Efficacy of antidepressants and benzodiazepines in minor depression: systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundDepression is a common condition that has been frequently treated with psychotropics.AimsTo review systematically the evidence of efficacy and acceptability of antidepressant and benzodiazepine treatments for patients with minor depression.MethodA systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind randomised controlled trials comparing antidepressants or benzodiazepines v. placebo in adults with minor depression. Data were obtained from MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and pharmaceutical company websites. Risk of bias was assessed for the generation of the allocation sequence, allocation concealment, masking, incomplete outcome data, and sponsorship bias.ResultsSix studies met inclusion criteria. Three studies compared paroxetine with placebo; fluoxetine, amitriptyline and isocarboxazid were studied in one study each. No studies compared benzodiazepines with placebo. In terms of failures to respond to treatment (6 studies, 234 patients treated with antidepressants and 234 with placebo) no significant difference between antidepressants and placebo was found (relative risk (RR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.81–1.08). In terms of acceptability, data extracted from two studies (93 patients treated with antidepressants and 93 with placebo) showed no statistically significant difference between antidepressants and placebo (RR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.65–1.73). There was no statistically significant between-study heterogeneity for any of the reported analyses.ConclusionsThere is evidence showing there is unlikely to be a clinically important advantage for antidepressants over placebo in individuals with minor depression. For benzodiazepines, no evidence is available, and thus it is not possible to determine their potential therapeutic role in this condition.

Download Full-text

Immediate versus wait-and-gradual discontinuation in antipsychotic switching: A meta-analysis

Journal of Psychopharmacology ◽

10.1177/0269881120922964 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 34 (8) ◽

pp. 914-919

Author(s):

Hiroyoshi Takeuchi ◽

Gary Remington

Keyword(s):

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Outcome Data ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Double Blind ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Switching Strategies

Introduction: In two previous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining antipsychotic switching strategies in patients with schizophrenia, we showed no significant differences in any clinical outcomes between immediate versus gradual and gradual versus wait-and-gradual discontinuation of the pre-switch antipsychotic. In this report, we compared immediate versus wait-and-gradual antipsychotic discontinuation. Methods: We identified five RCTs examining immediate versus wait-and-gradual discontinuation of the pre-switch antipsychotic in antipsychotic switching involving patients with schizophrenia. However, no data were available from one RCT. The following clinical outcome data were extracted and meta-analyzed: study discontinuation, psychopathology, extrapyramidal symptoms, and treatment-emergent adverse events that were reported in two or more of the studies. Results: The meta-analysis included four RCTs involving 351 patients ( n=175 for immediate and n=176 for wait-and-gradual antipsychotic discontinuation). A significant difference was found in study discontinuation due to all causes ( n=4, n=351, risk ratio=1.58, 95% confidence interval 1.15–2.17, p=0.005, I2=0%) between the immediate and wait-and-gradual antipsychotic discontinuation groups, while there was no significant difference in any other clinical outcomes. The group difference in study discontinuation due to all causes remained significant for the studies adopting immediate antipsychotic initiation but not for the studies switching to ziprasidone. Conclusion: Findings suggest that wait-and-gradual antipsychotic discontinuation may be preferable when a more cautious antipsychotic switch is needed. However, further long-term, double-blind RCTs are needed to confirm the present findings.

Download Full-text

Comparison of photoselective green light laser vaporisation versus traditional transurethral resection for benign prostate hyperplasia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and prospective studies

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028855 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (8) ◽

pp. e028855 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Shicong Lai ◽

Panxin Peng ◽

Tongxiang Diao ◽

Huimin Hou ◽

Xuan Wang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Transurethral Resection ◽

Prospective Studies ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Green Light ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Green Light Laser ◽

Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of green-light laser photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis, conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement.Data sourcesPubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library until October 2018.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials and prospective studies comparing the safety and efficacy of PVP versus TURP for LUTS manifesting through BPH.Data extraction and synthesisPerioperative parameters, complications rates and functional outcomes including treatment-related adverse events such as International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual (PVR), quality of life (QoL) and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF).Results22 publications consisting of 2665 patients were analysed. Pooled analysis revealed PVP is associated with reduced blood loss, transfusion, clot retention, TUR syndrome, capsular perforation, catheterisation time and hospitalisation, but also with a higher reintervention rate and longer intervention duration (all p<0.05). No significant difference in IPSS, Qmax, QoL, PVR or IIEF at 3, 24, 36 or 60 months was identified. There was a significant difference in QoL at 6 months (MD=−0.08; 95% CI −0.13 to −0.02; p=0.007), and IPSS (MD = −0.10; 95% CI −0.15 to −0.05; p<0.0001) and Qmax (MD=0.62; 95% CI 0.06 to 1.19; p=0.03) at 12 months, although these differences were not clinically relevant.ConclusionPVP is an effective alternative, holding additional safety benefits. PVP has equivalent long-term IPSS, Qmax, QoL, PVR, IIEF efficacy and fewer complications. The main drawbacks are dysuria and reintervention, although both can be managed with non-invasive techniques. The additional shortcoming is that PVP does not acquire histological tissue examination which removes an opportunity to identify prostate cancer.

Download Full-text

Impact of levothyroxine in women with positive thyroid antibodies on pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043751 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. e043751

Author(s):

Lorraine Lau ◽

Jamie L Benham ◽

Patricia Lemieux ◽

Jennifer Yamamoto ◽

Lois E Donovan

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Preterm Delivery ◽

Pregnancy Outcomes ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of levothyroxine therapy on pregnancy outcomes compared with placebo or no treatment in women without overt hypothyroidism with presence of thyroid peroxidase antibodies (TPOAb) and/or thyroglobulin antibodies (TgAb).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trialsStudy eligibility criteriaPrespecified criteria for inclusion were: randomised trials of levothyroxine versus control (placebo or no treatment) among women with positive TPOAb or TgAb who were pregnant or considering conception.Data sourcesOvid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from 1980 to 5 November 2020.Outcome measuresPrespecified data elements were extracted and where appropriate, meta-analyses were conducted. Main outcomes include pregnancy achieved, miscarriage, preterm delivery and live birth.Risk of bias assessmentCochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Quality Assessment of Randomised Controlled Trials.ResultsFrom 3023 citations, 79 citations were identified for full-text review. Of these, six trials (total of 2263 women) were included for qualitative and quantitative analyses. Risk of bias was deemed low for only one trial. There was no significant difference in the relative risk (RR) of pregnancy achieved (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.13), miscarriage (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.14), preterm delivery (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.39 to 1.10) or live births (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.16) in thyroid autoimmune women treated with levothyroxine compared with controls. Sensitivity analyses of preterm birth identified study quality and timing of levothyroxine initiation as sources of heterogeneity.ConclusionsAmong pregnant women or women planning conception, with thyroid autoimmunity, there is a lack of evidence of benefit for levothyroxine use (moderate to high Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations). Recommendations to use levothyroxine in this setting need to be reconsidered.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019130459.

Download Full-text

M89. PHARMACOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS FOR SMOKING CESSATION AMONG PEOPLE WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Schizophrenia Bulletin ◽

10.1093/schbul/sbaa030.401 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S168-S168

Author(s):

Dan Siskind ◽

Brian Wu ◽

Tommy Wong ◽

Steve Kisely

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Smoking Abstinence ◽

Pharmacological Interventions ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Meta Analyses

Abstract Background People living with schizophrenia are 3 times more likely to smoke than the general population, and have fewer and less successful quitting attempts. In concert with psychosocial quit interventions, there is a need for evidence based pharmacological interventions to assist people living with schizophrenia achieve smoking abstinence. Methods We systematically searched PubMed, PsycInfo, EMBASE and Cochrane for randomised controlled trials of pharmacological interventions for reducing smoking among people living with schizophrenia. We conducted pairwise and network meta-analyses of effectiveness of interventions for achieving abstinence and reduction in smoking. We also examined psychiatric and physical adverse events of interventions. Results Nineteen studies were included in the systematic review. Data was available for buproprion, varenicline and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Buproprion (RR 3.4, 95%CI 1.6–7.3, p=0.002), varenicline (RR 3.8, 95%CI 2.0–7.2, p<0.001) and NRT (RR 4.3, 95%CI 1.7–10.7, p=0.002) were all associated with increased rates of abstinence in pairwise meta-analyses. In a network meta-analysis varenicline was superior to buproprion (RR 2.0, 95%CI 1.0–3.9), however there was no statistically significant difference between varenicline and NRT or buproprion and NRT. Varenicline was associated with higher rates of nausea than placebo. Discussion Buproprion, varenicline and NRT were all superior to placebo for achieving abstinence. Varenicline appears to be superior to buproprion for achieving abstinence, however varenicline is associated with higher rates of nausea.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of antimicrobial lock solutions in preventing catheter-related blood stream infection in haemodialysis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomised controlled trials

Southern African Journal of Infectious Diseases ◽

10.4102/sajid.v31i3.80 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 31 (3) ◽

pp. 95-102

Author(s):

Ahmad M. Yakasai ◽

Hamza Muhammad ◽

Garba Iliyasu ◽

Aisha M. Nalado ◽

Mahmood M. Dalhat ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Low Dose ◽

Blood Stream Infection ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Blood Stream ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

High Dose ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Randomised Controlled

Background: Catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI) contributes to morbidity and mortality among patients on haemodialysis (HD). We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of antimicrobial lock solutions (ALS) in preventing CRBSI.Method: Electronic search of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ALS with other agents was performed up to January 2013. DerSimonian and Laird meta-analysis was performed to obtain pooled relative risk (RR) from which efficacy of ALS and numbers needed to treat (NNT) were calculated. In a restricted analysis, pooled RRs where compared using a test of interaction to calculate ratio of relative risks (RRR). Meta-regression analysis was employed to explore sources of heterogeneity.Results: Sixteen RCTs involving 2016 individuals met the inclusion criteria. The efficacy of ALS in preventing CRBSI was 80% with NNT of 3 patients to prevent one CRBSI. The RR of CRBSI was significantly lower with ALS compared with heparin-only lock solution [RR {95% confidence interval (CI)} = 0.20 (0.13-0.31)]. With low dose (≤ 5 mg/ml) and high dose (40 mg/ ml) gentamicin-containing ALS, the RR (95% CI) of developing CRBSI was 0.03 (0.01-0.13) and 0.18 (0.03-0.98), respectively, with no significant difference [RRR (95% CI) = 0.2 (0.02-1.61), p = 0.126]. Heterogeneity was explained by a statistically significant association between rate of CRBSI and catheter days (p = 0.037). Conclusion: ALS are effective in preventing CRBSI. Low dose gentamicin should be preferred over high dose gentamicin as an ALS because it offers similar benefit in preventing CRBSI with lesser risk of toxicity from systemic leakage and subsequent development of drug resistance.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039159 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (6) ◽

pp. e039159

Author(s):

Desye Gebrie ◽

Desalegn Getnet ◽

Tsegahun Manyazewal

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Clinical Symptoms ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Antiviral Drug ◽

Standard Of Care ◽

Outcome Data ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Randomised Controlled

BackgroundDespite global containment measures to fight the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the pandemic continued to rise, rapidly spread across the world, and resulting in 2.6 million confirmed cases and 185 061 deaths worldwide as of 23 April 2020. Yet, there are no approved vaccines or drugs to make the disease less deadly, while efforts are underway. Remdesivir, a nucleotide-analogue antiviral drug developed for Ebola, is determined to prevent and stop infections with COVID-19, while results are yet controversial. Here, we aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19.Method and analysisWe will search MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google scholar databases for articles published as of 30 June 2020 and we will complete the study on 30 August 2020. We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 guidelines for the design and reporting of the results. We will include RCTs that assessed the efficacy of remdesivir versus placebo or standard of care. The primary endpoint will be time to clinical recovery. The secondary endpoints will be proportion of participants relieved from clinical symptoms defined at the time (in hours) from initiation of the study treatment, all-cause mortality, discharged date, frequency of respiratory progression and treatment-emergent adverse events. RevMan V.5.3 software will be used for statistical analysis. Random effects model will be carried out to calculate mean differences for continuous outcome data and risk ratio for dichotomous outcome data between remdesivir and placebo or standard of care.Ethics and disseminationThere are no ethical considerations associated with this study as we will use publicly available data from previously published studies. We plan to publish results in open-access peer-reviewed journals and present at international and national conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020177953.

Download Full-text

Drug-induced orthostatic hypotension: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

PLoS Medicine ◽

10.1371/journal.pmed.1003821 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (11) ◽

pp. e1003821

Author(s):

Cini Bhanu ◽

Danielle Nimmons ◽

Irene Petersen ◽

Mine Orlu ◽

Daniel Davis ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Orthostatic Hypotension ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Drug Induced ◽

Evidence Summary ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Randomised Controlled

Background Drug-induced orthostatic hypotension (OH) is common, and its resulting cerebral hypoperfusion is linked to adverse outcomes including falls, strokes, cognitive impairment, and increased mortality. The extent to which specific medications are associated with OH remains unclear. Methods and findings We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the extent to which specific drug groups are associated with OH. EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception through 23 November 2020. Placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on any drug reporting on OH as an adverse effect in adults (≥18 years) were eligible. Three authors extracted data on the drug, OH, dose, participant characteristics, and study setting. The revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used to appraise evidence. Summary odds ratios (ORs) were estimated for OH using fixed effects Mantel–Haenszel statistics. We conducted subgroup analysis on validity of OH measurement, drug dose, risk of bias, age, and comorbidity. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to summarise the certainty of evidence. Of 36,940 citations, 69 eligible RCTs were included in the meta-analysis comprising 27,079 participants. Compared with placebo, beta-blockers and tricyclic antidepressants were associated with increased odds of OH (OR 7.76 [95% CI 2.51, 24.03]; OR 6.30 [95% CI 2.86, 13.91]). Alpha-blockers, antipsychotics, and SGLT-2 inhibitors were associated with up to 2-fold increased odds of OH, compared to placebo. There was no statistically significant difference in odds of OH with vasodilators (CCBs, ACE inhibitors/ARBs, SSRIs), compared to placebo. Limitations of this study are as follows: data limited to placebo-controlled studies, (excluding head-to-head trials), many RCTs excluded older participants; therefore results may be amplified in older patients in the clinical setting. The study protocol is publicly available on PROSPERO (CRD42020168697). Conclusions Medications prescribed for common conditions (including depression, diabetes, and lower urinary tract symptoms) were associated with significantly increased odds of OH. Drugs causing sympathetic inhibition were associated with significantly increased odds of OH, while most vasodilators were associated with small nonsignificant differences in odds of OH, compared to placebo. Drugs targeting multiple parts of the orthostatic blood pressure (BP) reflex pathway (e.g. sympathetic inhibition, vasodilation, cardio-inhibitory effects) may carry cumulative risk, suggesting that individuals with polypharmacy could benefit from postural BP monitoring.

Download Full-text

Clinical Effects and Safety of Electroacupuncture for the Treatment of Post-Stroke Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Acupuncture in Medicine ◽

10.1136/acupmed-2016-011300 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 36 (5) ◽

pp. 284-293 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Xue-bin Li ◽

Jie Wang ◽

An-ding Xu ◽

Jian-min Huang ◽

Lan-Qing Meng ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Jadad Score ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Post Stroke Depression ◽

Randomised Controlled

Objective The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of electroacupuncture (EA) in the treatment of post-stroke depression (PSD). Methods A comprehensive literature search in the Pubmed, Embase, CENTRAL, ISI Web of Science, CNKI and Wanfang databases was conducted, and all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were screened for eligibility by two independent reviewers. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool and Jadad score were used to assess the risk of bias of included studies, and only RCTs scoring ≥3 were included in a meta-analysis. Results 18 RCTs involving a total of 813 participants (mean age 61.6 years) in the EA groups and 723 participants (mean age 61.9 years) in the control groups were included. The included studies had an average 3 point Jadad score. PSD was diagnosed according to the Chinese Classification of Cerebrovascular Disease (CCCD) and the Chinese Classification of Mental Disease (CCMD) criteria. There was no significant difference between EA and antidepressants (fluoxetine 10–40 mg/day, citalopram 20 mg/day, sertraline 50 mg/day) in terms of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) scores at week 4 after treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) −0.11, 95% CI −0.31 to 0.10), at week 6 after treatment (SMD 0.04, 95% CI −0.43 to 0.51) or at week 8 after treatment (SMD −0.01, 95% CI −0.23 to 0.22). However, the combined incidence of adverse events in the EA groups was significantly lower than in the antidepressant groups (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.33). Conclusion There was no significant difference between EA and antidepressants in the severity of depression, however EA caused fewer adverse events than antidepressants. Additional larger scale RCTs with rigorous study design are required.

Download Full-text

Microbial colonisation associated with conventional and self-ligating brackets: a systematic review

Journal of Orthodontics ◽

10.1177/14653125211056023 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 146531252110560

Author(s):

Nidhi P Parmar ◽

Gabrielle L Thompson ◽

Nikki E Atack ◽

Anthony J Ireland ◽

Martyn Sherriff ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Critical Appraisal Skills ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Bracket Design

Background: Decalcification and gingivitis caused by plaque accumulation around brackets are common iatrogenic effects of fixed appliances. The influence of conventional versus self-ligating bracket design on microbial colonisation is unknown. Objective: To assess the levels of microbial colonisation associated with conventional and self-ligating brackets. Search sources: Three databases were searched for publications from 2009 to 2021. Data selection: Randomised controlled trials comparing levels of microbial colonisation before and during treatment with conventional and self-ligating brackets were assessed independently and in duplicate. Data extraction: Data were extracted independently by two authors from the studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias assessments were made using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklist. Results: A total of 11 randomised controlled trials were included in this systematic review. Six of the studies were found to be at low risk of bias and five presented with some concerns. The studies were considered moderate to high quality. Five trials reported no statistically significant difference in microbial colonisation between bracket types. The remaining studies showed mixed results, with some reporting increased colonisation of conventional brackets and others increased colonisation of self-ligating brackets. The heterogeneity of study methods and outcomes precluded meta-analysis. Conclusion: Of the 11 studies included in this systematic review, five found no differences in colonisation between conventional and self-ligating brackets. The remaining studies showed mixed results. The evidence is inconclusive regarding the association between bracket design and levels of microbial colonisation.

Download Full-text