-
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine 2022Brugada syndrome (BrS) is associated with ventricular tachyarrhythmias. However, the presence of electrical strom (ES) and its management still debated.
BACKGROUND
Brugada syndrome (BrS) is associated with ventricular tachyarrhythmias. However, the presence of electrical strom (ES) and its management still debated.
OBJECTIVES
We present the outcome and management of 44 BrS patients suffering from ES.
METHODS
A systematic literature review and pooled analysis Through database review including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Libary and Cinahl studies were analyzed. Evidence from 7 reports of 808 BrS patients was identified.
RESULTS
The mean age of patients suffering from ES was 34 ± 9.5 months (94.7% males, 65.8% spontaneous BrS type I). Using electrophysiological study ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation were inducible in 12/23 (52.2%). Recurrence of ES was documented in 6.1%. Death from ES was 8.2% after a follow-up of 83.5 ± 53.4. In up to 27 ES resolved without treatment. External shock was required in 35.6%, internal ICD shock in 13.3%, Overdrive pacing, left cardiac sympathetic block and atropin in 2.2%. Short-term antiarrhythmic management was as the following: Isopreterenol or Isopreterenol in combination with quinidine 35.5%, orciprenaline in 2.2%, quinidine 2.2%, disopyramide 2.2% or denopamide 2.2%. However, lidocaine, magensium sulfate, mexiletine and propanolol failed to control ES.
CONCLUSION
Although ES is rare in BrS, this entity challenges physicians. Despite its high mortality rate, spontaneous termination is possible. Short-term management using Isoproterenol and/or quinidine might be safe. Prospective studies on management of ES are warranted.
PubMed: 36386327
DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.981715 -
QJM : Monthly Journal of the... May 2002Acute organophosphorus (OP) pesticide poisoning is widespread in the developing world. Standard treatment involves the administration of intravenous atropine and an... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute organophosphorus (OP) pesticide poisoning is widespread in the developing world. Standard treatment involves the administration of intravenous atropine and an oxime to counter acetylcholinesterase inhibition at the synapse, but the usefulness of oximes is uncertain.
AIM
To assess the evidence on the use of oximes in OP poisoning.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
METHODS
We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases (last check 01/02/02) for 'organophosphate' or 'oxime' together with 'poisoning' or 'overdose'. We cross-referenced from other articles, and contacted experts to identify unpublished studies. A Web search engine [www.google.com] was also used, with the keywords 'organophosphate', 'oxime', and 'trial' (last check 01/02/02).
RESULTS
We found two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 182 patients treated with pralidoxime. The RCTs found no benefit with pralidoxime, and have been used to argue that pralidoxime should not be used in OP poisoning.
DISCUSSION
The RCT authors must be congratulated for attempting important studies in a difficult environment. However, their studies did not take into account recently clarified issues regarding outcome, and their methodology is unclear. A generalized statement that pralidoxime should not be used in OP poisoning is not supported by the published results. Oximes may well be irrelevant in the overwhelming self-poisoning typical of the tropics, but a large RCT comparing the current WHO-recommended pralidoxime regimen (>30 mg/kg bolus followed by >8 mg/kg/h infusion) with placebo is needed for a definitive answer. Such a study should be designed to identify any patient subgroups that might benefit from oximes.
Topics: Acute Disease; Atropine; Drug Overdose; Humans; Insecticides; Organophosphorus Compounds; Oximes; Pralidoxime Compounds; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Research Design
PubMed: 11978898
DOI: 10.1093/qjmed/95.5.275 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2006Cardenolides are naturally occurring plant toxins which act primarily on the heart. While poisoning with the digitalis cardenolides (digoxin and digitoxin) are reported... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cardenolides are naturally occurring plant toxins which act primarily on the heart. While poisoning with the digitalis cardenolides (digoxin and digitoxin) are reported worldwide, cardiotoxicity from other cardenolides such as the yellow oleander are also a major problem, with tens of thousands of cases of poisoning each year in South Asia. Because cardenolides from these plants are structurally similar, acute poisonings are managed using similar treatments. The benefit of these treatments is of interest, particularly in the context of cost since most poisonings occur in developing countries where resources are very limited.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy of antidotes for the treatment of acute cardenolide poisoning, in particular atropine, isoprenaline (isoproterenol), multiple-dose activated charcoal (MDAC), fructose-1,6-diphosphate, sodium bicarbonate, magnesium, phenytoin and anti-digoxin Fab antitoxin.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Controlled Trials Register of the Cochrane Collaboration, Current Awareness in Clinical Toxicology, Info Trac, www.google.com.au, and Science Citation Index of studies identified by the previous searches. We manually searched the bibliographies of identified articles and personally contacted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials where antidotes were administered to patients with acute symptomatic cardenolide poisoning were identified.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently extracted data on study design, including the method of randomisation, participant characteristics, type of intervention and outcomes from each study. We independently assessed methodological quality of the included studies. A pooled analysis was not appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
Two randomised controlled trials were identified, both were conducted in patients with yellow oleander poisoning. One trial investigated the effect of MDAC on mortality, the relative risk (RR) was 0.31 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 0.83) indicating a beneficial effect. The second study found a beneficial effect of anti-digoxin Fab antitoxin on the presence of cardiac dysrhythmias at two hours post-administration; the RR was 0.60 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.81). Other benefits were also noted in both studies and serious adverse effects were minimal. Studies assessing the effect of antidotes on other cardenolides were not identified. One ongoing study investigating the activated charcoal for acute yellow oleander self-poisoning was also identified.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is some evidence to suggest that MDAC and anti-digoxin Fab antitoxin may be effective treatments for yellow oleander poisoning. However, the efficacy and indications of these interventions for the treatment of acute digitalis poisoning is uncertain due to the lack of good quality controlled clinical trials. Given pharmacokinetic differences between individual cardenolides, the effect of antidotes administered to patients with yellow oleander poisoning cannot be readily translated to those of other cardenolides. Unfortunately cost limits the use of antidotes such as anti-digoxin Fab antitoxin in developing countries where cardenolide poisonings are frequent. More research is required using relatively cheap antidotes which may also be effective.
Topics: Acute Disease; Antidotes; Cardenolides; Cardiac Glycosides; Charcoal; Humans; Phytotherapy; Poisoning; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thevetia
PubMed: 17054261
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005490.pub2 -
Cureus Mar 2024Amblyopia is a neurodevelopmental disorder of the visual system that impairs the vision of millions of children worldwide. Amblyopia is best treated within the sensitive... (Review)
Review
Amblyopia is a neurodevelopmental disorder of the visual system that impairs the vision of millions of children worldwide. Amblyopia is best treated within the sensitive period of visual development when a child is up to seven years of age. Currently, the gold standard for early treatment of childhood amblyopia is patching, with new treatments emerging in recent years. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of these newly developed treatments for amblyopia in children aged seven years and younger while comparing them to the current industry standard of patching. We searched online databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and narrative reviews relating to amblyopia treatment in children aged seven and younger. We only included articles and studies completed within the last five years and those written in the English language. After compiling a list of 297 articles, we removed duplicates, articles without an available full text, and those not relevant to our topic. Of the remaining 51 articles, we were left with 22 after reading abstracts and removing further irrelevant articles. We did a quality assessment on the remaining 22 articles and were left with 14 articles for our systematic review after removing eight low-quality articles. Of the 14 articles, we had eight RCTs, two systematic reviews, one comparative interventional study, and three narrative reviews. Seven of the articles contained data reinforcing the effectiveness of patching while comparing it to other treatment modalities. Three of the articles had data supporting spectacle correction, including a novel form called alternative flicker glass which delivers occlusion therapy via a spectacle frame with unique lenses, and ultimately deemed it at least as effective or more than patching. Data from three articles supported the use of surgery to successfully correct the angle of strabismus. Findings from five articles backed the use of pharmacologic therapy, specifically atropine when used alongside patching as a more effective alternative to patching solely. However, levodopa plus patching had no advantage over patching alone. Additionally, seven articles addressed the use of virtual reality (VR) and dichoptic therapy as prospective treatments for childhood amblyopia. VR therapy proved beneficial when used within one week after strabismus surgery. Dichoptic training was also effective in improving amblyopic-eye visual acuity when used on its own or in conjunction with spectacles. Furthermore, dichoptic movie therapy was found to be more effective than patching. Thus, we found multiple highly effective treatments for childhood amblyopia that are as effective or more than patching. Future studies should consider prescribing these treatments to larger cohorts while also performing a cost-benefit analysis for each treatment. In addition, more needs to be learned about the potential adverse side effects of these treatments, especially for pharmaceutical therapy.
PubMed: 38650802
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.56705 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2014Postoperative pain remains a significant problem following paediatric surgery. Premedication with a suitable agent may improve its management. Clonidine is an alpha-2... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Postoperative pain remains a significant problem following paediatric surgery. Premedication with a suitable agent may improve its management. Clonidine is an alpha-2 adrenergic agonist which has sedative, anxiolytic and analgesic properties. It may therefore be a useful premedication for reducing postoperative pain in children.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the evidence for the effectiveness of clonidine, when given as a premedication, in reducing postoperative pain in children less than 18 years of age. We also sought evidence of any clinically significant side effects.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (Issue 12, 2012), Ovid MEDLINE (1966 to 21 December 2012) and Ovid EMBASE (1982 to 21 December 2012), as well as reference lists of other relevant articles and online trial registers.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomized (or quasi-randomized), controlled trials comparing clonidine premedication to placebo, a higher dose of clonidine, or another agent when used for surgical or other invasive procedures in children under the age of 18 years and where pain or a surrogate (principally the need for supplementary analgesia) was reported.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently performed the database search, decided on the inclusion eligibility of publications, ascertained study quality and extracted data. They then resolved any differences between their results by discussion. The data were entered into RevMan 5 for analyses and presentation. Sensitivity analyses were performed, as appropriate, to exclude studies with a high risk of bias.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 11 trials investigating a total of 742 children in treatment arms relevant to our study question. Risks of bias in the studies were mainly low or unclear, but two studies had aspects of their methodology that had a high risk of bias. Overall, the quality of the evidence from pooled studies was low or had unclear risk of bias. Four trials compared clonidine with a placebo or no treatment, six trials compared clonidine with midazolam, and one trial compared clonidine with fentanyl. There was substantial methodological heterogeneity between trials; the dose and route of clonidine administration varied as did the patient populations, the types of surgery and the outcomes measured. It was therefore difficult to combine the outcomes of some trials for meta-analysis.When clonidine was compared to placebo, pooling studies of low or unclear risk of bias, the need for additional analgesia was reduced when clonidine premedication was given orally at 4 µg/kg (risk ratio (RR) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 0.51). Only one small trial (15 patients per arm) compared clonidine to midazolam for the same outcome; this also found a reduction in the need for additional postoperative analgesia (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.71) when clonidine premedication was given orally at 2 or 4 µg/kg compared to oral midazolam at 0.5 mg/kg. A trial comparing oral clonidine at 4 µg/kg with intravenous fentanyl at 3 µg/kg found no statistically significant difference in the need for rescue analgesia (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.42). When clonidine 4 µg/kg was compared to clonidine 2 µg/kg, there was a statistically significant difference in the number of patients requiring additional analgesia, in favour of the higher dose, as reported by a single, higher-quality trial (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.65).The effect of clonidine on pain scores was hard to interpret due to differences in study methodology, the doses and route of drug administration, and the pain scale used. However, when given at a dose of 4 µg/kg, clonidine may have reduced analgesia requirements after surgery. There were no significant side effects of clonidine that were reported such as severe hypotension, bradycardia, or excessive sedation requiring intervention. However, several studies used atropine prophylactically with the aim of preventing such adverse effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There were only 11 relevant trials studying 742 children having surgery where premedication with clonidine was compared to placebo or other drug treatment. Despite heterogeneity between trials, clonidine premedication in an adequate dosage (4 µg/kg) was likely to have a beneficial effect on postoperative pain in children. Side effects were minimal, but some of the studies used atropine prophylactically with the intention of preventing bradycardia and hypotension. Further research is required to determine under what conditions clonidine premedication is most effective in providing postoperative pain relief in children.
Topics: Adrenergic alpha-2 Receptor Agonists; Analgesics; Child; Clonidine; Fentanyl; Humans; Midazolam; Pain, Postoperative; Preanesthetic Medication; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24470114
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009633.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2017Inhaled short-acting anticholinergics (SAAC) and short-acting beta₂-agonists (SABA) are effective therapies for adult patients with acute asthma who present to the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Inhaled short-acting anticholinergics (SAAC) and short-acting beta₂-agonists (SABA) are effective therapies for adult patients with acute asthma who present to the emergency department (ED). It is unclear, however, whether the combination of SAAC and SABA treatment is more effective in reducing hospitalisations compared to treatment with SABA alone.
OBJECTIVES
To conduct an up-to-date systematic search and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of combined inhaled therapy (SAAC + SABA agents) vs. SABA alone to reduce hospitalisations in adult patients presenting to the ED with an exacerbation of asthma.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, SCOPUS, LILACS, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global and evidence-based medicine (EBM) databases using controlled vocabulary, natural language terms, and a variety of specific and general terms for inhaled SAAC and SABA drugs. The search spanned from 1946 to July 2015. The Cochrane Airways Group provided search results from the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials which was most recently conducted in July 2016. An extensive search of the grey literature was completed to identify any other potentially relevant studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Included studies were randomised or controlled clinical trials comparing the effectiveness of combined inhaled therapy (SAAC and SABA) to SABA treatment alone to prevent hospitalisations in adults with acute asthma in the emergency department. Two independent review authors assessed studies for inclusion using pre-determined criteria.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated individual and pooled statistics as risk ratios (RR) or odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model and reporting heterogeneity (I²). For continuous outcomes, we reported individual trial results using mean differences (MD) and pooled results as weighted mean differences (WMD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs using a random-effects model.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 23 studies that involved a total of 2724 enrolled participants. Most studies were rated at unclear or high risk of bias.Overall, participants receiving combination inhaled therapy were less likely to be hospitalised (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.87; participants = 2120; studies = 16; I² = 12%; moderate quality of evidence). An estimated 65 fewer patients per 1000 would require hospitalisation after receiving combination therapy (95% 30 to 95), compared to 231 per 1000 patients receiving SABA alone. Although combination inhaled therapy was more effective than SABA treatment alone in reducing hospitalisation in participants with severe asthma exacerbations, this was not found for participants with mild or moderate exacerbations (test for difference between subgroups P = 0.02).Participants receiving combination therapy were more likely to experience improved forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) (MD 0.25 L, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.48; participants = 687; studies = 6; I² = 70%; low quality of evidence), peak expiratory flow (PEF) (MD 36.58 L/min, 95% CI 23.07 to 50.09; participants = 1056; studies = 12; I² = 25%; very low quality of evidence), increased percent change in PEF from baseline (MD 24.88, 95% CI 14.83 to 34.93; participants = 551; studies = 7; I² = 23%; moderate quality of evidence), and were less likely to return to the ED for additional care (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; participants = 1180; studies = 5; I² = 0%; moderate quality of evidence) than participants receiving SABA alone.Participants receiving combination inhaled therapy were more likely to experience adverse events than those treated with SABA agents alone (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.28 to 3.20; participants = 1392; studies = 11; I² = 14%; moderate quality of evidence). Among patients receiving combination therapy, 103 per 1000 were likely to report adverse events (95% 31 to 195 more) compared to 131 per 1000 patients receiving SABA alone.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, combination inhaled therapy with SAAC and SABA reduced hospitalisation and improved pulmonary function in adults presenting to the ED with acute asthma. In particular, combination inhaled therapy was more effective in preventing hospitalisation in adults with severe asthma exacerbations who are at increased risk of hospitalisation, compared to those with mild-moderate exacerbations, who were at a lower risk to be hospitalised. A single dose of combination therapy and multiple doses both showed reductions in the risk of hospitalisation among adults with acute asthma. However, adults receiving combination therapy were more likely to experience adverse events, such as tremor, agitation, and palpitations, compared to patients receiving SABA alone.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists; Albuterol; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Atropine; Cholinergic Antagonists; Drug Therapy, Combination; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Ipratropium; Levalbuterol; Metaproterenol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Scopolamine Derivatives
PubMed: 28076656
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001284.pub2 -
BMC Ophthalmology May 2020Many treatments are currently available for amblyopic patients; although, the comparative efficacy of these therapies is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Many treatments are currently available for amblyopic patients; although, the comparative efficacy of these therapies is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to establish the relative efficacy of these treatments for amblyopia.
METHODS
Electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) were systematically searched from inception to Sep. 2019. Only Randomized clinical trials comparing any two or three of the following treatments were included: refractive correction (spectacles alone), patching of 2 h per day (patch 2H), patch 6H, patch 12H, patch 2H + near activities (N), patch 2H + distant activities (D), atropine (Atr) daily, Atr weekly, Atr weekly + plano lens over the sound eye (Plano), optical penalization and binocular therapy. The reviewers independently extracted the data according to the PRISMA guidelines; assessed study quality by Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. The primary outcome measure was the change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) expressed as log MAR lines. Direct comparisons and a Bayesian meta-analysis were performed to synthesize data.
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies with 3279 patients were included. In the network meta-analysis, optical penalization was the least effective of all the treatments for the change of visual acuity, spectacles (mean difference [MD], 2.9 Log MAR lines; 95% credibility interval [CrI], 1.8-4.0), patch 2H (MD, 3.3; 95% CrI, 2.3-4.3), patch 6H (MD, 3.6; 95% CrI, 2.6-4.6), patch 12H (MD, 3.4; 95% CrI, 2.3-4.5), patch 2H + N (MD, 3.7; 95% CrI, 2.5-5.0), patch 2H + D (MD, 3.5; 95% CrI, 2.1-5.0), Atr daily (MD, 3.2; 95% CrI, 2.2-4.3), Atr weekly (MD, 3.2; 95% CrI, 2.2-4.3), Atr weekly + Plano (MD, 3.7; 95% CrI, 2.7-4.7), binocular therapy (MD, 3.1; 95% CrI, 2.0-4.2). The patch 6H and patch 2H + N were better than spectacles ([MD, 0.73; 95% Crl, 0.10-1.40]; [MD, 0.84; 95% CrI, 0.19-1.50]).
CONCLUSIONS
The NMA indicated that the efficacy of the most of the examined treatment modalities for amblyopia were comparable, with no significant difference. Further high quality randomized controlled trials are required to determine their efficacy and acceptability.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
CRD42019119843.
Topics: Amblyopia; Atropine; Child; Child, Preschool; Databases, Factual; Eyeglasses; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Male; Muscarinic Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Sensory Deprivation; Treatment Outcome; Vision, Binocular; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 32450849
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-020-01442-9 -
BMJ Paediatrics Open Mar 2024Pyrethroid-based mosquito repellents are widely used to control mosquito-borne diseases. Liquid mosquito-repellent vaporisers are effective modes of pyrethroid delivery...
BACKGROUND
Pyrethroid-based mosquito repellents are widely used to control mosquito-borne diseases. Liquid mosquito-repellent vaporisers are effective modes of pyrethroid delivery but can also pose significant health risks if ingested or used improperly.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review was performed to assess the demographic distribution, clinical presentation, management strategies and outcomes in children resulting from accidental ingestion of liquid mosquito repellent vaporiser.
METHODS
The study adheres to the reporting standards outlined in the PRISMA Statement for Systematic Reviews and was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (record # CRD42023413937) to enhance transparency and minimise reporting bias. A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar using specific MeSH terms related to insecticides, mosquito repellents, pyrethroids, ingestion, poisoning, toxicity and prevention. The reference lists of the included studies were also reviewed for additional relevant articles. The inclusion criteria involved studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2023 that focused on children under 18 years old with a history of mosquito-repellent ingestion based on primary data.
RESULTS
Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria; these were primarily case reports from India, China and the UAE. Male children were predominantly affected, and symptoms included vomiting, convulsions, cough and respiratory distress. Management primarily involved supportive and symptomatic measures, including atropine for salivation and antiepileptic drugs for seizures. Respiratory support was provided for respiratory complications.
CONCLUSION
Despite the known risks and diverse presentations of pyrethroid poisoning caused by liquid mosquito repellent vaporiser in children, the limited substantial evidence in the literature underscores the urgent need for comprehensive research to refine management approaches and enhance preventive measures.
Topics: Child; Animals; Humans; Male; Adolescent; Insect Repellents; Insecticides; Pyrethrins; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Eating
PubMed: 38555100
DOI: 10.1136/bmjpo-2023-002476 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2011Nearsightedness (myopia) causes blurry vision when looking at distant objects. Highly nearsighted people are at greater risk of several vision-threatening problems such... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Nearsightedness (myopia) causes blurry vision when looking at distant objects. Highly nearsighted people are at greater risk of several vision-threatening problems such as retinal detachments, choroidal atrophy, cataracts and glaucoma. Interventions that have been explored to slow the progression of myopia include bifocal spectacles, cycloplegic drops, intraocular pressure-lowering drugs, muscarinic receptor antagonists and contact lenses. The purpose of this review was to systematically assess the effectiveness of strategies to control progression of myopia in children.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of several types of interventions, including eye drops, undercorrection of nearsightedness, multifocal spectacles and contact lenses, on the progression of nearsightedness in myopic children younger than 18 years. We compared the interventions of interest with each other, to single vision lenses (SVLs) (spectacles), placebo or no treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 10), MEDLINE (January 1950 to October 2011), EMBASE (January 1980 to October 2011), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to October 2011), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com) and ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov). There were no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. The electronic databases were last searched on 11 October 2011. We also searched the reference lists and Science Citation Index for additional, potentially relevant studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which participants were treated with spectacles, contact lenses or pharmaceutical agents for the purpose of controlling progression of myopia. We excluded trials where participants were older than 18 years at baseline or participants had less than -0.25 diopters (D) spherical equivalent myopia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias for each included study. When possible, we analyzed data with the inverse variance method using a fixed-effect or random-effects model, depending on the number of studies and amount of heterogeneity detected.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 23 studies (4696 total participants) in this review, with 17 of these studies included in quantitative analysis. Since we only included RCTs in the review, the studies were generally at low risk of bias for selection bias. Undercorrection of myopia was found to increase myopia progression slightly in two studies; children who were undercorrected progressed on average 0.15 D (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.29 to 0.00) more than the fully corrected SVLs wearers at one year. Rigid gas permeable contact lenses (RGPCLs) were found to have no evidence of effect on myopic eye growth in two studies (no meta-analysis due to heterogeneity between studies). Progressive addition lenses (PALs), reported in four studies, and bifocal spectacles, reported in four studies, were found to yield a small slowing of myopia progression. For seven studies with quantitative data at one year, children wearing multifocal lenses, either PALs or bifocals, progressed on average 0.16 D (95% CI 0.07 to 0.25) less than children wearing SVLs. The largest positive effects for slowing myopia progression were exhibited by anti-muscarinic medications. At one year, children receiving pirenzepine gel (two studies), cyclopentolate eye drops (one study), or atropine eye drops (two studies) showed significantly less myopic progression compared with children receiving placebo (mean differences (MD) 0.31 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.44), 0.34 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.60), and 0.80 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.90), respectively).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The most likely effective treatment to slow myopia progression thus far is anti-muscarinic topical medication. However, side effects of these medications include light sensitivity and near blur. Also, they are not yet commercially available, so their use is limited and not practical. Further information is required for other methods of myopia control, such as the use of corneal reshaping contact lenses or bifocal soft contact lenses (BSCLs) with a distance center are promising, but currently no published randomized clinical trials exist.
Topics: Atropine; Child; Contact Lenses; Cyclopentolate; Disease Progression; Eyeglasses; Humans; Muscarinic Antagonists; Myopia; Ophthalmic Solutions; Pirenzepine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 22161388
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004916.pub3 -
Journal of Medical Toxicology :... Mar 2018Organophosphates (OP) account for the majority of pesticide-related unintentional or intentional poisonings in lower- and middle-income countries. The therapeutic role... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Organophosphates (OP) account for the majority of pesticide-related unintentional or intentional poisonings in lower- and middle-income countries. The therapeutic role of atropine is well-established for patients with acute OP poisoning. The benefit of adding 2-pyridine aldoxime methyl chloride (2-PAM), however, is controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials (RCT) to compare 2-PAM plus atropine in comparison to atropine alone for acute OP poisoning. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS up to March 2017. The Cochrane review handbook was used to assess the risk of bias. Data were abstracted and risk ratios (RR) were calculated for mortality, rate of intubation, duration of intubation, intermediate syndrome, and complications such as hospital-acquired infections, dysrhythmias, and pulmonary edema. We found five studies comprising 586 patients with varying risks of bias. The risk of death (RR = 1.5, 95% CI 0.9-2.5); intubation (RR = 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.6); intermediate syndrome (RR = 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.6); complications (RR = 1.2, 95% CI 0.8-1.8); and the duration of intubation (mean difference 0.0, 95% CI - 1.6-1.6) were not significantly different between the atropine plus 2-PAM and atropine alone. Based on our meta-analysis of the available RCTs, 2-PAM was not shown to improve outcomes in patients with acute OP poisoning.
Topics: Animals; Antidotes; Cholinesterase Reactivators; Humans; Organophosphate Poisoning; Pralidoxime Compounds
PubMed: 29230717
DOI: 10.1007/s13181-017-0636-2