-
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Aug 2009Travellers' diarrhoea is the most common medical complaint among persons venturing into developing areas from industrialized regions. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Travellers' diarrhoea is the most common medical complaint among persons venturing into developing areas from industrialized regions.
AIM
To review recent developments dealing with microbiological, clinical, pathophysiological and therapeutic aspects of travellers' diarrhoea.
METHODS
The author's extensive file plus a review of publications listed in PubMed on January 22, 2009 on the topic of travellers' diarrhoea were reviewed.
RESULTS
Travellers' diarrhoea is largely caused by detectable and undetected bacterial enteropathogens, explaining the remarkable effectiveness of antibacterial agents in prophylaxis and therapy of the illness. A number of host genetic polymorphisms have been recently linked with susceptibility to travellers' diarrhoea. Novel antisecretory agents are being developed for treatment considering their physiological effects in acute diarrhoea. All travellers should be armed with one of three antibacterial drugs, ciprofloxacin, rifaximin or azithromycin, before their trips to use in self therapy should diarrhoea occur during travel. Loperamide may treat milder forms of travellers' diarrhoea and can be employed with antibacterial drugs.
CONCLUSIONS
Diarrhoea will continue to plague international travellers to high-risk regions. More studies of the incidence rate, relative important of the various pathogens by geographical region of the world, host risk factors and optimal therapeutic approach are needed.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antidiarrheals; Clinical Trials as Topic; Diarrhea; Disease Susceptibility; Gastroenteritis; Humans; Travel
PubMed: 19392866
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2009.04028.x -
Frontiers in Bioengineering and... 2023To systematically evaluate the efficacy of moxibustion in diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D) model rats. A comprehensive search was conducted in the...
To systematically evaluate the efficacy of moxibustion in diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D) model rats. A comprehensive search was conducted in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang Data, VIP, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases from their inception to June 30, 2023. Relevant animal experiments investigating moxibustion for treating IBS-D in model rats were included. Two independent researchers screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the selected studies. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. In total, 21 animal studies comprising 680 model rats were included. The meta-analysis results demonstrated that moxibustion enhanced the threshold capacity of the abdominal withdrawal reflex (AWR) [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.84; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09, 2.60; < 0.00001], ameliorated the rate of loose stool (SMD = -4.03; 95% CI: -5.76, -2.30; < 0.00001), and decreased the colon 5-hydroxytryptamine (SMD = -3.67; 95% CI: -5.33, -2.01; < 0.00001), serum interleukin-1β (SMD = -3.24, 95% CI: -4.06, -2.41; < 0.00001), serum tumor necrosis factor-α (SMD = -2.35, 95% CI: -4.12, -0.58; < 0.00001), and serum substance P (SMD = -5.14, 95% CI: -8.45, -1.83; = 0.002) concentrations. Moxibustion did not affect the blood calcitonin gene-related peptide level compared to the blank model group ( = 0.15). Moxibustion modulated the brain-gut interaction, reduced visceral hypersensitivity, inhibited intestinal inflammation, and regulated the immune balance, improving the rate of loose stool and increasing the AWR threshold capacity in IBS-D model rats, achieving good analgesic and antidiarrheal effects. However, these conclusions require further validation due to limitations in the quantity and quality of the included studies.
PubMed: 38162185
DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1309661 -
Nutrients Nov 2019The protective effects of probiotic supplementation against radiation-induced diarrhea (RID) have been reported in previous systematic reviews; however so far, only... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The Effects of Probiotic Supplementation on the Incidence of Diarrhea in Cancer Patients Receiving Radiation Therapy: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
The protective effects of probiotic supplementation against radiation-induced diarrhea (RID) have been reported in previous systematic reviews; however so far, only non-conclusive results have been obtained. The objective of this study was to systematically update and evaluate the available evidence for probiotic supplementation. The protocol of this systematic review has been registered (CRD42018106059) with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The primary efficacy outcome was the incidence of RID. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of watery stool, soft stool, and antidiarrheal medication use. There were eight trials, and a total of 1116 participants were included in the primary analysis. Compared with placebo, probiotics were associated with a lower risk of RID [risk ratio (RR) = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.46, 0.83]. A requisite heterogeneity-adjusted trial sequential analysis indicated conclusive evidence for this beneficial effect. No statistically significant reduction in RID (RR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.14, 1.91) was observed on subgroup analysis in patients receiving both radiation therapy and chemotherapy. However, those patients receiving only radiation therapy (RT) demonstrated significant benefit (RR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.48, 0.78). There was a significant difference in the antidiarrheal medication use (RR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.35, 0.84) observed with the use of probiotics. However, no significant difference was observed for the incidence of soft and watery stool. The use of probiotics is beneficial in preventing RID in patients receiving RT.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Diarrhea; Dietary Supplements; Humans; MEDLINE; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Placebos; Probiotics; Radiotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Young Adult
PubMed: 31783578
DOI: 10.3390/nu11122886 -
PLoS Medicine Mar 2007Loperamide is widely used in adults for acute diarrhea. However, its use in children has been discouraged by the World Health Organization and the American Academy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Loperamide is widely used in adults for acute diarrhea. However, its use in children has been discouraged by the World Health Organization and the American Academy of Pediatrics owing to concerns over safety and efficacy in young children.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
To assess the efficacy and adverse effects of loperamide compared with placebo for acute diarrhea in children, we reviewed Medline, EMBase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and bibliographies of known clinical trials and of review articles, and we also interviewed key investigators in the field. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of children younger than 12 y of age with acute diarrhea, comparing loperamide with placebo. Included trials reported data on diarrhea duration or severity, or provided data on adverse effects. Compared with patients who received placebo, patients allocated to loperamide were less likely to continue to have diarrhea at 24 h (prevalence ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57 to 0.78), had a shorter duration of diarrhea by 0.8 d (95% CI: 0.7 to 0.9 d), and had a lower count of stools at 24 h (0.84, 95% CI: 0.77 to 0.92). Results were similar when random-effects summaries were estimated. Serious adverse events, defined as ileus, lethargy, or death, were reported in eight out of 927 children allocated to loperamide (0.9%, 95% CI: 0.4% to 1.7%). Serious adverse events were not reported in any of the 764 children allocated to placebo (0%, 95% CI: 0% to 0.5%). Among the children allocated to loperamide, serious adverse events were reported only among children younger than 3 y.
CONCLUSIONS
In children who are younger than 3 y, malnourished, moderately or severely dehydrated, systemically ill, or have bloody diarrhea, adverse events outweigh benefits even at doses
Topics: Age Factors; Child; Child, Preschool; Dehydration; Diarrhea; Humans; Infant; Loperamide; Models, Statistical; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sensitivity and Specificity; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 17388664
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040098 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2020Preterm birth (PTB) remains the foremost global cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality. Thus, the prevention of spontaneous PTB still remains of critical importance....
BACKGROUND
Preterm birth (PTB) remains the foremost global cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality. Thus, the prevention of spontaneous PTB still remains of critical importance. In an attempt to prevent PTB in singleton pregnancies, cervical cerclage, in combination with other treatments, has been advocated. This is because, cervical cerclage is an intervention that is commonly recommended in women with a short cervix at high risk of preterm birth but, despite this, many women still deliver prematurely, as the biological mechanism is incompletely understood. Additionally, previous Cochrane Reviews have been published on the effectiveness of cervical cerclage in singleton and multiple pregnancies, however, none has evaluated the effectiveness of using cervical cerclage in combination with other treatments.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether antibiotics administration, vaginal pessary, reinforcing or second cerclage placement, tocolytic, progesterone, or other interventions at the time of cervical cerclage placement prolong singleton gestation in women at high risk of pregnancy loss based on prior history and/or ultrasound finding of 'short cervix' and/or physical examination. History-indicated cerclage is defined as a cerclage placed usually between 12 and 15 weeks gestation based solely on poor prior obstetrical history, e.g. multiple second trimester losses due to painless dilatation. Ultrasound-indicated cerclage is defined as a cerclage placed usually between 16 and 23 weeks gestation for transvaginal ultrasound cervical length < 20 mm in a woman without cervical dilatation. Physical exam-indicated cerclage is defined as a cerclage placed usually between 16 and 23 weeks gestation because of cervical dilatation of one or more centimetres detected on physical (manual) examination.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (26 September 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included published, unpublished or ongoing randomised controlled trial (RCTs). Studies using a cluster-RCT design were also eligible for inclusion in this review but none were identified. We excluded quasi-RCTs (e.g. those randomised by date of birth or hospital number) and studies using a cross-over design. We also excluded studies that specified addition of the combination therapy after cervical cerclage because the woman subsequently became symptomatic. We included studies comparing cervical cerclage in combination with one, two or more interventions with cervical cerclage alone in singleton pregnancies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts of all retrieved articles, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and evaluated the certainty of the evidence for this review's main outcomes. Data were checked for accuracy. Standard Cochrane review methods were used throughout.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified two studies (involving a total of 73 women) comparing cervical cerclage alone to a different comparator. We also identified three ongoing studies (one investigating vaginal progesterone after cerclage, and two investigating cerclage plus pessary). One study (20 women), conducted in the UK, comparing cervical cerclage in combination with a tocolytic (salbutamol) with cervical cerclage alone in women with singleton pregnancy did not provide any useable data for this review. The other study (involving 53 women, with data from 50 women) took place in the USA and compared cervical cerclage in combination with a tocolytic (indomethacin) and antibiotics (cefazolin or clindamycin) versus cervical cerclage alone - this study did provide useable data for this review (and the study authors also provided additional data on request) but meta-analyses were not possible. This study was generally at a low risk of bias, apart from issues relating to blinding. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for serious risk of bias and imprecision (few participants, few events and wide 95% confidence intervals). Cervical cerclage in combination with an antibiotic and tocolytic versus cervical cerclage alone (one study, 50 women/babies) We are unclear about the effect of cervical cerclage in combination with antibiotics and a tocolytic compared with cervical cerclage alone on the risk of serious neonatal morbidity (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.24; very low-certainty evidence); perinatal loss (data for miscarriage and stillbirth only - data not available for neonatal death) (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.64; very low-certainty evidence) or preterm birth < 34 completed weeks of pregnancy (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.40; very low-certainty evidence). There were no stillbirths (intrauterine death at 24 or more weeks). The trial authors did not report on the numbers of babies discharged home healthy (without obvious pathology) or on the risk of neonatal death.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Currently, there is insufficient evidence to evaluate the effect of combining a tocolytic (indomethacin) and antibiotics (cefazolin/clindamycin) with cervical cerclage compared with cervical cerclage alone for preventing spontaneous PTB in women with singleton pregnancies. Future studies should recruit sufficient numbers of women to provide meaningful results and should measure neonatal death and numbers of babies discharged home healthy, as well as other important outcomes listed in this review. We did not identify any studies looking at other treatments in combination with cervical cerclage. Future research needs to focus on the role of other interventions such as vaginal support pessary, reinforcing or second cervical cerclage placement, 17-alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate or dydrogesterone or vaginal micronised progesterone, omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation and bed rest.
Topics: Albuterol; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bias; Cefazolin; Cerclage, Cervical; Clindamycin; Female; Humans; Indomethacin; Opium; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stillbirth; Tocolytic Agents
PubMed: 32970845
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012871.pub2 -
Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention,... Apr 2020In Iran, as in many other Asian and Middle Eastern countries, some believe that opium has beneficial effects on cardiovascular system. Dependent patients suppose that...
BACKGROUND
In Iran, as in many other Asian and Middle Eastern countries, some believe that opium has beneficial effects on cardiovascular system. Dependent patients suppose that opium has positive effects on cardiovascular function and can prevent or improve cardiovascular diseases; however, only few comprehensive studies evaluating such effects have been performed.
OBJECTIVES
In this study, we sought to clarify the effect of opium on cardiovascular problems by incorporating the previous findings and the current information on the issue and to explain the possible mechanisms of this effect.
METHODS
The available human studies published up to October 30, 2019, were searched in different databases. Case-control, cohort, and cross-sectional studies were retrieved. Papers published in English or those with an English abstract were included. The risk of bias for each included study was assessed based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). We then categorized the effects of opium on cardiovascular problems along with its probable underlying mechanisms of action.
RESULTS
In this study, most of the published articles suggested the adverse effects of opium on the cardiovascular system, including atherosclerosis, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, low ejection fraction, and cardiovascular mortality; however, some articles reported the beneficial or impartial effects of opium on the cardiovascular system. In this article, we have categorized all the effects of opium on cardiovascular system; also, the proposed mechanisms of action of opium in each of the above-mentioned disorders are summarized.
CONCLUSION
Although the available evidences were incoherent, it was mostly suggested that opium use does not protect against or improve cardiovascular problems.
Topics: Cardiovascular System; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Humans; Iran; Male; Opioid-Related Disorders; Opium; Risk Factors
PubMed: 32303254
DOI: 10.1186/s13011-020-00272-8