-
CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics Feb 2024Transcranial pulse stimulation (TPS) is a novel noninvasive ultrasonic brain stimulation that can increase cortical and corticospinal excitability, induce...
BACKGROUND
Transcranial pulse stimulation (TPS) is a novel noninvasive ultrasonic brain stimulation that can increase cortical and corticospinal excitability, induce neuroplasticity, and increase functional connectivity within the brain. Several trials have confirmed its potential in treating Alzheimer's disease (AD).
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effect and safety of TPS on AD.
DESIGN
A systematic review.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase via Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), VIP (China Science and Technology Journal Database), and WanFang were searched from inception to April 1, 2023. Study selection, data extraction, and quality evaluation of the studies were conducted by two reviewers independently, with any controversy resolved by consensus. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies was used to assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS
Five studies were included in this review, with a total of 99 patients with AD. For cognitive performance, TPS significantly improved the scores of the CERAD (Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease) test battery, Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (cognitive), Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and Mini-Mental Status Examination. For depressive symptoms, TPS significantly reduced the scores of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (affective), Geriatric Depression Score, and Beck Depression Inventory. By functional magnetic resonance imaging, studies have shown that TPS improved cognitive performance in AD patients by increasing functional connectivity in the hippocampus, parahippocampal cortex, precuneus, and parietal cortex, and activating cortical activity in the bilateral hippocampus. TPS alleviated depressive symptoms in AD patients by decreasing functional connectivity between the ventromedial network (left frontal orbital cortex) and the salience network (right anterior insula). Adverse events in this review, including headache, worsening mood, jaw pain, nausea, and drowsiness, were reversible and lasted no longer than 1 day. No serious adverse events or complications were observed.
CONCLUSIONS
TPS is promising in improving cognitive performance and reducing depressive symptoms in patients with AD. TPS may be a safe adjunct therapy in the treatment of AD. However, these findings lacked a sham control and were limited by the small sample size of the included studies. Further research may be needed to better explore the potential of TPS.
PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Patients and the public were not involved in this study.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Alzheimer Disease; Brain; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Hippocampus; Mental Status and Dementia Tests; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
PubMed: 37469252
DOI: 10.1111/cns.14372 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2016This review is one of a series on drugs used to treat fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This review is one of a series on drugs used to treat fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterised by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep problems and fatigue affecting approximately 2% of the general population. People often report high disability levels and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Drug therapy focuses on reducing key symptoms and disability, and improving HRQoL. Cannabis has been used for millennia to reduce pain and other somatic and psychological symptoms.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of cannabinoids for fibromyalgia symptoms in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE to April 2016, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews, three clinical trial registries, and contact with trial authors.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials of at least four weeks' duration of any formulation of cannabis products used for the treatment of adults with fibromyalgia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted the data of all included studies and assessed risk of bias. We resolved discrepancies by discussion. We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. First tier evidence was derived from data meeting current best standards and subject to minimal risk of bias (outcome equivalent to substantial pain intensity reduction, intention-to-treat analysis without imputation for drop-outs; at least 200 participants in the comparison, eight to 12 weeks' duration, parallel design), second tier evidence from data that did not meet one or more of these criteria and were considered at some risk of bias but with adequate numbers (i.e. data from at least 200 participants) in the comparison, and third tier evidence from data involving small numbers of participants that were considered very likely to be biased or used outcomes of limited clinical utility, or both. We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).
MAIN RESULTS
We included two studies with 72 participants. Overall, the two studies were at moderate risk of bias. The evidence was derived from group mean data and completer analysis (very low quality evidence overall). We rated the quality of all outcomes according to GRADE as very low due to indirectness, imprecision and potential reporting bias.The primary outcomes in our review were participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) much or very much improved, withdrawal due to adverse events (tolerability) and serious adverse events (safety). Nabilone was compared to placebo and to amitriptyline in one study each. Study sizes were 32 and 40 participants. One study used a cross-over design and one used a parallel group design; study duration was four or six weeks. Both studies used nabilone, a synthetic cannabinoid, with a bedtime dosage of 1 mg/day. No study reported the proportion of participants experiencing at least 30% or 50% pain relief or who were very much improved. No study provided first or second tier (high to moderate quality) evidence for an outcome of efficacy, tolerability and safety. Third tier (very low quality) evidence indicated greater reduction of pain and limitations of HRQoL compared to placebo in one study. There were no significant differences to placebo noted for fatigue and depression (very low quality evidence). Third tier evidence indicated better effects of nabilone on sleep than amitriptyline (very low quality evidence). There were no significant differences between the two drugs noted for pain, mood and HRQoL (very low quality evidence). More participants dropped out due to adverse events in the nabilone groups (4/52 participants) than in the control groups (1/20 in placebo and 0/32 in amitriptyline group). The most frequent adverse events were dizziness, nausea, dry mouth and drowsiness (six participants with nabilone). Neither study reported serious adverse events during the period of both studies. We planned to create a GRADE 'Summary of findings' table, but due to the scarcity of data we were unable to do this. We found no relevant study with herbal cannabis, plant-based cannabinoids or synthetic cannabinoids other than nabilone in fibromyalgia.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no convincing, unbiased, high quality evidence suggesting that nabilone is of value in treating people with fibromyalgia. The tolerability of nabilone was low in people with fibromyalgia.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Amitriptyline; Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Cannabinoids; Dronabinol; Fibromyalgia; Health Status; Humans; Middle Aged; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27428009
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011694.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2022Many people with cancer experience moderate to severe pain that requires treatment with strong opioids, such as oxycodone and morphine. Strong opioids are, however, not... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Many people with cancer experience moderate to severe pain that requires treatment with strong opioids, such as oxycodone and morphine. Strong opioids are, however, not effective for pain in all people, neither are they well tolerated by all people. The aim of this review was to assess whether oxycodone is associated with better pain relief and tolerability than other analgesic options for adults with cancer pain. This is an updated Cochrane review previously published in 2017.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and tolerability of oxycodone by any route of administration for pain in adults with cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and MEDLINE In-Process (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Science Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (ISI Web of Science), BIOSIS (ISI), and PsycINFO (Ovid) to November 2021. We also searched four trial registries, checked the bibliographic references of relevant studies, and contacted the authors of the included studies. We applied no language, date, or publication status restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (parallel-group or cross-over) comparing oxycodone (any formulation or route of administration) with placebo or an active drug (including oxycodone) for cancer background pain in adults by examining pain intensity/relief, adverse events, quality of life, and participant preference.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently sifted the search, extracted data and assessed the included studies using standard Cochrane methodology. We meta-analysed pain intensity data using the generic inverse variance method, and pain relief and adverse events using the Mantel-Haenszel method, or summarised these data narratively along with the quality of life and participant preference data. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
For this update, we identified 19 new studies (1836 participants) for inclusion. In total, we included 42 studies which enrolled/randomised 4485 participants, with 3945 of these analysed for efficacy and 4176 for safety. The studies examined a number of different drug comparisons. Controlled-release (CR; typically taken every 12 hours) oxycodone versus immediate-release (IR; taken every 4-6 hours) oxycodone Pooled analysis of three of the four studies comparing CR oxycodone to IR oxycodone suggest that there is little to no difference between CR and IR oxycodone in pain intensity (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.1 to 0.34; n = 319; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on adverse events, including constipation (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.13), drowsiness/somnolence (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.54), nausea (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.28), and vomiting (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.15) (very low-certainty evidence). There were no data available for quality of life or participant preference, however, three studies suggested that treatment acceptability may be similar between groups (low-certainty evidence). CR oxycodone versus CR morphine The majority of the 24 studies comparing CR oxycodone to CR morphine reported either pain intensity (continuous variable), pain relief (dichotomous variable), or both. Pooled analysis indicated that pain intensity may be lower (better) after treatment with CR morphine than CR oxycodone (SMD 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.27; n = 882 in 7 studies; low-certainty evidence). This SMD is equivalent to a difference of 0.27 points on the Brief Pain Inventory scale (0-10 numerical rating scale), which is not clinically significant. Pooled analyses also suggested that there may be little to no difference in the proportion of participants achieving complete or significant pain relief (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.10; n = 1249 in 13 studies; low-certainty evidence). The RR for constipation (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.86) may be lower after treatment with CR oxycodone than after CR morphine. Pooled analyses showed that, for most of the adverse events, the CIs were wide, including no effect as well as potential benefit and harm: drowsiness/somnolence (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05), nausea (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.12), and vomiting (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.04) (low or very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for quality of life. The evidence is very uncertain about the treatment effects on treatment acceptability and participant preference. Other comparisons The remaining studies either compared oxycodone in various formulations or compared oxycodone to different alternative opioids. None found any clear superiority or inferiority of oxycodone for cancer pain, neither as an analgesic agent nor in terms of adverse event rates and treatment acceptability. The certainty of this evidence base was limited by the high or unclear risk of bias of the studies and by imprecision due to low or very low event rates or participant numbers for many outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The conclusions have not changed since the previous version of this review (in 2017). We found low-certainty evidence that there may be little to no difference in pain intensity, pain relief and adverse events between oxycodone and other strong opioids including morphine, commonly considered the gold standard strong opioid. Although we identified a benefit for pain relief in favour of CR morphine over CR oxycodone, this was not clinically significant and did not persist following sensitivity analysis and so we do not consider this important. However, we found that constipation and hallucinations occurred less often with CR oxycodone than with CR morphine; but the certainty of this evidence was either very low or the finding did not persist following sensitivity analysis, so these findings should be treated with utmost caution. Our conclusions are consistent with other reviews and suggest that, while the reliability of the evidence base is low, given the absence of important differences within this analysis, it seems unlikely that larger head-to-head studies of oxycodone versus morphine are justified, although well-designed trials comparing oxycodone to other strong analgesics may well be useful. For clinical purposes, oxycodone or morphine can be used as first-line oral opioids for relief of cancer pain in adults.
Topics: Adult; Analgesics, Opioid; Cancer Pain; Constipation; Humans; Morphine; Nausea; Neoplasms; Oxycodone; Pain; Quality of Life; Reproducibility of Results; Sleepiness; Vomiting
PubMed: 35679121
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003870.pub7 -
BMJ Open Jul 2014To evaluate the safety profile of nicergoline compared with placebo and other active agents from published randomised controlled trials. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the safety profile of nicergoline compared with placebo and other active agents from published randomised controlled trials.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of nicergoline compared with placebo and other active agents across various indications.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Medline-in-process, Cochrane, EMBASE, EMBASE alerts, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Cochrane Methodology Register (CMR) for all the randomised controlled trials, open-label or blinded, in adults treated with nicergoline. Studies published until August 2013 were included.
REVIEW METHOD
29 studies were included for data extraction. The studies included in this review were majorly from European countries and mostly in cerebrovascular disease (n=15) and dementia (n=8).
RESULTS
The treatment withdrawals were comparatively lower in the nicergoline group as compared with the placebo group (RR=0.92; 95% CI 0.7 to 1.21) and other active comparators (RR=0.45; 95% CI 0.10 to 1.95), but the difference was non-significant. Incidence of any adverse events (AEs) was slightly higher (RR=1.05; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.2) while incidence of serious AEs was lower (RR=0.85; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.45) in the nicergoline compared with placebo group. Frequency of anxiety was significantly lower in nicergoline as compared with placebo (p=0.01). Other AEs including diarrhoea, gastric upset, dizziness and drowsiness were less frequent in the nicergoline group when compared with placebo/active drugs, but the difference was non-significant. Frequency of hypotension and hot flushes was slightly higher in the nicergoline group but the difference was non-significant. None of the studies reported any incidence of fibrosis or ergotism with nicergoline treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
Nicergoline is an ergot derivative, but its safety profile is better than other ergot derivatives like ergotamine and ergotoxine. This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that nicergoline has a good safety profile. None of the studies included in this systematic review reported any incidence of fibrosis or ergotism with nicergoline.
Topics: Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists; Brain Diseases; Humans; Neuroprotective Agents; Nicergoline; Peripheral Vascular Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25079927
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005090 -
Sleep Medicine Reviews Feb 2014Sleep problems are a potential risk factor for work injuries but the extent of the risk is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Sleep problems are a potential risk factor for work injuries but the extent of the risk is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the effect of sleep problems on work injuries.
METHODS
A systematic literature search using several databases was performed. Sleep problems of any duration or frequency as well as work injuries of any severity were of interest. The effect estimates of the individual studies were pooled and relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated through random effects models. Additionally, the population attributable risk was estimated.
RESULTS
In total, 27 observational studies (n = 268,332 participants) that provided 54 relative risk estimates were included. The findings of the meta-analysis suggested that workers with sleep problems had a 1.62 times higher risk of being injured than workers without sleep problems (RR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.43-1.84). Approximately 13% of work injuries could be attributed to sleep problems.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review confirmed the association between sleep problems and work injuries and, for the first time, quantified its magnitude. As sleep problems are of growing concern in the population, these findings are of interest for both sleep researchers and occupational physicians.
Topics: Accidents, Occupational; Humans; Occupational Injuries; Risk; Sleep Wake Disorders
PubMed: 23702220
DOI: 10.1016/j.smrv.2013.01.004 -
Clocks & Sleep Dec 2023The gut microbiota (GM) plays a crucial role in human health. The bidirectional interaction between GM and the central nervous system may occur via the... (Review)
Review
The gut microbiota (GM) plays a crucial role in human health. The bidirectional interaction between GM and the central nervous system may occur via the microbiota-gut-brain axis, possibly regulating the sleep/wake cycle. Recent reports highlight associations between intestinal dysbiosis and sleep disorders, suggesting that probiotics could ameliorate this condition. However, data are poor and inconsistent. The aim of this quantitative metanalytic study is to assess the GM composition in sleep disturbances and evaluate probiotics' effectiveness for managing sleep disorders. A systematic review was carried out until July 2022 in online databases, limiting the literature research to human studies and English language articles. No significant GM diversity between patients with sleep disturbances versus healthy controls was found, revealed by -diversity, while -diversity is missing due to lack of proper reporting. However, probiotics supplementation significantly reduced the self-assessed parameter of sleep quality and disturbances Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) score compared with the placebo. No difference in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score was found. While available data suggest that GM diversity is not related to sleep disturbances, probiotics administration strongly improves sleep quality as a subjective perception. However, heterogeneity of data reporting in the scientific literature should be considered as a limitation.
PubMed: 38131749
DOI: 10.3390/clockssleep5040050 -
BMC Women's Health Sep 2023Menstrual disturbances harm women's health, and general well-being. As growing evidence highlights the relationship between sleep and menstrual disturbances, it is...
BACKGROUND
Menstrual disturbances harm women's health, and general well-being. As growing evidence highlights the relationship between sleep and menstrual disturbances, it is imperative to comprehensively examine the association between sleep and menstrual disturbance considering the multiple dimensions of sleep. This systematic review aims to identify the association between sleep and menstrual disturbances by evaluating using Buysse's sleep health framework.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, psychINFO, and CINAHL to identify publications describing any types of menstrual disturbances, and their associations with sleep published between January 1, 1988 to June 2, 2022. Quality assessment was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies. The findings were iteratively evaluated menstrual disturbances and their association with sleep using Buysse's sleep health framework. This framework understands sleep as multidimensional concept and provides a holistic framing of sleep including Satisfaction, Alertness during waking hours, Timing of sleep, Efficiency, and Sleep duration. Menstrual disturbances were grouped into three categories: premenstrual syndrome, dysmenorrhea, and abnormal menstrual cycle/heavy bleeding during periods.
RESULTS
Thirty-five studies were reviewed to examine the association between sleep and menstrual disturbances. Premenstrual syndrome and dysmenorrhea were associated with sleep disturbances in sleep health domains of Satisfaction (e.g., poor sleep quality), Alertness during waking hours (e.g., daytime sleepiness), Efficiency (e.g., difficulty initiating/maintaining sleep), and Duration (e.g., short sleep duration). Abnormal menstrual cycle and heavy bleeding during the period were related to Satisfaction, Efficiency, and Duration. There were no studies which investigated the timing of sleep.
CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS
Sleep disturbances within most dimensions of the sleep health framework negatively impact on menstrual disturbances. Future research should longitudinally examine the effects of sleep disturbances in all dimensions of sleep health with the additional objective sleep measure on menstrual disturbances. This review gives insight in that it can be recommended to provide interventions for improving sleep disturbances in women with menstrual disturbance.
Topics: Female; Humans; Dysmenorrhea; Cross-Sectional Studies; Menstruation Disturbances; Premenstrual Syndrome; Sleep; Sleep Wake Disorders
PubMed: 37658359
DOI: 10.1186/s12905-023-02629-0 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2017Essential tremor (ET) is one of the most common movement disorders. The treatment is primarily based on pharmacological agents. Although primidone and propranolol are... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Essential tremor (ET) is one of the most common movement disorders. The treatment is primarily based on pharmacological agents. Although primidone and propranolol are well established treatments in clinical practice, they can be ineffective in 25% to 55% of patients, and can produce serious adverse events in a large percentage of them. For these reasons, it may be worthwhile evaluating the treatment alternatives for ET. Zonisamide has been suggested as a potentially useful agent for the treatment of ET but there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect on functional abilities and the safety profile of zonisamide in adults with essential tremor (ET).
SEARCH METHODS
We carried out a systematic search, without language restrictions to identify all relevant trials. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, NICE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) to January 2017. We searched BIOSIS Citation Index (2000 to January 2017) for conference proceedings. We handsearched grey literature and examined the reference lists of identified studies and reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of zonisamide versus placebo or any other treatment. We included studies in which the diagnosis of ET was made according to accepted and validated diagnostic criteria. We excluded studies conducted in patients presenting secondary forms of tremor or reporting only neurophysiological parameters to assess outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently collected and extracted data using a data collection form. We assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence.We used inverse variance methods for continuous outcomes and measurement scales. We compared differences between treatment groups as mean differences. We combined results for dichotomous outcomes using Mantel-Haenszel methods and obtained risk differences to compare treatment groups. We used Review Manager 5 software for data management and analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
We only considered one study eligible for this review (20 participants). Assessments of risk of bias for most domains were unclear or low. Adverse events were only reported in participants from the zonisamide group, making it possible that they were aware of treatment group assignment. We are uncertain as to the effects of zonisamide on motor tasks (mean difference (MD) -0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.51 to 1.51, very low-quality evidence) and functional disabilities (MD -0.30, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.63, very low-quality evidence) when compared with placebo. Three participants in the zonisamide group (30%) and two participants in the placebo group (20%) discontinued the treatment and withdrew from the study for any reason (very low-quality evidence), however the increased risk of withdrawal in the zonisamide group was statistically non-significant (risk difference (RD) 0.1, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.48). Six participants in the zonisamide group (60%) and none of the participants in the placebo group (0%) developed adverse events (AEs), with a RD of 0.60 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.92; very low quality evidence). The most common AEs, experienced with zonisamide treatment, were headache, nausea, fatigue, sleepiness, and diarrhoea. Quality of life was not assessed in the study included.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on currently available data, there is insufficient evidence to assess the efficacy and safety of zonisamide treatment for ET.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Essential Tremor; Humans; Isoxazoles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Zonisamide
PubMed: 28836659
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009684.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2015This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2012 (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 1).The efficacy and safety of vigabatrin (VGB) as an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2012 (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 1).The efficacy and safety of vigabatrin (VGB) as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy have been well established. However, this information needs to be weighed against the risk of development of visual field defects. Whether VGB monotherapy is an effective and safe treatment compared with the standard antiepileptic drug carbamazepine (CBZ) as monotherapy for epilepsy has not been systematically reviewed.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the efficacy and safety of VGB versus CBZ monotherapy for epilepsy in children and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 3 of 4), MEDLINE (1948 to July 2015), EMBASE (1974 to July 2015) and the Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM) (1979 to July 2015). We searched trial registers and contacted the manufacturer of VGB and authors of included studies for additional information. We applied no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing VGB versus CBZ monotherapy for epilepsy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcome was time to treatment withdrawal. Secondary outcomes were time to achieve six-month and 12-month remission after randomisation, time to first seizure after randomisation and adverse events. We presented results as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) (time to event data) or as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs (adverse events).
MAIN RESULTS
Five studies involving a total of 734 participants were eligible for inclusion. We assessed only one study as good quality and the other four as poor quality. However, it was difficult to perform a meta-analysis by extracting aggregate data to synthesise the results as originally planned, mainly because not all studies reported the same outcomes as those chosen for this review. No significant differences favoured VGB or CBZ in terms of time to treatment withdrawal and time to achieve six-month remission after dose stabilisation from randomisation, but results did show a disadvantage for VGB on time to first seizure after randomisation. Compared with CBZ, VGB was associated with more occurrences of weight gain and fewer occurrences of skin rash and drowsiness. No differences in visual field defects and visual disturbances were noted.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Data are currently insufficient to address the risk-benefit balance of VGB versus CBZ monotherapy for epilepsy. Given the high prevalence of visual field defects reported in an existing systematic review of observational studies (Maguire 2010), VGB monotherapy should be prescribed with caution for epilepsy and should not be considered a first-line choice. If necessary, the visual field should be frequently assessed. Future research should focus on investigating the reasons for visual field defects and exploring potential prevention strategies. Moreover, future monotherapy studies of epilepsy should report results according to the recommendations of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Commission, and methodological quality should be improved.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Carbamazepine; Epilepsy; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Vigabatrin
PubMed: 26580100
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008781.pub3 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Sep 2007Sleep disorders may affect 20-30% of young children, and include excessive daytime sleepiness, problems getting to sleep (dysomnias), or undesirable phenomena during... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Sleep disorders may affect 20-30% of young children, and include excessive daytime sleepiness, problems getting to sleep (dysomnias), or undesirable phenomena during sleep (parasomnias), such as sleep terrors, and sleepwalking. Children with physical or learning disabilities are at increased risk of sleep disorders.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments for dysomnias in children? What are the effects of treatments for parasomnias in children? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to September 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 14 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antihistamines, behavioural therapy plus benzodiazepines, or plus chloral and derivates, exercise, extinction and graduated extinction, light therapy, melatonin, safety/protective interventions for parasomnias, scheduled waking (for parasomnias), sleep hygiene, and sleep restriction.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Behavior Therapy; Child; Humans; Learning Disabilities; Melatonin; Parasomnias; Sleep; Sleep Wake Disorders
PubMed: 19450298
DOI: No ID Found