerular filtration rate, with appropriate dosage reductions and careful follow-up of kidney function.
Topics: Acidosis, Lactic; Contraindications; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Metformin; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Risk
PubMed: 25536258
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.15298 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2016Child and adolescent obesity has increased globally, and can be associated with significant short- and long-term health consequences. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Child and adolescent obesity has increased globally, and can be associated with significant short- and long-term health consequences.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy of drug interventions for the treatment of obesity in children and adolescents.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed (subsets not available on Ovid), LILACS as well as the trial registers ICTRP (WHO) and ClinicalTrials.gov. Searches were undertaken from inception to March 2016. We checked references and applied no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of pharmacological interventions for treating obesity (licensed and unlicensed for this indication) in children and adolescents (mean age under 18 years) with or without support of family members, with a minimum of three months' pharmacological intervention and six months' follow-up from baseline. We excluded interventions that specifically dealt with the treatment of eating disorders or type 2 diabetes, or included participants with a secondary or syndromic cause of obesity. In addition, we excluded trials which included growth hormone therapies and pregnant participants.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data following standard Cochrane methodology. Where necessary we contacted authors for additional information.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 21 trials and identified eight ongoing trials. The included trials evaluated metformin (11 trials), sibutramine (six trials), orlistat (four trials), and one trial arm investigated the combination of metformin and fluoxetine. The ongoing trials evaluated metformin (four trials), topiramate (two trials) and exenatide (two trials). A total of 2484 people participated in the included trials, 1478 participants were randomised to drug intervention and 904 to comparator groups (91 participants took part in two cross-over trials; 11 participants not specified). Eighteen trials used a placebo in the comparator group. Two trials had a cross-over design while the remaining 19 trials were parallel RCTs. The length of the intervention period ranged from 12 weeks to 48 weeks, and the length of follow-up from baseline ranged from six months to 100 weeks.Trials generally had a low risk of bias for random sequence generation, allocation concealment and blinding (participants, personnel and assessors) for subjective and objective outcomes. We judged approximately half of the trials as having a high risk of bias in one or more domain such as selective reporting.The primary outcomes of this review were change in body mass index (BMI), change in weight and adverse events. All 21 trials measured these outcomes. The secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (only one trial reported results showing no marked differences; very low certainty evidence), body fat distribution (measured in 18 trials), behaviour change (measured in six trials), participants' views of the intervention (not reported), morbidity associated with the intervention (measured in one orlistat trial only reporting more new gallstones following the intervention; very low certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (one suicide in the orlistat intervention group; low certainty evidence) and socioeconomic effects (not reported).Intervention versus comparator for mean difference (MD) in BMI change was -1.3 kg/m (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.9 to -0.8; P < 0.00001; 16 trials; 1884 participants; low certainty evidence). When split by drug type, sibutramine, metformin and orlistat all showed reductions in BMI in favour of the intervention.Intervention versus comparator for change in weight showed a MD of -3.9 kg (95% CI -5.9 to -1.9; P < 0.00001; 11 trials; 1180 participants; low certainty evidence). As with BMI, when the trials were split by drug type, sibutramine, metformin and orlistat all showed reductions in weight in favour of the intervention.Five trials reported serious adverse events: 24/878 (2.7%) participants in the intervention groups versus 8/469 (1.7%) participants in the comparator groups (risk ratio (RR) 1.43, 95% CI 0.63 to 3.25; 1347 participants; low certainty evidence). A total 52/1043 (5.0%) participants in the intervention groups versus 17/621 (2.7%) in the comparator groups discontinued the trial because of adverse events (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.52; 10 trials; 1664 participants; low certainty evidence). The most common adverse events in orlistat and metformin trials were gastrointestinal (such as diarrhoea, mild abdominal pain or discomfort, fatty stools). The most frequent adverse events in sibutramine trials included tachycardia, constipation and hypertension. The single fluoxetine trial reported dry mouth and loose stools. No trial investigated drug treatment for overweight children.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review is part of a series of associated Cochrane reviews on interventions for obese children and adolescents and has shown that pharmacological interventions (metformin, sibutramine, orlistat and fluoxetine) may have small effects in reduction in BMI and bodyweight in obese children and adolescents. However, many of these drugs are not licensed for the treatment of obesity in children and adolescents, or have been withdrawn. Trials were generally of low quality with many having a short or no post-intervention follow-up period and high dropout rates (overall dropout of 25%). Future research should focus on conducting trials with sufficient power and long-term follow-up, to ensure the long-term effects of any pharmacological intervention are comprehensively assessed. Adverse events should be reported in a more standardised manner specifying amongst other things the number of participants experiencing at least one adverse event. The requirement of regulatory authorities (US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency) for trials of all new medications to be used in children and adolescents should drive an increase in the number of high quality trials.
Topics: Adolescent; Anti-Obesity Agents; Body Mass Index; Child; Cyclobutanes; Fluoxetine; Humans; Lactones; Metformin; Orlistat; Pediatric Obesity; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27899001
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012436 -
Journal of Endodontics Apr 2016This systematic review aimed to compare the effectiveness of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine for root canal disinfection during root canal therapy. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
This systematic review aimed to compare the effectiveness of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine for root canal disinfection during root canal therapy.
METHODS
A literature search for clinical trials was made on the PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Knowledge, SCOPUS, and Science Direct databases and in the reference lists of the identified articles up to January 2015. Quality assessment of the selected studies was performed according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement.
RESULTS
One clinical trial and 4 randomized clinical trials were selected from the 172 articles initially identified. There was heterogeneity in the laboratory methods used to assess the root canal disinfection as well as in the concentrations of the irrigants used. Therefore, meta-analysis was not performed. Two studies reported effective and similar reductions in bacterial levels for both irrigants. Sodium hypochlorite was more effective than chlorhexidine in reducing microorganisms in 1 study, and another reported opposite findings. Both root irrigants were ineffective in eliminating endotoxins from necrotic pulp root canals in 1 study. Trial design and information regarding randomization procedures were not clearly described in the clinical trials. No study compared laboratory results with clinical outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence on this topic is scarce, and the findings of studies were not consistent. Additional randomized clinical trials using clinical outcomes to compare the use of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine during root canal therapy are needed.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents; Bacteria; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Root Canal Irrigants; Root Canal Preparation; Root Canal Therapy; Sodium Hypochlorite
PubMed: 26852149
DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.12.021 -
The Lancet. Microbe Oct 2022Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common postoperative complication and substantially increases health-care costs. Published meta-analyses and international... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common postoperative complication and substantially increases health-care costs. Published meta-analyses and international guidelines differ with regard to which preoperative skin antiseptic solution and concentration has the highest efficacy. We aimed to compare the efficacy of different skin preparation solutions and concentrations for the prevention of SSIs, and to provide an overview of current guidelines.
METHODS
This systematic review and network meta-analysis compared different preoperative skin antiseptics in the prevention of SSIs in adult patients undergoing surgery of any wound classification. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL, published up to Nov 23, 2021, that directly compared two or more antiseptic agents (ie, chlorhexidine, iodine, or olanexidine) or concentrations in aqueous and alcohol-based solutions. We excluded paediatric, animal, and non-randomised studies, and studies not providing standard preoperative intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis. Studies with no SSIs in both groups were excluded from the quantitative analysis. Two reviewers screened and reviewed eligible full texts and extracted data. The primary outcome was the occurrence of SSI (ie, superficial, deep, and organ space). We conducted a frequentist random effects network meta-analysis to estimate the network effects of the skin preparation solutions on the prevention of SSIs. A risk-of-bias and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation assessment were done to determine the certainty of the evidence. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021293554.
FINDINGS
Overall, 2326 articles were identified, 33 studies were eligible for the systematic review, and 27 studies with 17 735 patients reporting 2144 SSIs (overall incidence of 12·1%) were included in the quantitative analysis. Only 2·0-2·5% chlorhexidine in alcohol (relative risk 0·75, 95% CI 0·61-0·92) and 1·5% olanexidine (0·49, 0·26-0·92) significantly reduced the rate of SSIs compared with aqueous iodine. For clean surgery, we found no difference in efficacy between different concentrations of chlorhexidine in alcohol. Seven RCTs were at high risk of bias, 24 had some concerns, and two had low risk of bias. Heterogeneity across the studies was moderate (I=27·5%), and netsplitting did not show inconsistencies between direct and indirect comparisons. Five of ten studies that mentioned adverse events related to the skin preparation solutions reported no adverse events, and five reported a total of 56 mild events (mainly erythema, pruritus, dermatitis, skin irritation, or mild allergic symptoms); none reported a substantial difference in adverse events between groups.
INTERPRETATION
For adult patients undergoing a surgical procedure of any wound classification, skin preparation using either 2·0-2·5% chlorhexidine in alcohol or 1·5% olanexidine is most effective in the prevention of SSIs. For clean surgery, no specific concentration of chlorhexidine in alcohol can be recommended. The efficacy of olanexidine was established by a single randomised trial and further investigation is needed.
FUNDING
Dutch Association for Quality Funds Medical Specialists.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Biguanides; Chlorhexidine; Ethanol; GRADE Approach; Humans; Incidence; Iodine; Network Meta-Analysis; Povidone-Iodine; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 35985350
DOI: 10.1016/S2666-5247(22)00187-2 -
Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome Oct 2022Metformin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients are at higher risk of vitamin B deficiency and more severe neuropathy symptoms. There is still no guideline... (Review)
Review
The efficacy of vitamin B supplementation for treating vitamin B deficiency and peripheral neuropathy in metformin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus patients: A systematic review.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Metformin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients are at higher risk of vitamin B deficiency and more severe neuropathy symptoms. There is still no guideline suggesting vitamin B supplementation for this population. This study aimed to analyze the efficacy of vitamin B supplementation in this population.
METHOD
Studies reporting the efficacy of vitamin B supplementation in metformin-treated T2DM patients were systematically searched in PubMed, Cochrane, EBSCOHost, and Scopus following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Additional relevant studies were searched manually through citations. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using suitable tools.
RESULTS
Seven clinical trials with a total of 506 participants were included. Using the Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2 tools for clinical trials, 4 studies were assessed to have high risk of bias and 3 studies had low risk of bias. There were 5 studies that measured changes in serum vitamin B level, all of which reported a statistically significant increase after supplementation. Significant reductions in homocysteine after supplementation were found in 2 studies. Its effect on neuropathy symptoms was still unclear, with 2 studies reporting a significant improvement and 1 study reporting no significant effect.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this systematic review support the implementation of vitamin B supplementation for metformin-treated T2DM to prevent or treat vitamin B deficiency and neuropathy. More high-quality clinical studies are required to generate quantitative analysis and to encourage supplementation in available guidelines.
Topics: Humans; Metformin; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Vitamin B 12; Hypoglycemic Agents; Vitamin B 12 Deficiency; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Homocysteine; Dietary Supplements; Vitamins
PubMed: 36240684
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2022.102634 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2023This study aimed to perform a network meta-analysis to objectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of 10 Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) in... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
This study aimed to perform a network meta-analysis to objectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of 10 Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) in combination with metformin that is approved for use worldwide in patients with type 2 diabetes and to provide evidence-based support and reference for the selection of clinical treatment.
METHODS
Three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were searched from their respective inception until September 30, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of GLP-1RAs for treating type 2 diabetes (T2D) were included. The 10 GLP-1RAs are exenatide (including exenatide twice daily and once weekly), liraglutide, lixisenatide, dulaglutide, PEX168, semaglutide (subcutaneous and oral semaglutide), tirzepatide and albiglutide.
RESULTS
34 RCTs with 10 GLP-1RAs and 12993 patients were included in the Network Meta-Analysis (NMA). According to the NMA, tirzepatide 15 mg, semaglutide 1.0 mg, PEX168-200μg, oral semaglutide 14 and dulaglutide 1.5 mg reduced HbA1c by -2.23%, -1.57%, -1.12%, -1.10%, -1.09% and body weight by -11.33 kg, -5.99 kg, +0.40 kg, -3.95 kg, -1.87 kg, respectively. There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse events for tirzepatide 15 mg, oral-semaglutide 14 mg, and semaglutide 1.0 mg. PEX168-200μg, tirzepatide 15mg, and oral semaglutide 14mg had Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) values greater than placebo, and only tirzepatide 15mg and oral semaglutide 14mg were significantly different from placebo in the rate of serious adverse events. All GLP-1RA did not lead to increased incidence of hypoglycemia. Albiglutide 30mg and semaglutide 1.0mg significantly differed from placebo in Adverse Event (AE) withdrawal. Finally, the sensitivity analysis and publication bias analysis results indicate that the study results are reliable.
CONCLUSION
This study's results showed that GLP-1RAs were effective in lowering HbA1c and reducing body weight without increased incidence of hypoglycemic reactions. In addition, this study may provide reference and evidence-based medical evidence for clinicians to select GLP-1RAs in patients with T2D and high body mass index (BMI). Based on the NMA results, tirzepatide 15mg and semaglutide 1.0mg may be preferred.
Topics: Humans; Body Weight; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Exenatide; Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor; Glycated Hemoglobin; Metformin
PubMed: 37701904
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1244432 -
PLoS Medicine Aug 2019Metformin is increasingly offered as an acceptable and economic alternative to insulin for treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in many countries. However,... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Metformin is increasingly offered as an acceptable and economic alternative to insulin for treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in many countries. However, the impact of maternal metformin treatment on the trajectory of fetal, infant, and childhood growth is unknown.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
PubMed, Ovid Embase, Medline, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane database were systematically searched (from database inception to 26 February 2019). Outcomes of GDM-affected pregnancies randomised to treatment with metformin versus insulin were included (randomised controlled trials and prospective randomised controlled studies) from cohorts including European, American, Asian, Australian, and African women. Studies including pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes or non-diabetic women were excluded, as were trials comparing metformin treatment with oral glucose-lowering agents other than insulin. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for eligibility and risk of bias, and conflicts were resolved by a third reviewer. Outcome measures were parameters of fetal, infant, and childhood growth, including weight, height, BMI, and body composition. In total, 28 studies (n = 3,976 participants) met eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. No studies reported fetal growth parameters; 19 studies (n = 3,723 neonates) reported measures of neonatal growth. Neonates born to metformin-treated mothers had lower birth weights (mean difference -107.7 g, 95% CI -182.3 to -32.7, I2 = 83%, p = 0.005) and lower ponderal indices (mean difference -0.13 kg/m3, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.00, I2 = 0%, p = 0.04) than neonates of insulin-treated mothers. The odds of macrosomia (odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.77, p < 0.001) and large for gestational age (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.99, p = 0.04) were lower following maternal treatment with metformin compared to insulin. There was no difference in neonatal height or incidence of small for gestational age between groups. Two studies (n = 411 infants) reported measures of infant growth (18-24 months of age). In contrast to the neonatal phase, metformin-exposed infants were significantly heavier than those in the insulin-exposed group (mean difference 440 g, 95% CI 50 to 830, I2 = 4%, p = 0.03). Three studies (n = 520 children) reported mid-childhood growth parameters (5-9 years). In mid-childhood, BMI was significantly higher (mean difference 0.78 kg/m2, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.33, I2 = 7%, p = 0.005) following metformin exposure than following insulin exposure, although the difference in absolute weights between the groups was not significantly different (p = 0.09). Limited evidence (1 study with data treated as 2 cohorts) suggested that adiposity indices (abdominal [p = 0.02] and visceral [p = 0.03] fat volumes) may be higher in children born to metformin-treated compared to insulin-treated mothers. Study limitations include heterogeneity in metformin dosing, heterogeneity in diagnostic criteria for GDM, and the scarcity of reporting of childhood outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Following intrauterine exposure to metformin for treatment of maternal GDM, neonates are significantly smaller than neonates whose mothers were treated with insulin during pregnancy. Despite lower average birth weight, metformin-exposed children appear to experience accelerated postnatal growth, resulting in heavier infants and higher BMI by mid-childhood compared to children whose mothers were treated with insulin. Such patterns of low birth weight and postnatal catch-up growth have been reported to be associated with adverse long-term cardio-metabolic outcomes. This suggests a need for further studies examining longitudinal perinatal and childhood outcomes following intrauterine metformin exposure. This review protocol was registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42018117503.
Topics: Child Development; Child, Preschool; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Insulin; Metformin; Pregnancy
PubMed: 31386659
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002848 -
Acta Diabetologica May 2023To expand the evidence base for the clinical use of metformin, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Short-term neonatal outcomes in women with gestational diabetes treated using metformin versus insulin: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
AIMS
To expand the evidence base for the clinical use of metformin, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of metformin versus insulin with respect to short-term neonatal outcomes.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) was performed. Two reviewers extracted the data and calculated pooled estimates by use of a random-effects model. In total, 24 studies involving 4355 participants met the eligibility criteria and were included in the quantitative analyses.
RESULTS
Unlike insulin, metformin lowered neonatal birth weights (mean difference - 122.76 g; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 178.31, - 67.21; p < 0.0001), the risk of macrosomia (risk ratio [RR] 0.68; 95% CI 0.54, 0.86; p = 0.001), the incidence of neonatal intensive care unit admission (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.61, 0.88; p = 0.0009), and the incidence of neonatal hypoglycemia (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.52, 0.81; p = 0.0001). Subgroup analysis based on the maximum daily oral dose of metformin indicated that metformin-induced neonatal birth weight loss was independent of the oral dose.
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analysis provides further evidence that metformin is a safe oral antihyperglycemic drug and has some benefits over insulin when used for the treatment of gestational diabetes, without an increased risk of short-term neonatal adverse outcomes. Metformin may be particularly useful in women with gestational diabetes at high risk for neonatal hypoglycemia, women who want to limit maternal and fetal weight gain, and women with an inability to afford or use insulin safely.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Diabetes, Gestational; Metformin; Insulin; Hypoglycemic Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Hypoglycemia; Birth Weight; Weight Gain
PubMed: 36593391
DOI: 10.1007/s00592-022-02016-5 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Jan 2019Biofilm management and infection control are essential after periodontal and implant surgery. In this context, chlorhexidine (CHX) mouth-rinses are frequently...
BACKGROUND
Biofilm management and infection control are essential after periodontal and implant surgery. In this context, chlorhexidine (CHX) mouth-rinses are frequently recommended post-surgically. Despite its common use and many studies in this field, a systematic evaluation of the benefits after periodontal or implant surgery is-surprisingly-still missing.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits of chlorhexidine rinsing after periodontal or implant surgery in terms of plaque and inflammation reduction potential. Furthermore, to screen whether the concentration changes or additives in CHX solutions reduce side effects associated with its use.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed for clinical trials, which compared CHX rinsing after periodontal or implant surgery with rinsing using placebo, non-staining formulations, or solutions with reduced concentrations of the active compound. Four databases (Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane) were searched up to June 2018. Two reviewers independently identified and screened the literature.
RESULTS
From 691 titles identified, only eleven publications met the inclusion criteria and were finally included. Mainly early publications assessed the benefits of CHX over placebo rinsing, whereas more recent publications focused more on the evaluation of new formulations with regard to effectiveness and side effects. The use of CHX after surgery showed in general significant reduction in plaque (means of 29-86% after 1 week) and bleeding (up to 73%) as compared to placebo. No consensus, however, was found regarding the most beneficial CHX formulation avoiding side effects.
CONCLUSION
Chlorhexidine rinsing helps to reduce biofilm formation and gingival inflammation after surgery. However, no additional reduction of periodontal probing depth over any given placebo or control solution could be found irrespective of whether CHX was used or not. The use of additives such as antidiscoloration systems (ADS) or herbal extracts may reduce side effects while retaining efficacy.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Within the limitations of this review, it can be concluded that CHX may represent a valuable chemo-preventive tool immediately after surgery, during the time period in which oral hygiene capacity is compromised. To reduce the side effects of CHX and maintain comparable clinical effects, rinsing with less concentrated formulations (e.g., 0.12%) showed the most promising results so far.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Biofilms; Chlorhexidine; Dental Implantation; Gingivitis; Humans; Mouthwashes; Periodontal Diseases; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 30535817
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2761-y -
Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia :... 2021In ICU patients on mechanical ventilation (MV), ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common infection. However, such infection can be prevented through oral care... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
In ICU patients on mechanical ventilation (MV), ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common infection. However, such infection can be prevented through oral care protocols. The objective of this study was to compare the efficiency of the use of chlorhexidine and oral hygiene protocols (brushing and clinical procedures) with that of the use of chlorhexidine alone (intervention group and control group, respectively) in decreasing the prevalence of VAP in patients ≥ 18 years of age admitted to the ICU and requiring MV.
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, studies were identified through searches of various national and international databases, as well as of the gray literature, and were selected in accordance with eligibility criteria.
RESULTS
We evaluated six studies, involving a collective total of 1,276 patients. We classified the risk of bias as low in three studies, high in two, and uncertain in one; among the six risk domains evaluated, a low risk of bias was predominant in five. The results for random risks were similar in terms of direction and statistical magnitude-chi-square = 6.34; risk difference: -0.06 (95% CI: -0.11 to -0.02); I2 = 21%; p = 0.007. There was a decrease in the prevalence of VAP in the intervention group (n = 1,276) included in the meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Protocols that include the mechanical removal of oral biofilm in combination with the use of chlorhexidine can reduce the incidence of VAP among ICU patients requiring MV.
Topics: Chlorhexidine; Humans; Oral Hygiene; Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated; Respiration, Artificial; Toothbrushing
PubMed: 33503132
DOI: 10.36416/1806-3756/e20190286