-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2018Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic drugs can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. There... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic drugs can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. There are several uterotonic drugs for preventing PPH but it is still debatable which drug is best.
OBJECTIVES
To identify the most effective uterotonic drug(s) to prevent PPH, and generate a ranking according to their effectiveness and side-effect profile.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (1 June 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) for unpublished trial reports (30 June 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled comparisons or cluster trials of effectiveness or side-effects of uterotonic drugs for preventing PPH.Quasi-randomised trials and cross-over trials are not eligible for inclusion in this review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL and PPH ≥ 1000 mL as primary outcomes. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available drugs. We stratified our primary outcomes according to mode of birth, prior risk of PPH, healthcare setting, dosage, regimen and route of drug administration, to detect subgroup effects.The absolute risks in the oxytocin are based on meta-analyses of proportions from the studies included in this review and the risks in the intervention groups were based on the assumed risk in the oxytocin group and the relative effects of the interventions.
MAIN RESULTS
This network meta-analysis included 140 randomised trials with data from 88,947 women. There are two large ongoing studies. The trials were mostly carried out in hospital settings and recruited women who were predominantly more than 37 weeks of gestation having a vaginal birth. The majority of trials were assessed to have uncertain risk of bias due to poor reporting of study design. This primarily impacted on our confidence in comparisons involving carbetocin trials more than other uterotonics.The three most effective drugs for prevention of PPH ≥ 500 mL were ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, carbetocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin combination. These three options were more effective at preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL compared with oxytocin, the drug currently recommended by the WHO (ergometrine plus oxytocin risk ratio (RR) 0.69 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.83), moderate-quality evidence; carbetocin RR 0.72 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.00), very low-quality evidence; misoprostol plus oxytocin RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.90), moderate-quality evidence). Based on these results, about 10.5% women given oxytocin would experience a PPH of ≥ 500 mL compared with 7.2% given ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, 7.6% given carbetocin, and 7.7% given misoprostol plus oxytocin. Oxytocin was ranked fourth with close to 0% cumulative probability of being ranked in the top three for PPH ≥ 500 mL.The outcomes and rankings for the outcome of PPH ≥ 1000 mL were similar to those of PPH ≥ 500 mL. with the evidence for ergometrine plus oxytocin combination being more effective than oxytocin (RR 0.77 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.95), high-quality evidence) being more certain than that for carbetocin (RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.38 to 1.28), low-quality evidence), or misoprostol plus oxytocin combination (RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.14), moderate-quality evidence)There were no meaningful differences between all drugs for maternal deaths or severe morbidity as these outcomes were so rare in the included randomised trials.Two combination regimens had the poorest rankings for side-effects. Specifically, the ergometrine plus oxytocin combination had the higher risk for vomiting (RR 3.10 (95% CI 2.11 to 4.56), high-quality evidence; 1.9% versus 0.6%) and hypertension [RR 1.77 (95% CI 0.55 to 5.66), low-quality evidence; 1.2% versus 0.7%), while the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination had the higher risk for fever (RR 3.18 (95% CI 2.22 to 4.55), moderate-quality evidence; 11.4% versus 3.6%) when compared with oxytocin. Carbetocin had similar risk for side-effects compared with oxytocin although the quality evidence was very low for vomiting and for fever, and was low for hypertension.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, carbetocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin combination were more effective for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL than the current standard oxytocin. Ergometrine plus oxytocin combination was more effective for preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL than oxytocin. Misoprostol plus oxytocin combination evidence is less consistent and may relate to different routes and doses of misoprostol used in the studies. Carbetocin had the most favourable side-effect profile amongst the top three options; however, most carbetocin trials were small and at high risk of bias.Amongst the 11 ongoing studies listed in this review there are two key studies that will inform a future update of this review. The first is a WHO-led multi-centre study comparing the effectiveness of a room temperature stable carbetocin versus oxytocin (administered intramuscularly) for preventing PPH in women having a vaginal birth. The trial includes around 30,000 women from 10 countries. The other is a UK-based trial recruiting more than 6000 women to a three-arm trial comparing carbetocin, oxytocin and ergometrine plus oxytocin combination. Both trials are expected to report in 2018.Consultation with our consumer group demonstrated the need for more research into PPH outcomes identified as priorities for women and their families, such as women's views regarding the drugs used, clinical signs of excessive blood loss, neonatal unit admissions and breastfeeding at discharge. To date, trials have rarely investigated these outcomes. Consumers also considered the side-effects of uterotonic drugs to be important but these were often not reported. A forthcoming set of core outcomes relating to PPH will identify outcomes to prioritise in trial reporting and will inform futures updates of this review. We urge all trialists to consider measuring these outcomes for each drug in all future randomised trials. Lastly, future evidence synthesis research could compare the effects of different dosages and routes of administration for the most effective drugs.
Topics: Drug Therapy, Combination; Ergonovine; Female; Fever; Humans; Hypertension; Misoprostol; Network Meta-Analysis; Oxytocics; Oxytocin; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Vomiting
PubMed: 29693726
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011689.pub2 -
Nutrients Nov 2021Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder common from childhood to adulthood, affecting 5% to 12% among the general population in...
UNLABELLED
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder common from childhood to adulthood, affecting 5% to 12% among the general population in developed countries. Potential etiological factors have been identified, including genetic causes, environmental elements and epigenetic components. Nutrition is currently considered an influencing factor, and several studies have explored the contribution of restriction and dietary supplements in ADHD treatments. Iron is an essential cofactor required for a number of functions, such as transport of oxygen, immune function, cellular respiration, neurotransmitter metabolism (dopamine production), and DNA synthesis. Zinc is also an essential trace element, required for cellular functions related to the metabolism of neurotransmitters, melatonin, and prostaglandins. Epidemiological studies have found that iron and zinc deficiencies are common nutritional deficits worldwide, with important roles on neurologic functions (poor memory, inattentiveness, and impulsiveness), finicky appetite, and mood changes (sadness and irritability). Altered levels of iron and zinc have been related with the aggravation and progression of ADHD.
OBJECTIVE
This is a systematic review focused on the contribution of iron and zinc in the progression of ADHD among children and adolescents, and how therapies including these elements are tolerated along with its effectiveness (according to PRISMA guidelines).
METHOD
The scientific literature was screened for randomized controlled trials published between January 2000 to July 2021. The databases consulted were Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Two independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality and risk of bias (CONSORT, NICE, and Cochrane checklists used).
CONCLUSION
Nine studies met the eligibility criteria and were selected. Evidence was obtained regarding the contribution of iron-zinc supplementation in the treatment of ADHD among young individuals. The discussion was focused on how the deficits of these elements contribute to affectation on multiple ADHD correlates, and potential mechanisms explaining the mediational pathways. Evidence also suggested that treating ADHD with diet interventions might be particularly useful for specific subgroups of children and adolescents, but further investigations of the effects of these diet interventions are needed.
Topics: Adolescent; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Child; Dietary Supplements; Ferrous Compounds; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Zinc
PubMed: 34836314
DOI: 10.3390/nu13114059 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2021Miscarriage, defined as the spontaneous loss of a pregnancy before 24 weeks' gestation, is common with approximately 25% of women experiencing a miscarriage in their... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Miscarriage, defined as the spontaneous loss of a pregnancy before 24 weeks' gestation, is common with approximately 25% of women experiencing a miscarriage in their lifetime. An estimated 15% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. Miscarriage can lead to serious morbidity, including haemorrhage, infection, and even death, particularly in settings without adequate healthcare provision. Early miscarriages occur during the first 14 weeks of pregnancy, and can be managed expectantly, medically or surgically. However, there is uncertainty about the relative effectiveness and risks of each option.
OBJECTIVES
To estimate the relative effectiveness and safety profiles for the different management methods for early miscarriage, and to provide rankings of the available methods according to their effectiveness, safety, and side-effect profile using a network meta-analysis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (9 February 2021), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (12 February 2021), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness or safety of methods for miscarriage management. Early miscarriage was defined as less than or equal to 14 weeks of gestation, and included missed and incomplete miscarriage. Management of late miscarriages after 14 weeks of gestation (often referred to as intrauterine fetal deaths) was not eligible for inclusion in the review. Cluster- and quasi-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion. Randomised trials published only as abstracts were eligible if sufficient information could be retrieved. We excluded non-randomised trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least three review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for the primary outcomes of complete miscarriage and composite outcome of death or serious complications. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Relative effects for the primary outcomes are reported subgrouped by the type of miscarriage (incomplete and missed miscarriage). We also performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available methods.
MAIN RESULTS
Our network meta-analysis included 78 randomised trials involving 17,795 women from 37 countries. Most trials (71/78) were conducted in hospital settings and included women with missed or incomplete miscarriage. Across 158 trial arms, the following methods were used: 51 trial arms (33%) used misoprostol; 50 (32%) used suction aspiration; 26 (16%) used expectant management or placebo; 17 (11%) used dilatation and curettage; 11 (6%) used mifepristone plus misoprostol; and three (2%) used suction aspiration plus cervical preparation. Of these 78 studies, 71 (90%) contributed data in a usable form for meta-analysis. Complete miscarriage Based on the relative effects from the network meta-analysis of 59 trials (12,591 women), we found that five methods may be more effective than expectant management or placebo for achieving a complete miscarriage: · suction aspiration after cervical preparation (risk ratio (RR) 2.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41 to 3.20, low-certainty evidence), · dilatation and curettage (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.75, low-certainty evidence), · suction aspiration (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.62, low-certainty evidence), · mifepristone plus misoprostol (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.66, moderate-certainty evidence), · misoprostol (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.46, low-certainty evidence). The highest ranked surgical method was suction aspiration after cervical preparation. The highest ranked non-surgical treatment was mifepristone plus misoprostol. All surgical methods were ranked higher than medical methods, which in turn ranked above expectant management or placebo. Composite outcome of death and serious complications Based on the relative effects from the network meta-analysis of 35 trials (8161 women), we found that four methods with available data were compatible with a wide range of treatment effects compared with expectant management or placebo: · dilatation and curettage (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.06, low-certainty evidence), · suction aspiration (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.32, low-certainty evidence), · misoprostol (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.15, low-certainty evidence), · mifepristone plus misoprostol (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.84, low-certainty evidence). Importantly, no deaths were reported in these studies, thus this composite outcome was entirely composed of serious complications, including blood transfusions, uterine perforations, hysterectomies, and intensive care unit admissions. Expectant management and placebo ranked the lowest when compared with alternative treatment interventions. Subgroup analyses by type of miscarriage (missed or incomplete) agreed with the overall analysis in that surgical methods were the most effective treatment, followed by medical methods and then expectant management or placebo, but there are possible subgroup differences in the effectiveness of the available methods. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on relative effects from the network meta-analysis, all surgical and medical methods for managing a miscarriage may be more effective than expectant management or placebo. Surgical methods were ranked highest for managing a miscarriage, followed by medical methods, which in turn ranked above expectant management or placebo. Expectant management or placebo had the highest chance of serious complications, including the need for unplanned or emergency surgery. A subgroup analysis showed that surgical and medical methods may be more beneficial in women with missed miscarriage compared to women with incomplete miscarriage. Since type of miscarriage (missed and incomplete) appears to be a source of inconsistency and heterogeneity within these data, we acknowledge that the main network meta-analysis may be unreliable. However, we plan to explore this further in future updates and consider the primary analysis as separate networks for missed and incomplete miscarriage.
Topics: Abortion, Incomplete; Abortion, Missed; Abortion, Spontaneous; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Mifepristone; Misoprostol; Network Meta-Analysis; Oxytocics; Placebos; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Suction; Vacuum Curettage; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 34061352
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012602.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2018Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic agents can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic agents can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. The current World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation for preventing PPH is 10 IU (international units) of intramuscular or intravenous oxytocin. There are several uterotonic agents for preventing PPH but there is still uncertainty about which agent is most effective with the least side effects. This is an update of a Cochrane Review which was first published in April 2018 and was updated to incorporate results from a recent large WHO trial.
OBJECTIVES
To identify the most effective uterotonic agent(s) to prevent PPH with the least side effects, and generate a ranking according to their effectiveness and side-effect profile.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (24 May 2018), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials or cluster-randomised trials comparing the effectiveness and side effects of uterotonic agents with other uterotonic agents, placebo or no treatment for preventing PPH were eligible for inclusion. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded. Randomised trials published only as abstracts were eligible if sufficient information could be retrieved.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL and PPH ≥ 1000 mL as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included blood loss and related outcomes, morbidity outcomes, maternal well-being and satisfaction and side effects. Primary outcomes were also reported for pre-specified subgroups, stratifying by mode of birth, prior risk of PPH, healthcare setting, dosage, regimen and route of administration. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available agents.
MAIN RESULTS
The network meta-analysis included 196 trials (135,559 women) involving seven uterotonic agents and placebo or no treatment, conducted across 53 countries (including high-, middle- and low-income countries). Most trials were performed in a hospital setting (187/196, 95.4%) with women undergoing a vaginal birth (71.5%, 140/196).Relative effects from the network meta-analysis suggested that all agents were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL when compared with placebo or no treatment. The three highest ranked uterotonic agents for prevention of PPH ≥ 500 mL were ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, misoprostol plus oxytocin combination and carbetocin. There is evidence that ergometrine plus oxytocin (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.84, moderate certainty), carbetocin (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.93, moderate certainty) and misoprostol plus oxytocin (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.86, low certainty) may reduce PPH ≥ 500 mL compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol, injectable prostaglandins, and ergometrine may make little or no difference to this outcome compared with oxytocin.All agents except ergometrine and injectable prostaglandins were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL when compared with placebo or no treatment. High-certainty evidence suggests that ergometrine plus oxytocin (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03) and misoprostol plus oxytocin (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.11) make little or no difference in the outcome of PPH ≥ 1000 mL compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that ergometrine may make little or no difference to this outcome compared with oxytocin meanwhile the evidence on carbetocin was of very low certainty. High-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol is less effective in preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL when compared with oxytocin (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.42). Despite the comparable relative treatment effects between all uterotonics (except misoprostol) and oxytocin, ergometrine plus oxytocin, misoprostol plus oxytocin combinations and carbetocin were the highest ranked agents for PPH ≥ 1000 mL.Misoprostol plus oxytocin reduces the use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73, high certainty) and probably also reduces the risk of blood transfusion (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.70, moderate certainty) when compared with oxytocin. Carbetocin, injectable prostaglandins and ergometrine plus oxytocin may also reduce the use of additional uterotonics but the certainty of the evidence is low. No meaningful differences could be detected between all agents for maternal deaths or severe morbidity as these outcomes were rare in the included randomised trials where they were reported.The two combination regimens were associated with important side effects. When compared with oxytocin, misoprostol plus oxytocin combination increases the likelihood of vomiting (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.18, high certainty) and fever (RR 3.14, 95% CI 2.20 to 4.49, moderate certainty). Ergometrine plus oxytocin increases the likelihood of vomiting (RR 2.93, 95% CI 2.08 to 4.13, moderate certainty) and may make little or no difference to the risk of hypertension, however absolute effects varied considerably and the certainty of the evidence was low for this outcome.Subgroup analyses did not reveal important subgroup differences by mode of birth (caesarean versus vaginal birth), setting (hospital versus community), risk of PPH (high versus low risk for PPH), dose of misoprostol (≥ 600 mcg versus < 600 mcg) and regimen of oxytocin (bolus versus bolus plus infusion versus infusion only).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
All agents were generally effective for preventing PPH when compared with placebo or no treatment. Ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, carbetocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin combination may have some additional desirable effects compared with the current standard oxytocin. The two combination regimens, however, are associated with significant side effects. Carbetocin may be more effective than oxytocin for some outcomes without an increase in side effects.
Topics: Drug Therapy, Combination; Ergonovine; Female; Fever; Humans; Hypertension; Misoprostol; Network Meta-Analysis; Oxytocics; Oxytocin; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Prostaglandins; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vomiting
PubMed: 30569545
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011689.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2020Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), defined as a blood loss of 500 mL or more after birth, is the leading cause of maternal death worldwide. The World Health Organization... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), defined as a blood loss of 500 mL or more after birth, is the leading cause of maternal death worldwide. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that all women giving birth should receive a prophylactic uterotonic agent. Despite the routine administration of a uterotonic agent for prevention, PPH remains a common complication causing one-quarter of all maternal deaths globally. When prevention fails and PPH occurs, further administration of uterotonic agents as 'first-line' treatment is recommended. However, there is uncertainty about which uterotonic agent is best for the 'first-line' treatment of PPH.
OBJECTIVES
To identify the most effective uterotonic agent(s) with the least side-effects for PPH treatment, and generate a meaningful ranking among all available agents according to their relative effectiveness and side-effect profile.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (5 May 2020), and the reference lists of all retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials or cluster-randomised trials comparing the effectiveness and safety of uterotonic agents with other uterotonic agents for the treatment of PPH were eligible for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed all trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed each trial for risk of bias. Our primary outcomes were additional blood loss of 500 mL or more after recruitment to the trial until cessation of active bleeding and the composite outcome of maternal death or severe morbidity. Secondary outcomes included blood loss-related outcomes, morbidity outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and indirect comparisons, where possible, but due to the limited number of included studies, we were unable to conduct the planned network meta-analysis. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
Seven trials, involving 3738 women in 10 countries, were included in this review. All trials were conducted in hospital settings. Randomised women gave birth vaginally, except in one small trial, where women gave birth either vaginally or by caesarean section. Across the seven trials (14 trial arms) the following agents were used: six trial arms used oxytocin alone; four trial arms used misoprostol plus oxytocin; three trial arms used misoprostol; one trial arm used Syntometrine® (oxytocin and ergometrine fixed-dose combination) plus oxytocin infusion. Pairwise meta-analysis of two trials (1787 participants), suggests that misoprostol, as first-line treatment uterotonic agent, probably increases the risk of blood transfusion (risk ratio (RR) 1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 2.14, moderate-certainty) compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol administration may increase the incidence of additional blood loss of 1000 mL or more (RR 2.57, 95% CI 1.00 to 6.64). The data comparing misoprostol with oxytocin is imprecise, with a wide range of treatment effects for the additional blood loss of 500 mL or more (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.69 to 4.02, low-certainty), maternal death or severe morbidity (RR 1.98, 95% CI 0.36 to 10.72, low-certainty, based on one study n = 809 participants, as the second study had zero events), and the use of additional uterotonics (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.94, low-certainty). The risk of side-effects may be increased with the use of misoprostol compared with oxytocin: vomiting (2 trials, 1787 participants, RR 2.47, 95% CI 1.37 to 4.47, high-certainty) and fever (2 trials, 1787 participants, RR 3.43, 95% CI 0.65 to 18.18, low-certainty). According to pairwise meta-analysis of four trials (1881 participants) generating high-certainty evidence, misoprostol plus oxytocin makes little or no difference to the use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05) and to blood transfusion (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.17) compared with oxytocin. We cannot rule out an important benefit of using the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination over oxytocin alone, for additional blood loss of 500 mL or more (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.06, moderate-certainty). We also cannot rule out important benefits or harms for additional blood loss of 1000 mL or more (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.34, moderate-certainty, 3 trials, 1814 participants, one study reported zero events), and maternal mortality or severe morbidity (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.39, moderate-certainty). Misoprostol plus oxytocin increases the incidence of fever (4 trials, 1866 participants, RR 3.07, 95% CI 2.62 to 3.61, high-certainty), and vomiting (2 trials, 1482 participants, RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.95, high-certainty) compared with oxytocin alone. For all outcomes of interest, the available evidence on the misoprostol versus Syntometrine® plus oxytocin combination was of very low-certainty and these effects remain unclear. Although network meta-analysis was not performed, we were able to compare the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination with misoprostol alone through the common comparator of oxytocin. This indirect comparison suggests that the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination probably reduces the risk of blood transfusion (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.99, moderate-certainty) and may reduce the risk of additional blood loss of 1000 mL or more (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.89, low-certainty) compared with misoprostol alone. The combination makes little or no difference to vomiting (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.59, high-certainty) compared with misoprostol alone. Misoprostol plus oxytocin compared to misoprostol alone are compatible with a wide range of treatment effects for additional blood loss of 500 mL or more (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.26, low-certainty), maternal mortality or severe morbidity (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.07 to 4.24, low-certainty), use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.73, low-certainty), and fever (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.17 to 4.77, low-certainty).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence suggests that oxytocin used as first-line treatment of PPH probably is more effective than misoprostol with less side-effects. Adding misoprostol to the conventional treatment of oxytocin probably makes little or no difference to effectiveness outcomes, and is also associated with more side-effects. The evidence for most uterotonic agents used as first-line treatment of PPH is limited, with no evidence found for commonly used agents, such as injectable prostaglandins, ergometrine, and Syntometrine®.
Topics: Bias; Blood Transfusion; Confidence Intervals; Drug Therapy, Combination; Ergonovine; Female; Humans; Misoprostol; Network Meta-Analysis; Oxytocics; Oxytocin; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33232518
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012754.pub2 -
Metabolites Dec 2022Gliomas are highly lethal tumours characterised by heterogeneous molecular features, producing various metabolic phenotypes leading to therapeutic resistance. Lipid... (Review)
Review
Gliomas are highly lethal tumours characterised by heterogeneous molecular features, producing various metabolic phenotypes leading to therapeutic resistance. Lipid metabolism reprogramming is predominant and has contributed to the metabolic plasticity in glioma. This systematic review aims to discover lipids alteration and their biological roles in glioma and the identification of potential lipids biomarker. This systematic review was conducted using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Extensive research articles search for the last 10 years, from 2011 to 2021, were conducted using four electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL and ScienceDirect. A total of 158 research articles were included in this study. All studies reported significant lipid alteration between glioma and control groups, impacting glioma cell growth, proliferation, drug resistance, patients' survival and metastasis. Different lipids demonstrated different biological roles, either beneficial or detrimental effects on glioma. Notably, prostaglandin (PGE2), triacylglycerol (TG), phosphatidylcholine (PC), and sphingosine-1-phosphate play significant roles in glioma development. Conversely, the most prominent anti-carcinogenic lipids include docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), and vitamin D3 have been reported to have detrimental effects on glioma cells. Furthermore, high lipid signals were detected at 0.9 and 1.3 ppm in high-grade glioma relative to low-grade glioma. This evidence shows that lipid metabolisms were significantly dysregulated in glioma. Concurrent with this knowledge, the discovery of specific lipid classes altered in glioma will accelerate the development of potential lipid biomarkers and enhance future glioma therapeutics.
PubMed: 36557318
DOI: 10.3390/metabo12121280 -
International Journal of Molecular... Jun 2023Through a process termed , platelets cause thrombi to shrink and become more stable. After platelets are activated via inside-out signaling, glycoprotein αIIbβIII...
Through a process termed , platelets cause thrombi to shrink and become more stable. After platelets are activated via inside-out signaling, glycoprotein αIIbβIII binds to fibrinogen and initiates a cascade of intracellular signaling that ends in actin remodeling, which causes the platelet to change its shape. Clot retraction is also important for wound healing. Although the detailed molecular biology of clot retraction is only partially understood, various substances and physiological conditions modulate clot retraction. In this review, we describe some of the current literature pertaining to clot retraction modulators. In addition, we discuss compounds from , , and that diminish clot retraction and have numerous other health benefits. Caffeic acid and diindolylmethane, both common in plants and vegetables, likewise reduce clot retraction, as do all-trans retinoic acid (a vitamin A derivative), two MAP4K inhibitors, and the chemotherapeutic drug Dasatinib. Conversely, the endogenous anticoagulant Protein S (PS) and the matricellular protein secreted modular calcium-binding protein 1 (SMOC1) both enhance clot retraction. Most studies aiming to identify mechanisms of clot retraction modulators have focused on the increased phosphorylation of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein and inositol 1,4,5-triphosphate receptor I and the decreased phosphorylation of various phospholipases (e.g., phospholipase A2 (PLA) and phosphatidylinositol-specific phospholipase Cγ2 (PLCγ), c-Jun N-terminal kinase, and (PI3Ks). One study focused on the decreased phosphorylation of Sarcoma Family Kinases (SFK), and others have focused on increased cAMP levels and the downregulation of inflammatory markers such as thromboxanes, including thromboxane A2 (TXA) and thromboxane B2 (TXB); prostaglandin A2 (PGE2); reactive oxygen species (ROS); and cyclooxygenase (COX) enzyme activity. Additionally, pregnancy, fibrinolysis, and the autoimmune condition systemic lupus erythematosus all seem to affect, or at least have some relation with, clot retraction. All the clot retraction modulators need in-depth study to explain these effects.
Topics: Blood Platelets; Clot Retraction; Phosphorylation; Platelet Aggregation; Signal Transduction
PubMed: 37445780
DOI: 10.3390/ijms241310602 -
Scientific Reports Mar 2023There is increasing evidence of sex differences in underlying mechanisms causing pain in preclinical models, and in clinical populations. There are also important...
There is increasing evidence of sex differences in underlying mechanisms causing pain in preclinical models, and in clinical populations. There are also important disconnects between clinical pain populations and the way preclinical pain studies are conducted. For instance, osteoarthritis pain more frequently affects women, but most preclinical studies have been conducted using males in animal models. The most widely used painkillers, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), act on the prostaglandin pathway by inhibiting cyclooxygenase (COX) enzymes. The purpose of this study was to analyze the preclinical and clinical literature on the role of prostaglandins and COX in inflammation and pain. We aimed to specifically identify studies that used both sexes and investigate whether any sex-differences in the action of prostaglandins and COX inhibition had been reported, either in clinical or preclinical studies. We conducted a PubMed search and identified 369 preclinical studies and 100 clinical studies that matched our inclusion/exclusion criteria. Our analysis shows that only 17% of preclinical studies on prostaglandins used both sexes and, out of those, only 19% analyzed or reported data separated by sex. In contrast, 79% of the clinical studies analyzed used both sexes. However, only 6% of those reported data separated by sex. Interestingly, 14 out of 15 preclinical studies and 5 out of 6 clinical studies that analyzed data separated by sex have identified sex-differences. This builds on the increasing evidence of sex-differences in prostaglandin signaling and the importance of sex as a biological variable in data analysis. The preclinical literature identifies a sex difference in prostaglandin D synthase (PTGDS) expression where it is higher in female than in male rodents in the nervous system. We experimentally validated that PTGDS expression is higher in female human dorsal root ganglia (DRG) neurons recovered from organ donors. Our semi-systematic literature review reveals a need for continued inclusivity of both male and female animals in prostaglandins studies and data analysis separated by sex in preclinical and clinical studies. Our finding of sex-differences in neuronal PTGDS expression in humans exemplifies the need for a more comprehensive understanding of how the prostaglandin system functions in the DRG in rodents and humans.
Topics: Animals; Female; Humans; Male; Cyclooxygenase 2; Pain; Prostaglandins; Sensory Receptor Cells; Sex Characteristics
PubMed: 36949072
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-31603-x -
BMC Medical Genetics Aug 2017Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a group of vascular diseases that produce right ventricular dysfunction, heart failure syndrome, and death. Although the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a group of vascular diseases that produce right ventricular dysfunction, heart failure syndrome, and death. Although the majority of patients appear idiopathic, accumulated research work combined with current sequencing technology show that many gene variants could be an important component of the disease. However, current guidelines, clinical practices, and available gene panels focus the diagnosis of PAH on a relatively low number of genes and variants associated with the bone morphogenic proteins and transforming Growth Factor-β pathways, such as the BMPR2, ACVRL1, CAV1, ENG, and SMAD9.
METHODS
To provide an expanded view of the genes and variants associated with PAH, we performed a systematic literature review. Facilitated by a web tool, we classified, curated, and annotated most of the genes and PubMed abstracts related to PAH, in which many of the mutations and variants were not annotated in public databases such as ClinVar from NCBI. The gene list generated was compared with other available tests.
RESULTS
Our results reveal that there is genetic evidence for at least 30 genes, of which 21 genes shown specific mutations. Most of the genes are not covered by current available genetic panels. Many of these variants were not annotated in the ClinVar database and a mapping of these mutations suggest that next generation sequencing is needed to cover all mutations found in PAH or related diseases. A pathway analysis of these genes indicated that, in addition to the BMP and TGFβ pathways, there was connections with the nitric oxide, prostaglandin, and calcium homeostasis signalling, which may be important components in PAH.
CONCLUSION
Our systematic review proposes an expanded gene panel for more accurate characterization of the genetic incidence and risk in PAH. Their usage would increase the knowledge of PAH in terms of genetic counseling, early diagnosis, and potential prognosis of the disease.
Topics: Bone Morphogenetic Proteins; Databases, Genetic; Humans; Hypertension, Pulmonary; Mutation; Risk; Signal Transduction; Transforming Growth Factor beta
PubMed: 28768485
DOI: 10.1186/s12881-017-0440-5 -
PloS One 2021Prostaglandins are thought to be important mediators in the initiation of human labour, however the evidence supporting this is not entirely clear. Determining how, and...
Prostaglandins are thought to be important mediators in the initiation of human labour, however the evidence supporting this is not entirely clear. Determining how, and which, prostaglandins change during pregnancy and labour may provide insight into mechanisms governing labour initiation and the potential to predict timing of labour onset. The current study systematically searched the existing scientific literature to determine how biofluid levels of prostaglandins change throughout pregnancy before and during labour, and whether prostaglandins and/or their metabolites may be useful for prediction of labour. The databases EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched for English-language articles on prostaglandins measured in plasma, serum, amniotic fluid, or urine during pregnancy and/or spontaneous labour. Studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias and a qualitative summary of included studies was generated. Our review identified 83 studies published between 1968-2021 that met the inclusion criteria. As measured in amniotic fluid, levels of PGE2, along with PGF2α and its metabolite 13,14-dihydro-15-keto-PGF2α were reported higher in labour compared to non-labour. In blood, only 13,14-dihydro-15-keto-PGF2α was reported higher in labour. Additionally, PGF2α, PGF1α, and PGE2 were reported to increase in amniotic fluid as pregnancy progressed, though this pattern was not consistent in plasma. Overall, the evidence supporting changes in prostaglandin levels in these biofluids remains unclear. An important limitation is the lack of data on the complexity of the prostaglandin pathway outside of the PGE and PGF families. Future studies using new methodologies capable of co-assessing multiple prostaglandins and metabolites, in large, well-defined populations, will help provide more insight as to the identification of exactly which prostaglandins and/or metabolites consistently change with labour. Revisiting and revising our understanding of the prostaglandins may provide better targets for clinical monitoring of pregnancies. This study was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Topics: Amniotic Fluid; Body Fluids; Databases, Factual; Dinoprost; Female; Humans; Labor Onset; Labor, Obstetric; Oxytocics; Plasma; Pregnancy; Prostaglandins; Prostaglandins E; Prostaglandins F; Serum; Urine
PubMed: 34793529
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260115