scholarly journals Shuanghuanglian oral preparations combined with azithromycin for treatment of Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia in Asian children: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0254405
Author(s):  
Yingying Peng ◽  
Zhe Chen ◽  
Yanjiao Li ◽  
Qiu Lu ◽  
Huanmin Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Mycoplasma Pneumoniae ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Disappearance Time ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Mycoplasma Pneumoniae Pneumonia ◽  
Better Than

Background Mycoplasma pneumoniae is one of the main causes of community-acquired pneumonia. Due to the imperfect immune system of children, this also causes Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia (MPP) to be more common in children. Globally, the incidence of MPP in children is gradually increasing. This study was the first to systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of Shuanghuanglian (SHL) oral preparations combined with azithromycin in the treatment of MPP in children. Methods This study fully retrieved 3 Chinese databases and 5 English databases to search the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SHL oral preparations combined with azithromycin in the treatment of children with MPP. The search time is from the inception to September 2020. Data extraction and risk bias evaluation were performed independently by two researchers. We conducted a Meta-analysis of all the outcome indicators. Besides, Meta-regression, subgroup analysis, and heterogeneity analysis were used for the primary outcomes to find the possible potential confounding factors. Results Finally, we included 27 RCTs involving 2884 patients. SHL oral preparations combined with azithromycin were better than azithromycin alone in response rate (RR = 1.14, 95% CI[1.11, 1.18]; low certainty evidence), disappearance time of fever(MD = -1.72, 95% CI[-2.47, -0.97]; low certainty evidence), disappearance time of cough (MD = -2.95, 95% CI[-3.55, -2.34]; low certainty evidence), and disappearance time of pulmonary rales (MD = -2.13, 95% CI[-2.88, -1.38]; low certainty evidence). The Meta-regression results showed that the course of disease, age, and method of administration may be the source of heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis have found that the results were stable. For other related clinical symptoms, T lymphocytes, and Serum inflammatory factors, SHL oral preparations combined with azithromycin was better than azithromycin alone, and the difference was statistically significant. For adverse events with low certainty evidence, safety needs further verification. Conclusion Based on the results of meta-analysis with low certainty evidence, we believed that SHL oral preparations combined with azithromycin likely be effectively improved clinical symptoms compared with azithromycin alone. Low certainty evidence showed that SHL may safety with no serious adverse events. Due to these limitations, the safety needs further verification. More high-quality, multicenter, and large-sample RCTs should be tested and verified in the future.

scholarly journals Safety of Denosumab Versus Zoledronic Acid in Patients with Bone-related Diseases A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenhao Luo ◽  
Ye Li
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Skeletal Related Events ◽  
Better Than

IntroductionBoth Dmab and ZA have been widely used in the prevention and treatment of bone-related diseases, while which drug is an optimal treatment in terms of safety and efficacy remains controversial.Material and methodsPubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched up to 1st January 2021, and were evaluated by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Randomized controlled trials comparing Dmab versus ZA in patients with bone-related diseases were included.ResultsA total of 13 studies involving 21042 participants were included. The incidence of total adverse events was significantly lower in patients receiving Dmab treatment than in those undergoing ZA treatment(OR= 0.84, 95% CI = 0.75–0.94, P = 0.003). 9 trials comparing Dmab with ZA further showed that Dmab was significantly better than ZA in controlling serious adverse events (OR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.85–0.99, P = 0.02). Compared to ZA, Dmab was correlated with a lower incidence of skeletal-related events (OR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.70–0.85, P = 0.00001). However, no significant difference was found in the rate of infection events between Dmab and ZA (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.93–1.20, P =0.39).ConclusionsThis study demonstrated superiority of Dmab over ZA in treating bone-related diseases in terms of safety and efficacy.

Effects of Teriparatide versus Salmon Calcitonin Therapy for the Treat-ment of Osteoporosis in Asia: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Changjun Chen ◽  
Mohammed Alqwbani ◽  
Jie Chen ◽  
Ruitong Yang ◽  
Songgang Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Salmon Calcitonin ◽  
Bone Markers ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Asian Patients ◽  
Teriparatide Treatment

Objective: The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of teriparatide versus salmon calcitonin for the treatment of osteoporosis in Asian patients and to investigate whether the results of global studies could be applicable to Asian patients. Methods: PubMed, OVID, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and EMBASE up to December 2018 were searched. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared teriparatide versus salmon calcitonin in Asian osteoporosis popula-tion were included. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used for data synthe-sis, and Cochrane Collaboration software Review Manager 5.3 was used to analyze the pooled data. Results: Three RCTs involving 529 patients were included (mean age 68.7 yr; 93.4% females; mean follow-up 6 months); outcome measures included bone mineral density (BMD) of the femoral neck, total hip and lumbar spine; bone markers and adverse events. We found that the period of 6-months of teriparatide treatment was helpful for the improvement of the BMD of lumbar vertebra, however, the improvement of BMD was not significant in femoral neck and total hip join. There was a positive correlation between bone-specific alka-line phosphatase (BSAP) and osteocalcin (OCN) and the response of Asian patients to subcutaneous injection of 20 micrograms per day of teriparatide. And the proportion of the occurrence of adverse effect was more obvious in teriparatide group compared with salmon calciton-in, but there was no significant difference. Conclusion: Results suggested that the use of teriparatide could improve the lumbar BMD by short-term (six months) application in Asian osteoporosis patients, which is beneficial to the patients who cannot tolerate adverse events of long-term treatment. The BSAP and OCN bone markers could be useful to monitor the responses of Asian osteoporosis patients to teriparatide treatment. Finally, both of teriparatide and salmon calcitonin were well tolerated by Asian patients.

scholarly journals Cardiovascular safety and efficacy of metformin-SGLT2i versus metformin-sulfonylureas in type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Desye Gebrie ◽  
Desalegn Getnet ◽  
Tsegahun Manyazewal
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Sodium Glucose Cotransporter

AbstractDiabetes is a serious threat to global health and among the top 10 causes of death, with nearly half a billion people living with it worldwide. Treating patients with diabetes tend to become more challenging due to the progressive nature of the disease. The role and benefits of combination therapies for the management of type 2 diabetes are well-documented, while the comparative safety and efficacy among the different combination options have not been elucidated. We aimed to systematically synthesize the evidence on the comparative cardiovascular safety and efficacy of combination therapy with metformin-sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors versus metformin-sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes. We searched MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to 15 August 2019 without restriction in the year of publication. We included randomized controlled trials of patients with type 2 diabetes who were on metformin-sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors or metformin-sulphonylureas combination therapy at least for a year. The primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and serious adverse events, and the secondary endpoints were cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, hypoglycemia, and changes in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), body weight, fasting plasma glucose, blood pressure, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. We used a random-effects meta-analysis model to estimate mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes. We followed PICOS description model for defining eligibility and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 guidelines for reporting results. Of 3,190 citations, we included nine trials involving 10,974 participants. The pooled analysis showed no significant difference in all-cause mortality (risk ration [RR] = 0.93, 95% CI [0.52, 1.67]), serious adverse events (RR = 0.96, 95% CI [0.79, 1.17]) and adverse events (RR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.99, 1.02]) between the two, but in hypoglycemia (RR = 0.13, 95% CI [0.10, 0.17], P < 0.001). Participants taking metformin-sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors showed a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c (mean difference [MD] = − 0.10%, 95% CI [− 0.17, − 0.03], body weight (MD = − 4.57 kg, 95% CI [− 4.74, − 4.39], systolic blood pressure (MD = − 4.77 mmHg, 95% CI [− 5.39, − 4.16]), diastolic blood pressure (MD = − 2.07 mmHg, 95% CI [− 2.74, − 1.40], and fasting plasma glucose (MD = − 0.55 mmol/L, 95% CI [− 0.69, − 0.41]), p < 0.001. Combination therapy of metformin and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors is a safe and efficacious alternative to combination therapy of metformin and sulphonylureas for patients with type 2 diabetes who are at risk of cardiovascular comorbidity. However, there remains a need for additional long-term randomized controlled trials as available studies are very limited and heterogeneous.

Inhaled Levodopa (CVT-301) for the Treatment of Parkinson Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 10.1212/CPJ.0000000000001143
Author(s):  
Glenardi Glenardi ◽  
Tutwuri Handayani ◽  
Jimmy Barus ◽  
Ghea Mangkuliguna
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Placebo Group ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Respiratory Symptoms ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Motor Fluctuation ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Improve Motor Function

ABSTRACTPurposeof Review: To investigate the efficacy and safety of CVT-301 for motor fluctuation in Parkinson’s disease (PD).Recent Findings:This study demonstrated that the CVT-301 group had a higher proportion of patients achieving an ON state than the placebo group (OR=2.68; 95% CI: 1.86-3.86; p<0.00001). Moreover, CVT-301 had also shown to improve motor function by UPDRS-III score (SMD=3.83; 95% CI: 2.44-5.23; p<0.00001) and promote an overall improvement of PD by PGIC self-rating (OR=2.95; 95% CI: 1.78-4.9; p<0.00001). The most common adverse events encountered were respiratory symptoms (OR=12.18; 95% CI: 5.01-29.62; p<0.00001) and nausea (OR=3.95; 95% CI: 1.01-15.41; p=0.05).Summary:CVT-301 had the potential to be an alternative or even a preferred treatment for motor fluctuation in PD patients.

Long-term mortality and patency after drug-coated balloon angioplasty in the hemodialysis circuit: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2022 ◽  
pp. 112972982110701
Author(s):  
Yunfeng Li ◽  
Zhenwei Shi ◽  
Yunyun Zhao ◽  
Zhanjiang Cao ◽  
Zhengli Tan
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Balloon Angioplasty ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Primary Patency ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Technical Success ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Drug Coated Balloon

Purpose: To compare all-cause mortality and primary patency with drug-coated balloon angioplasty (DCBA) compared with plain balloon angioplasty (PBA) in people with hemodialysis-related stenosis. Materials and methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from November 1966 to February 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the use of DCBA versus PBA for stenosis in hemodialysis circuits. Data extracted from the articles were integrated to determine all-cause mortality, target lesion primary patency (TLPP), circuit access primary patency (CAPP), 30-day adverse events, and technical success for the two approaches. We performed meta-analysis on these results using a fixed-effects model to evaluate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) where I2 < 50% in a test for heterogeneity, or a random-effect model if otherwise. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were also performed. Results: Sixteen RCTs of 1672 individuals were included in our meta-analysis, of which 839 individuals received DCBA and 833 received PBA. The pooled outcome showed no statistical difference between DCBA and PBA in all-cause mortality at 6 months (OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.72–2.32, p = 0.39, I2 = 4%), 12 months (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.68–1.53, p = 0.91, I2 = 0%), and 24 months (OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 0.87–2.57, p = 0.15, I2 = 0%), 30-day adverse events (OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.30–3.98, p = 0.90, I2 = 66%), and technical success (OR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.02–1.92, p = 0.16, I2 = 65%). The DCBA had significantly better outcomes versus PBA in TLPP at 6 months (OR = 2.37, 95% CI = 1.84–3.04, p < 0.001, I2 = 44%) and 12 months (OR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.22–2.56, p = 0.002, I2 = 56%), and CAPP at 6 months (OR = 2.07, 95% CI = 1.21–3.54, p = 0.008, I2 = 67%) and 12 months (OR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.29–2.15, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%). Conclusion: In hemodialysis circuit stenosis, DCBA appears to have similar safety but greater efficacy than PBA.

scholarly journals Remote Ischemic Preconditioning to Prevent Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zigang Liu ◽  
Yongmei Zhao ◽  
Ming Lei ◽  
Guancong Zhao ◽  
Dongcheng Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Kidney Injury ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Ischemic Preconditioning ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Meta Regression

Objective: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the influence of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) on acute kidney injury (AKI) after cardiac surgery showed inconsistent results. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of RIPC on AKI after cardiac surgery.Methods: Relevant studies were obtained by search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane's Library databases. A random-effect model was used to pool the results. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were used to determine the source of heterogeneity.Results: Twenty-two RCTs with 5,389 patients who received cardiac surgery −2,702 patients in the RIPC group and 2,687 patients in the control group—were included. Moderate heterogeneity was detected (p for Cochrane's Q test = 0.03, I2 = 40%). Pooled results showed that RIPC significantly reduced the incidence of AKI compared with control [odds ratio (OR): 0.76, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.61–0.94, p = 0.01]. Results limited to on-pump surgery (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64–0.95, p = 0.01) or studies with acute RIPC (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.63–0.97, p = 0.03) showed consistent results. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses indicated that study characteristics, including study design, country, age, gender, diabetic status, surgery type, use of propofol or volatile anesthetics, cross-clamp time, RIPC protocol, definition of AKI, and sample size did not significantly affect the outcome of AKI. Results of stratified analysis showed that RIPC significantly reduced the risk of mild-to-moderate AKI that did not require renal replacement therapy (RRT, OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.60–0.96, p = 0.02) but did not significantly reduce the risk of severe AKI that required RRT in patients after cardiac surgery (OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.50–1.07, p = 0.11).Conclusions: Current evidence supports RIPC as an effective strategy to prevent AKI after cardiac surgery, which seems to be mainly driven by the reduced mild-to-moderate AKI events that did not require RRT. Efforts are needed to determine the influences of patient characteristics, procedure, perioperative drugs, and RIPC protocol on the outcome.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document