-
International Journal of Environmental... Sep 2022Oral health is an integral component of general health and well-being but might be undermined among children living with HIV (CLWH) due to the condition itself or the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Oral health is an integral component of general health and well-being but might be undermined among children living with HIV (CLWH) due to the condition itself or the antiretroviral therapy (ART) received. This review summarises the current evidence and compares the oral health status of the CLWH who were treatment-naïve with those undergoing different ART medications. Fourteen studies were included in the final qualitative and quantitative analyses. This review identified no significant difference in the prevalence of caries, periodontal conditions, and tooth development between both groups. Orofacial opportunistic infections were more prevalent in the CLWH without ART. Children undergoing ART with a duration longer than 3 years had a significantly lower prevalence of oral candidiasis and CD4+ T-cell counts. However, due to the insufficient number of well-administered case-control studies with adequate sample size, the quality of the evidence in all outcomes was of very low certainty.
Topics: CD4 Lymphocyte Count; Candidiasis, Oral; Child; HIV Infections; Humans; Oral Health; Prevalence
PubMed: 36231240
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191911943 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Mar 2015Antifungal prophylaxis is a promising strategy for reducing invasive fungal infections (IFIs) in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) recipients, but the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Systematic review and mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of primary oral antifungal prophylaxis in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients.
BACKGROUND
Antifungal prophylaxis is a promising strategy for reducing invasive fungal infections (IFIs) in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) recipients, but the optimum prophylactic agent is unknown. We used mixed treatment comparison (MTC) meta-analysis to compare clinical trials examining the use of oral antifungals for prophylaxis in alloHCT recipients, with the goal of informing medical decision-making.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of fluconazole, itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole for primary antifungal prophylaxis were identified through a systematic literature review. Outcomes of interest (incidence of IFI/invasive aspergillosis/invasive candidiasis, all-cause mortality, and use of other antifungals) were extracted from eligible RCTs and incorporated into a Bayesian hierarchical random-effects MTC.
RESULTS
Five eligible RCTs, randomizing 2147 patients in total, were included. Relative to fluconazole, prophylaxis with itraconazole (odds ratio [OR]: 0.52; interquartile range [IQR]: 0.35-0.76), posaconazole (OR: 0.56; IQR: 0.32-0.99), and voriconazole (OR: 0.46; IQR: 0.28-0.73) reduced incidence of overall proven/probable IFI. Posaconazole (OR: 0.31; IQR: 0.17-0.58) and voriconazole (OR: 0.33; IQR: 0.17-0.58) prophylaxis reduced proven/probable invasive aspergillosis more than itraconazole (OR: 0.68; IQR: 0.42-1.12). All-cause mortality was similar across all mould-active agents.
CONCLUSION
As expected, mould-active azoles prevented IFIs, particularly invasive aspergillosis, more effectively than fluconazole in alloHCT recipients. The paucity of comparative efficacy data suggests that other factors such as long-term tolerability, availability of intravenous formulations, local IFI epidemiology, and drug costs may need to form the basis for selection among the mould-active azoles.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Bayes Theorem; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Humans; Mycoses; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Transplant Recipients
PubMed: 25887385
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-015-0855-6 -
International Journal of Environmental... Nov 2021COVID-19 disease first appeared in 2019 and quickly spread worldwide, causing a global pandemic. The oral cavity represents a target of SARS-CoV-2, and oral lesions are...
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 disease first appeared in 2019 and quickly spread worldwide, causing a global pandemic. The oral cavity represents a target of SARS-CoV-2, and oral lesions are observed in both non-hospitalized and hospitalized patients. This systematic review aims to investigate the frequency of oral manifestations in COVID-19 hospitalized patients.
METHODS
An electronic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, including articles published up to September 2021. The review protocol was based on PRISMA-P. The risk of bias of the studies was assessed using the Joana Briggs Institute. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE instrument.
RESULTS
Fifty-nine articles were included: 19 case reports, 17 case series, 2 case-control studies, 13 cross-sectional studies, 4 observational studies, and 4 retrospective studies. Oral ulcers, cheilitis, and tongue lesions were more common in patients before hospitalization, while perioral pressure ulcers, macroglossia, blisters, and oral candidiasis were more recurrent in patients during hospitalization. The first could be related directly to COVID-19, while the latter could be caused by medical devices, treatments, prone position, and immunological impairment.
CONCLUSIONS
An accurate oral examination during the hospital admission of all confirmed COVID-19 cases is encouraged to recognize oral early manifestations and to apply appropriate treatments.
Topics: COVID-19; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Retrospective Studies; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34886241
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182312511 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Aug 2010The aims of this systematic review were to determine, in patients receiving cancer therapy, the prevalence of clinical oral fungal infection and fungal colonization, to... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The aims of this systematic review were to determine, in patients receiving cancer therapy, the prevalence of clinical oral fungal infection and fungal colonization, to determine the impact on quality of life and cost of care, and to review current management strategies for oral fungal infections.
METHODS
Thirty-nine articles that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria were independently reviewed by two calibrated reviewers, each using a standard form. Information was extracted on a number of variables, including study design, study population, sample size, interventions, blinding, outcome measures, methods, results, and conclusions for each article. Areas of discrepancy between the two reviews were resolved by consensus. Studies were weighted as to the quality of the study design, and recommendations were based on the relative strength of each paper. Statistical analyses were performed to determine the weighted prevalence of clinical oral fungal infection and fungal colonization.
RESULTS
For all cancer treatments, the weighted prevalence of clinical oral fungal infection was found to be 7.5% pre-treatment, 39.1% during treatment, and 32.6% after the end of cancer therapy. Head and neck radiotherapy and chemotherapy were each independently associated with a significantly increased risk for oral fungal infection. For all cancer treatments, the prevalence of oral colonization with fungal organisms was 48.2% before treatment, 72.2% during treatment, and 70.1% after treatment. The prophylactic use of fluconazole during cancer therapy resulted in a prevalence of clinical fungal infection of 1.9%. No information specific to oral fungal infections was found on quality of life or cost of care.
CONCLUSIONS
There is an increased risk of clinically significant oral fungal infection during cancer therapy. Systemic antifungals are effective in the prevention of clinical oral fungal infection in patients receiving cancer therapy. Currently available topical antifungal agents are less efficacious, suggesting a need for better topical agents.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Candidiasis, Oral; Health Care Costs; Humans; Neoplasms; Oropharynx; Pharyngeal Diseases; Quality of Life; Risk Factors
PubMed: 20449755
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-010-0892-z -
Evidence-based Complementary and... 2015In view of the limitations of antifungal agents used in the treatment of oral candidiasis and the wide variety of natural products that have been studied as treatment of... (Review)
Review
In view of the limitations of antifungal agents used in the treatment of oral candidiasis and the wide variety of natural products that have been studied as treatment of this disease, this systematic literature review proposed to evaluate whether scientific evidence attesting to the efficacy of natural products in the treatment of this disease exists. A systematic search in PubMed, MEDLINE, SciELO, Lilacs, and Cochrane Library databases was accomplished using the associations among the keywords Candida albicans, phytotherapy, biological products, denture stomatitis, and oral candidiasis in both English and Portuguese. Four independent observers evaluated the methodological quality of the resulting articles. Three studies were included for detailed analysis and evaluated according to the analysis protocol based on the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) 2010 statement. The tested products were different in all studies. Two studies mentioned random samples, but no study described the sample allocation. No study mentioned sample calculations, a prior pilot study, or examiner calibration, and only one trial reported sample losses. Differences between the tested products and the methodological designs among these studies did not allow the existence of scientific evidence related to the effectiveness of these products for the proposed subjects to be confirmed.
PubMed: 25883668
DOI: 10.1155/2015/147804 -
Caries Research 2018Oral Candida albicans has been detected in children with early childhood caries (ECC) and has demonstrated cariogenic traits in animal models of the disease. Conversely,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Oral Candida albicans has been detected in children with early childhood caries (ECC) and has demonstrated cariogenic traits in animal models of the disease. Conversely, other studies found no positive correlation between C. albicans and caries experience in children, while suggesting it may have protective effects as a commensal organism. Thus, this study aimed to examine whether oral C. albicans is associated with ECC. Seven electronic databases were searched. The data from eligible studies were extracted, and the risk of bias was evaluated. A fixed effects model (Mantel-Haenszel estimate) was used for meta-analysis, and the summary effect measure was calculated by odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Fifteen cross-sectional studies were included for the qualitative assessment and 9 studies for meta-analysis. Twelve studies revealed higher oral C. albicans prevalence in ECC children than in caries-free children, while 2 studies indicated an equivalent prevalence. A pooled estimate, with OR = 6.51 and 95% CI = 4.94-8.57, indicated a significantly higher ECC experience in children with oral C. albicans than those without C. albicans (p < 0.01). The odds of experiencing ECC in children with C. albicans versus children without C. albicans were 5.26 for salivary, 6.69 for plaque, and 6.3 for oral swab samples. This systematic review indicates that children with oral C. albicans have >5 times higher odds of having ECC compared to those without C. albicans. Further prospective cohort studies are needed to determine whether C. albicans could be a risk factor for ECC, and whether it is dependent on different sample sources (saliva/plaque).
Topics: Candida albicans; Candidiasis, Oral; Child; Child, Preschool; Dental Caries; Humans
PubMed: 29262404
DOI: 10.1159/000481833 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2010Treatment of cancer is increasingly effective but is associated with short and long term side effects. Oral and gastrointestinal side effects, including oral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Treatment of cancer is increasingly effective but is associated with short and long term side effects. Oral and gastrointestinal side effects, including oral candidiasis, remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to treat them.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Computerised searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group and PaPaS Trials Registers (to 1 June 2010), CENTRAL via the Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2010, 1 June 2010), MEDLINE via OVID (1 June 2010), EMBASE via OVID (1 June 2010), CINAHL via EBSCO (1 June 2010), CANCERLIT via PubMed (1 June 2010), OpenSIGLE (1 June 2010) and LILACS via Virtual Health Library (1 June 2010) were undertaken. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched and the authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials comparing agents prescribed to treat oral candidiasis in people receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy for cancer. The outcomes were eradication of oral candidiasis, dysphagia, systemic infection, amount of analgesia, length of hospitalisation, cost and patient quality of life.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Trial authors were contacted for details of randomisation and withdrawals and a quality assessment was carried out. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated using fixed-effect models.
MAIN RESULTS
Ten trials involving 940 patients, satisfied the inclusion criteria and are included in this review. Drugs absorbed from the gastrointestinal (GI) tract were beneficial in eradication of oral candidiasis compared with drugs not absorbed from the GI tract (three trials: RR = 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 to 1.52), however there was significant heterogeneity. A drug absorbed from the GI tract, ketoconazole, was more beneficial than placebo in eradicating oral candidiasis (one trial: RR = 3.61, 95% CI 1.47 to 8.88). Clotrimazole, at a higher dose of 50 mg was more effective than a lower 10 mg dose in eradicating oral candidiasis, when assessed mycologically (one trial: RR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.60). Only one of the ten trials was assessed as at low risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to claim or refute a benefit for any antifungal agent in treating candidiasis. Further well designed, placebo-controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of old and new interventions for treating oral candidiasis are needed. Clinicians need to make a decision on whether to prevent or treat oral candidiasis in patients receiving treatment for cancer.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Candidiasis, Oral; Gastrointestinal Tract; Humans; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 20614427
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001972.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2017Staphylococcus aureus causes pulmonary infection in young children with cystic fibrosis. Prophylactic antibiotics are prescribed hoping to prevent such infection and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Staphylococcus aureus causes pulmonary infection in young children with cystic fibrosis. Prophylactic antibiotics are prescribed hoping to prevent such infection and lung damage. Antibiotics have adverse effects and long-term use might lead to infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. This is an update of a previously published review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess continuous oral antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent the acquisition of Staphylococcus aureus versus no prophylaxis in people with cystic fibrosis, we tested these hypotheses. Prophylaxis:1. improves clinical status, lung function and survival;2. causes adverse effects (e.g. diarrhoea, skin rash, candidiasis);3. leads to fewer isolates of common pathogens from respiratory secretions;4. leads to the emergence of antibiotic resistance and colonisation of the respiratory tract with Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches, handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. Companies manufacturing anti-staphylococcal antibiotics were contacted.Most recent search of the Group's Register: 29 September 2016.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials of continuous oral prophylactic antibiotics (given for at least one year) compared to intermittent antibiotics given 'as required', in people with cystic fibrosis of any disease severity.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The authors assessed studies for eligibility and methodological quality and extracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four studies, with a total of 401 randomised participants aged zero to seven years on enrolment; one study is ongoing. The two older included studies generally had a higher risk of bias across all domains, but in particular due to a lack of blinding and incomplete outcome data, than the two more recent studies. We only regarded the most recent study as being generally free of bias, although even here we were not certain of the effect of the per protocol analysis on the study results. Evidence was downgraded based on GRADE assessments and outcome results ranged from moderate to low quality. Downgrading decisions were due to limitations in study design (all outcomes); for imprecision (number of people needing additional antibiotics); and for inconsistency (weight z score).Fewer children receiving anti-staphylococcal antibiotic prophylaxis had one or more isolates of Staphylococcus aureus (low quality evidence). There was no significant difference between groups in infant or conventional lung function (moderate quality evidence). We found no significant effect on nutrition (low quality evidence), hospital admissions, additional courses of antibiotics (low quality evidence) or adverse effects (moderate quality evidence). There was no significant difference in the number of isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa between groups (low quality evidence), though there was a trend towards a lower cumulative isolation rate of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in the prophylaxis group at two and three years and towards a higher rate from four to six years. As the studies reviewed lasted six years or less, conclusions cannot be drawn about the long-term effects of prophylaxis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Anti-staphylococcal antibiotic prophylaxis leads to fewer children having isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, when commenced early in infancy and continued up to six years of age. The clinical importance of this finding is uncertain. Further research may establish whether the trend towards more children with CF with Pseudomonas aeruginosa, after four to six years of prophylaxis, is a chance finding and whether choice of antibiotic or duration of treatment might influence this.
Topics: Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Child; Child, Preschool; Cystic Fibrosis; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Tract Infections; Staphylococcal Infections; Staphylococcus aureus
PubMed: 28417451
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001912.pub4 -
Life (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2022The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of antifungal agents used in the prevention of oropharyngeal candidiasis among HIV-infected adults. A... (Review)
Review
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Antifungal Agents in the Prophylaxis of Oropharyngeal Candidiasis among HIV-Infected Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of antifungal agents used in the prevention of oropharyngeal candidiasis among HIV-infected adults. A systematic search was conducted in four databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, CENTRAL, and Embase) for eligible randomized control trials (RCTs). The network meta-analyses (NMA) were performed using a random-effects model. Interventions were ranked based on the efficacy and safety using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. From a total of 1574 studies screened, 7 RCTs comprising 959 participants were included in NMA. The use of fluconazole as a prophylactic agent was associated with a significant reduction in incidence of OPC compared to placebo (RR, 0.45 (95% CI: 0.27-0.77)) in HIV-infected adults. The overall quality of evidence was graded as moderate. Fluconazole was ranked the best antifungal for efficacy (SUCRA-95.6%) as well as safety (SUCRA-39.3%) in HIV-infected adults. Overall, the quality of evidence was graded as moderate. Fluconazole can be considered as an effective agent with a better safety profile for the prophylaxis of OPC in HIV-infected adults. However, similar to any other antimicrobial agent, the risk of possibility of resistance must be weighed against the benefits.
PubMed: 35455006
DOI: 10.3390/life12040515 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2011Treatment of cancer is increasingly more effective but is associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects remain a major source of illness despite... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Treatment of cancer is increasingly more effective but is associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to prevent them. One of these side effects is oral mucositis (mouth ulcers).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic agents for oral mucositis in patients with cancer receiving treatment, compared with other potentially active interventions, placebo or no treatment.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Electronic searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group and PaPaS Trials Registers (to 16 February 2011), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 1), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 16 February 2011), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 16 February 2011), CINAHL via EBSCO (1980 to 16 February 2011), CANCERLIT via PubMed (1950 to 16 February 2011), OpenSIGLE (1980 to 2005) and LILACS via the Virtual Health Library (1980 to 16 February 2011) were undertaken. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched and the authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of interventions to prevent oral mucositis in patients receiving treatment for cancer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Information regarding methods, participants, interventions, outcome measures, results and risk of bias were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. Authors were contacted for further details where these were unclear. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were followed and risk ratios calculated using random-effects models.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 131 studies with 10,514 randomised participants are now included. Overall only 8% of these studies were assessed as being at low risk of bias. Ten interventions, where there was more than one trial in the meta-analysis, showed some statistically significant evidence of a benefit (albeit sometimes weak) for either preventing or reducing the severity of mucositis, compared to either a placebo or no treatment. These ten interventions were: aloe vera, amifostine, cryotherapy, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), intravenous glutamine, honey, keratinocyte growth factor, laser, polymixin/tobramycin/amphotericin (PTA) antibiotic pastille/paste and sucralfate.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Ten interventions were found to have some benefit with regard to preventing or reducing the severity of mucositis associated with cancer treatment. The strength of the evidence was variable and implications for practice include consideration that benefits may be specific for certain cancer types and treatment. There is a need for further well designed, and conducted trials with sufficient numbers of participants to perform subgroup analyses by type of disease and chemotherapeutic agent.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Candidiasis, Oral; Humans; Neoplasms; Oral Ulcer; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomatitis
PubMed: 21491378
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000978.pub5