scholarly journals Erratum to: Probiotic treatments for induction and maintenance of remission in inflammatory bowel diseases: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 84-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikihiro Fujiya ◽  
Nobuhiro Ueno ◽  
Yutaka Kohgo
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Bowel Diseases ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel ◽  
Maintenance Of Remission

scholarly journals Acupuncture and Moxibustion for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Ji ◽  
Yuan Lu ◽  
Huirong Liu ◽  
Hui Feng ◽  
Fuqing Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Moxibustion Therapy ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Acupuncture And Moxibustion ◽  
Bowel Diseases ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel

Background. Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are recurrent and refractory which include ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD). Clinical researches about acupuncture and moxibustion treatments for IBD are increasing, while systematic reviews about their efficacy remains in a shortage. This study sought to evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture and moxibustion for IBD.Methods. Seven significant databases both in and abroad were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared acupuncture and moxibustion as the main intervention to pharmacotherapy in treating IBD. A meta-analysis was performed.Results. A total of 43 RCTs were included. Among the 43 included trials, 10 trials compared oral sulphasalazine (SASP) with acupuncture and/or moxibustion treatments. A meta-analysis of the 10 trials indicated that acupuncture and moxibustion therapy was superior to oral SASP.Conclusion. Acupuncture and moxibustion therapy demonstrates better efficacy than oral SASP in treating IBD. However, given the limitations of this systematic review and the included literature, definitive conclusions regarding the exact efficacy of acupuncture and moxibustion treatment for IBD cannot be drawn. Extant RCTs still cannot provide sufficient evidence and multicentre, double-blind RCTs with large sample sizes are needed to provide higher-quality evidence.

Any Future for Fecal Microbiota Transplantation as Treatment Strategy for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases?

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (Suppl. 1) ◽  
pp. 74-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrizia Kump ◽  
Christoph Högenauer
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases ◽  
Fecal Microbiota Transplantation ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Fecal Microbiota ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Bowel Diseases ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is a novel therapeutic procedure aiming at restoring a normal intestinal microbiota by application of fecal microorganisms from a healthy subject into the gastrointestinal tract of a patient. FMT is the most effective treatment for recurrent Clostridium difficile infections (CDI). These infections also occur in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), where case series demonstrated a successful treatment of CDI by FMT in 83-92% of patients. The effect of FMT on the activity of IBD has mainly been investigated in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients, including 3 randomized controlled trials. So far, 2 randomized controlled trials showed a superiority of FMT compared to placebo in inducing remission in UC, while 1 study found no significant difference to placebo. The variation in response to FMT between these studies as well as in the uncontrolled trials might be explained by many differences in the way of FMT application, patient pretreatment and patient and donor selection. The data for the use of FMT in Crohn's disease and pouchitis are sparse; currently, no conclusion can be drawn regarding the effectiveness of FMT in these indications. It needs to be noted that cases of IBD activation after FMT have been reported. So far, FMT can only be recommended to be used for the treatment of concomitant CDI in IBD in clinical practice. For treating IBD irrespective of CDI, FMT should be only used in clinical trials. Current forms of FMT, especially protocols using repeated application, are very time and personnel consuming. Future trends are the use of defined stable microbiota preparations, in particular oral preparations, which will enable better and larger controlled trails for investigating FMT in IBD.

scholarly journals Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Biosimilars, Biologics and JAK1 Inhibitors for Active Crohn Disease

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guozhi Wu ◽  
Yuan Yang ◽  
Min Liu ◽  
Yuping Wang ◽  
Qinghong Guo
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Crohn Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Certolizumab Pegol ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Maintenance Of Remission

Background: Crohn disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects quality of life. There are several drugs available for the treatment of CD, but their relative efficacy is unknown due to a lack of high-quality head-to-head randomized controlled trials.Aim: To perform a mixed comparison of the efficacy and safety of biosimilars, biologics and JAK1 inhibitors for CD.Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, embase and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to Dec. 28, 2020. Only RCTs that compared the efficacy or safety of biosimilars, biologics and JAK1 inhibitors with placebo or another active agent for CD were included in the comparative analysis. Efficacy outcomes were the induction of remission, maintenance of remission and steroid-free remission, and safety outcomes were serious adverse events (AEs) and infections. The Bayesian method was utilized to compare the treatments. The registration number is CRD42020187807.Results: Twenty-eight studies and 29 RCTs were identified in our systematic review. The network meta-analysis demonstrated that infliximab and adalimumab were superior to certolizumab pegol (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.35–4.97; OR 2.96, 95% CI 1.57–5.40, respectively) and tofacitinib (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.27–5.97; OR 3.10, 95% CI 1.47–6.52, respectively) and revealed the superiority of CT-P13 compared with placebo (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.31–7.59) for the induction of remission. Infliximab (OR 7.49, 95% CI 1.85–34.77), adalimumab (OR 10.76, 95% CI 2.61–52.35), certolizumab pegol (OR 4.41, 95% CI 1.10–21.08), vedolizumab (OR 4.99, 95% CI 1.19–25.54) and CT-P13 (OR 10.93, 95% CI 2.10–64.37) were superior to filgotinib for the maintenance of remission. Moreover, infliximab (OR 3.80, 95% CI 1.49–10.23), adalimumab (OR 4.86, 95% CI 1.43–16.95), vedolizumab (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.21–6.52) and CT-P13 (OR 5.15, 95% CI 1.05–27.58) were superior to placebo for steroid-free remission. Among all treatments, adalimumab ranked highest for the induction of remission, and CT-P13 ranked highest for the maintenance of remission and steroid-free remission.Conclusion: CT-P13 was more efficacious than numerous biological agents and JAK1 inhibitors and should be recommended for the treatment of CD. Further head-to-head RCTs are warranted to compare these drugs.

scholarly journals Side Effects Associated with Probiotic Use in Adult Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Nutrients ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 2913 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Pina Dore ◽  
Stefano Bibbò ◽  
Gianni Fresi ◽  
Gabrio Bassotti ◽  
Giovanni Mario Pes
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel Disease ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Bowel Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel

Probiotics demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the safety profile of probiotics is insufficiently explored. In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we examined the occurrence of side effects related to probiotic/synbiotic use in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of IBD patients as compared with placebo. Eligible RCTs in adult patients with IBD were identified by accessing the Medline database via PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials up to December 2018. Occurrence of side effects was retrieved and recorded. Data were pooled and the relative risks (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The low-moderate study heterogeneity, assessed by the I2 statistic, allowed to use of a fixed-effects modelling for meta-analysis. Nine RCTs among 2337, including 826 patients (442 treated with probiotics/symbiotic and 384 with placebo) were analyzed. Eight were double-blind RCTs, and six enrolled ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. Although the risk for the overall side effects (RR 1.35, 95%CI 0.93–1.94; I2 = 25%) and for gastrointestinal symptoms (RR 1.78, 95%CI 0.99–3.20; I2 = 20%) was higher in IBD patients taking probiotics than in those exposed to placebo, statistical significance was achieved only for abdominal pain (RR 2.59, 95%CI 1.28–5.22; I2 = 40%). In conclusion, despite the small number of RCTs and the variety of probiotic used and schedule across studies, these findings highlight the level of research effort still required to identify the most appropriate use of probiotics in IBD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document