Invited commentary on “Effects of erector spinae plane block on postoperative pain and side-effects in adult patients underwent surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials”

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of preoperative oral gabapentin in preventing postoperative Catheter-Related Bladder Discomfort (CRBD) in surgical patients.Methods: Randomized controlled trials in which gabapentin was used for the prevention of CRBD in surgical patients with transurethral catheterization were evaluated. The primary outcome was the incidence of moderate-to-severe CRBD at 0, 1, 2, and 6 h after surgery, and secondary outcomes included the incidence of any grade CRBD, postoperative pain, and adverse events. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean difference (MD), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and P values were estimated using fixed and random effects statistical models. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the levels of certainty for key results.Results: A total of 6 randomized controlled trials involving 679 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Gabapentin significantly reduced the risk of moderate-to-severe CRBD at 0, 1, 2, and 6 h (0 h: RR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.31, p < 0.00001; 1 h: RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.66, p < 0.001; 2 h: RR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.56, p < 0.00001; 6 h: RR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.38, p < 0.00001). The overall incidence of CRBD at 1 h showed no statistical difference between the two groups (RR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.30 to 1.00, p = 0.05). The risk of CRBD was significantly reduced in the gabapentin group at 0, 2, and 6 h after surgery (0 h: RR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.74, p < 0.0001; 2 h: RR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.75, p < 0.00001; 6 h: RR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.83, p < 0.001). In addition, gabapentin was associated with low postoperative pain intensity without significant side effects.Conclusion: Preoperative oral gabapentin as an adjunct to surgery is effective in decreasing the risk and severity of CRBD over a short time after surgery, and it can decrease postoperative pain without significant side effects. Overall, the level of certainty was moderate to low.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD42021228171.

Download Full-text

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

Nutrients ◽

10.3390/nu11122913 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (12) ◽

pp. 2913 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

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.

Download Full-text