Radiofrequency ablation treatment of soft palate for patients with snoring: A systematic review of effectiveness and adverse effects

2009 ◽  
Vol 119 (6) ◽  
pp. 1241-1250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leif J. J. Bäck ◽  
Maija L. Hytönen ◽  
Risto P. Roine ◽  
Antti O. V. Malmivaara
Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 2382
Author(s):  
Hauna Sheyholislami ◽  
Kristin L. Connor

Probiotic and prebiotic products have shown potential health benefits, including for the prevention of adverse pregnancy outcomes. The incidence of adverse effects in pregnant people and their infants associated with probiotic/prebiotic/synbiotic intake, however, remains unclear. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the evidence on adverse effects of maternal probiotic, prebiotic, and/or synbiotic supplementation during pregnancy and lactation and interpret the findings to help inform clinical decision-making and care of this population. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Scientific databases were searched using pre-determined terms, and risk of bias assessments were conducted to determine study quality. Inclusion criteria were English language studies, human studies, access to full-text, and probiotic/prebiotic/synbiotic supplementation to the mother and not the infant. In total, 11/100 eligible studies reported adverse effects and were eligible for inclusion in quantitative analysis, and data were visualised in a GOfER diagram. Probiotic and prebiotic products are safe for use during pregnancy and lactation. One study reported increased risk of vaginal discharge and changes in stool consistency (relative risk [95% CI]: 3.67 [1.04, 13.0]) when administering Lactobacillus rhamnosus and L. reuteri. Adverse effects associated with probiotic and prebiotic use do not pose any serious health concerns to mother or infant. Our findings and knowledge translation visualisations provide healthcare professionals and consumers with information to make evidence-informed decisions about the use of pre- and probiotics.


Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 2159
Author(s):  
Charalampos Aktypis ◽  
Maria-Eleni Spei ◽  
Maria Yavropoulou ◽  
Göran Wallin ◽  
Anna Koumarianou ◽  
...  

A broad spectrum of novel targeted therapies with prime antitumor activity and/or ample control of hormonal symptoms together with an overall acceptable safety profile have emerged for patients with metastatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs). In this systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis, the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched to assess and compare the safety profile of NEN treatments with special focus on the cardiovascular adverse effects of biotherapy and molecular targeted therapies (MTTs). Quality/risk of bias were assessed using GRADE criteria. Placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in patients with metastatic NENs, including medullary thyroid cancer (MTC) were included. A total of 3695 articles and 122 clinical trials registered in clinicaltrials.gov were screened. We included sixteen relevant RCTs comprising 3408 unique patients assigned to different treatments compared with placebo. All the included studies had a low risk of bias. We identified four drug therapies for NENs with eligible placebo-controlled RCTs: somatostatin analogs (SSAs), tryptophan hydroxylase (TPH) inhibitors, mTOR inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). Grade 3 and 4 adverse effects (AE) were more often encountered in patients treated with mTOR inhibitors and TKI (odds ratio [OR]: 2.42, 95% CI: 1.87–3.12 and OR: 3.41, 95% CI: 1.46–7.96, respectively) as compared to SSAs (OR:0.77, 95% CI: 0.47–1.27) and TPH inhibitors (OR:0.77, 95% CI: 0.35–1.69). MTOR inhibitors had the highest risk for serious cardiac AE (OR:3.28, 95% CI: 1.66–6.48) followed by TKIs (OR:1.51, 95% CI: 0.59–3.83). Serious vascular AE were more often encountered in NEN patients treated with mTOR inhibitors (OR: 1.72, 95% CI: 0.64–4.64) and TKIs (OR:1.64, 95% CI: 0.35–7.78). Finally, patients on TKIs were at higher risk for new-onset or exacerbation of pre-existing hypertension (OR:3.31, 95% CI: 1.87–5.86). In conclusion, SSAs and TPH inhibitors appear to be safer as compared to mTOR inhibitors and TKIs with regards to their overall toxicity profile, and cardiovascular toxicities in particular. Special consideration should be given to a patient-tailored approach with anticipated toxicities of targeted NEN treatments together with assessment of cardiovascular comorbidities, assisting clinicians in treatment selection and early recognition/management of cardiovascular toxicities. This approach could improve patient compliance and preserve cardiovascular health and overall quality of life.


Heart Rhythm ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 1990-1996 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad R. Afzal ◽  
Jawaria Chatta ◽  
Anweshan Samanta ◽  
Salman Waheed ◽  
Morteza Mahmoudi ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Roland A. Snijder ◽  
Maurits K. Konings ◽  
Peter Lucas ◽  
Toine C. Egberts ◽  
Annemoon D. Timmerman

AbstractInfusion therapy is medically and technically challenging and frequently associated with medical errors. When administering pharmaceuticals by means of infusion, dosing errors can occur due to flow rate variability. These dosing errors may lead to adverse effects. We aimed to systematically review the available biomedical literature for


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1739.2-1739
Author(s):  
C. Hatzantonis

Background:Knee osteoarthritis has been a leading cause of chronic pain and disability in our increasingly aging population. Conservative management options of physiotherapy and oral analgesics offer some relief, but delivery of intra-articular injections such as corticosteroids or hyaluronic acid has increasingly become the mainstay of pain management of knee osteoarthritis. In a clinical setting, intra-articular injections offer a means to delay a total knee replacement. Despite the abundance of literature on corticosteroids and hyaluronic acid, there is no known percentage of infection rates or adverse effects that clinicians may use to inform patients prior to obtaining consent for the injection.Objectives:To determine a rate of adverse events and infection rates in patients undergoing intra-articular injections of corticosteroids or hyaluronic acid.Methods:A systematic review of current literature including studies involving patients ranging from 45 patients (Carmona L, 2018) to Cochrane reviews of 1767 patients (Campbell Kirk, 2015). From these studies, the number of patients, adverse reactions (i.e. pain, erythema) and serious adverse reactions (infections) were calculated.Results:Within our study, there was a large variation of numbers of adverse effects of hyaluronic acid and corticosteroids amongst studies, with percentages as variable as 0-9.3%. Corticosteroids demonstrated 11-26% reduction of adverse events compared to hyaluronic acid. However, confidence intervals were found to not be statistically significant.Conclusion:Intra-articular injections of corticosteroids and hyaluronic acid, although deemed clinically effective, continue to demonstrate variable rates of adverse effects and infection amongst patients with progressive knee osteoarthritis.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document