scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of Ayurveda interventions for sinusitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author(s):  
Azeem Ahmad ◽  
Manohar S. Gundeti ◽  
Parth P. Dave ◽  
Sophia Jameela ◽  
Shruti Khanduri ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives To provide a broad evaluation of the efficacy and safety of Ayurveda interventions for the management of sinusitis. Methods Five electronic databases for published research articles, three databases for the dissertation/doctoral thesis works, clinical trial registries, and hand searches were done till May 2021. All comparative clinical trials recruiting sinusitis patients of any age group, receiving Ayurveda intervention, regardless of forms, dosages, and ingredients, for not less than one week were included. The data extraction and the risk of bias (RoB) assessment were done by two reviewers independently. Results A total of 2,824 records were identified, of which 09 randomized parallel arms trials met inclusion criteria. No studies were found comparing Ayurveda vs. placebo or non-Ayurveda interventions. Combined Ayurveda therapy (CT) was statistically more beneficial compared with either procedural or non-procedural Ayurveda therapy alone in reducing symptoms nasal discharge (standardized MD −0.71, 95% CI −1.16 to −0.26, I 2 58%, 210 participants) and headache (standardized MD −0.44, 95% CI −0.86 to −0.02, I 2 56%, 218 participants), however, no significant difference was found in reducing symptoms nasal obstruction and loss of smell. No data related to the safety of Ayurveda intervention was found. All the trials (09) were having ‘high’ to ‘some concern’ overall bias. Conclusions Although individual studies appeared to produce positive results, very low certainty of total effect hindered to arrive at any conclusion regarding efficacy or safety of Ayurveda interventions for sinusitis. There is a need for well-designed-executed-reported clinical studies on clinically relevant outcomes. PROSPERO registration number CRD42018103995

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Azeem Ahmad ◽  
Manohar S. Gundeti ◽  
Parth P. Dave ◽  
Sophia Jameela ◽  
Shruti Khanduri ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTObjectivesTo provide a broad evaluation of the efficacy and safety of Ayurveda interventions (procedural and non-procedural) for the management of sinusitis, and also of the relative efficacy and safety of different Ayurveda therapies for Sinusitis.MethodsFive electronic databases for published research articles, three databases for the unpublished doctoral thesis, clinical trial registries, and hand searches were done till August 2020. All comparative clinical trials recruiting sinusitis patients of any age group, receiving Ayurveda intervention, regardless of forms, dosages, and ingredients, for not less than one week were included. The data extraction and the risk of bias(RoB) assessment were done by two reviewers independently.ResultsA total of 2824 records were identified, of which 09 randomized parallel arms trials met inclusion criteria. No studies were found comparing Ayurveda versus placebo or non-Ayurveda interventions. Combined Ayurveda therapy (CT) was statistically more beneficial compared with either procedural or non-procedural Ayurveda therapy alone in reducing symptoms nasal discharge (standardized MD −0.71, 95% CI −1.16 to −0.26, I2 58%, 210 participants) and headache (standardized MD −0.44, 95% CI −0.86 to −0.02, I2 56%, 218 participants), however, no significant difference was found in reducing symptoms nasal obstruction and loss of smell. No numerical data related to the safety of Ayurveda intervention was found in included trials. Because, included trials(09) were having ‘high’ to ‘unclear’ overall bias, sub-standard methodology, and heterogeneity in results, the overall findings need to be interpreted cautiously.ConclusionsAlthough individual studies appeared to produce positive results, very low certainty of total effect(downgraded twice for RoB, once for inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision each) hindered to arrive at any conclusion regarding efficacy or safety of Ayurveda interventions for sinusitis. There is a need for well-designed-executed-reported clinical studies on clinically relevant outcomes.PROSPERO registration numberRD42018103995ARTICLE SUMMARYStrength and limitations of this studyThis is the first systematic review to provide the status of available evidence on the efficacy and safety of Ayurveda interventions for sinusitis.The search strategy was comprehensive, all the relevant sources were searched for published as well as unpublished research works.This systematic review has a broad review question, which compromises its eternal validity.The certainty of the overall effect is ‘very low’ due to ‘unclear’ to ‘high’ overall risk of bias, lack of validated outcome measures, inconsistency in results with wide CIs, small sample sizes, incomplete reporting, etc.


2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (7) ◽  
pp. 030006052110327
Author(s):  
Weihua Liu ◽  
Wenli Yu ◽  
Hongli Yu ◽  
Mingwei Sheng

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and propofol in patients who underwent gastrointestinal endoscopy. Methods Relevant studies comparing dexmedetomidine and propofol among patients who underwent gastrointestinal endoscopy were retrieved from databases such as PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Results Seven relevant studies (dexmedetomidine group, n = 238; propofol group, n = 239) met the inclusion criteria. There were no significant differences in the induction time (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 3.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.95–7.88, I2 = 99%) and recovery time (WMD = 2.74, 95% CI = −2.72–8.19, I2 = 98%). Subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences in the risks of hypotension (risk ratio [RR] = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.25–1.22) and nausea and vomiting (RR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.46–2.22) between the drugs, whereas dexmedetomidine carried a lower risk of hypoxia (RR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.11–0.63) and higher risk of bradycardia (RR = 3.01, 95% CI = 1.38–6.54). Conclusions Dexmedetomidine had similar efficacy and safety profiles as propofol in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Abdul Razzack ◽  
D Rocha Castellanos ◽  
A Lopez Mendez ◽  
M Fernando Perez Paz ◽  
S Pothuru ◽  
...  

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background- Patients with small Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms are managed with surveillance as there is currently insufficient evidence to recommend surgical aneurysm repair. Hence, there is a dire need and interest in pharmacotherapy like tetracycline antibiotics to reduce the need for aneurysm repair. Purpose- To determine the efficacy and safety of doxycycline in the management of small abdominal aortic aneurysms. Methods- Electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane) were searched until 25th November 2020.The primary outcomes were the mean difference (MD) in aneurysm diameter and the odds ratio (OR) calculated to compare the number of individuals referred to Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in each group. Results- A total of three studies with 572 participants (Doxycycline = 290; Placebo = 282 ) were included in our analysis. Average follow up was a period of 18 months. For AAA expansion, the combined results demonstrated a statistically significant mean difference in expansion rates favoring the placebo groups over the intervention (WMD-0.75, 95%CI 0.12-1.38; p = 0.02;I2 = 0%) There was no statistically significant difference in the efficacy and safety of doxycycline as opposed to placebo groups for referral to AAA surgery (OR 1.01, 95%CI 0.61-1.69; p = 0.96, I2 = 0%) and all-cause mortality(OR 0.51; 95%CI 0.18-1.43; p = 0.20, I2 =0%) Conclusion- Amongst patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms, doxycycline did not significantly reduce aneurysm growth. Abstract Figure. A) AAA expansion B)Surgery C)Mortality


2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 030006052110066
Author(s):  
Hua Zhang ◽  
Bo Wang ◽  
Jie He ◽  
Zhongju Du

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Methods A literature review was conducted using the PubMed, Cochrane Review, Embase, and Google Scholar databases. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of all retrieved studies. The research was reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to ensure the reliability and verity of the results. The statistical analysis was performed using STATA version 13.0. Results Nine randomized controlled trials were collected for the data extraction and meta-analysis. Significant differences in the pain score at 4, 12, and 24 weeks were found between patients treated with radiofrequency ablation and those treated with placebo. Furthermore, the use of radiofrequency ablation was associated with an improved outcome of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index at 4, 12, and 24 weeks. No serious adverse events were observed in any patients who underwent radiofrequency ablation. Conclusion Radiofrequency ablation is efficacious and safe for reducing pain and improving knee function in patients with knee osteoarthritis, without increasing the risk of adverse effects.


BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. e017567
Author(s):  
Shimels Hussien Mohammed ◽  
Mulugeta Molla Birhanu ◽  
Tesfamichael Awoke Sissay ◽  
Tesfa Dejenie Habtewold ◽  
Balewgizie Sileshi Tegegn ◽  
...  

IntroductionIndividuals living in poor neighbourhoods are at a higher risk of overweight/obesity. There is no systematic review and meta-analysis study on the association of neighbourhood socioeconomic status (NSES) with overweight/obesity. We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse the existing evidence on the association of NSES with overweight/obesity.Methods and analysisCross-sectional, case–control and cohort studies published in English from inception to 15 May 2017 will be systematically searched using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Sciences and Google Scholar. Selection, screening, reviewing and data extraction will be done by two reviewers, independently and in duplicate. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) will be used to assess the quality of evidence. Publication bias will be checked by visual inspection of funnel plots and Egger’s regression test. Heterogeneity will be checked by Higgins’s method (I2statistics). Meta-analysis will be done to estimate the pooled OR. Narrative synthesis will be performed if meta-analysis is not feasible due to high heterogeneity of studies.Ethics and disseminationEthical clearance is not required as we will be using data from published articles. Findings will be communicated through a publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations at professional conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017063889.


2021 ◽  
pp. neurintsurg-2021-018032
Author(s):  
Derrek Schartz ◽  
Sajal Medha K Akkipeddi ◽  
Nathaniel Ellens ◽  
Redi Rahmani ◽  
Gurkirat Singh Kohli ◽  
...  

BackgroundTransradial access (TRA) has gained increased usage among neurointerventionalists. However, the overall safety profile of access site complications (ASCs) and non-access site complications (NASCs) of TRA versus transfemoral access (TFA) for neuroendovascular procedures remains unclear.MethodsA systematic literature review and meta-analysis using a random effects model was conducted to investigate the pooled odds ratios (OR) of ASCs and NASCs. Randomized, case–control, and cohort studies comparing access-related complications were analyzed. An assessment of study heterogeneity and publication bias was also completed.ResultsSeventeen comparative studies met the inclusion criteria for final analysis. Overall, there was a composite ASC rate of 1.8% (49/2767) versus 3.2% (168/5222) for TRA and TFA, respectively (P<0.001). TRA was associated with a lower odds of ASC compared with TFA (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.68, P<0.001, I2=31%). There was significantly lower odds of complications within the intervention and diagnostic subgroups. For NASC, TRA had a lower composite incidence of complications than TFA at 1.2% (31/2586) versus 4.2% (207/4909), P<0.001). However, on meta-analysis, we found no significant difference overall between TRA and TFA for NASCs (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.51 to 1.22, P=0.28, I2=0%), which was also the case on subgroup analysis.ConclusionOn meta-analysis, the current literature indicates that TRA is associated with a lower incidence of ASCs compared with TFA, but is not associated with a lower rate of NASCs.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naeim Ehtesham ◽  
Maryam Zare Rafie ◽  
Meysam Mosallaei

Abstract Background: Considering that familial multiple sclerosis (FMS) can reveal the extent to which genetic and environmental factors each involve in the etiopathogenesis of the disease, we performed an updated meta-analysis of the worldwide prevalence of FMS by addition of recent publications. Methods: A search in PubMed, Scopus, the ISI Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to 20 December 2020 was done. The inclusion criteria were based on the CoCoPop approach (condition, context, and population). The qualified studies entered the process of the meta-analysis by using comprehensive meta-analysis ver. 2 software.Results: The pooled prevalence of MS in relatives of 16179 FMS cases was estimated to be 11.8% (95% CI: 10.7-13) based on a random-effects model. The pooled mean age of disease onset in adult probands was calculated to be 28.7 years (95% CI: 27.2± 30.2). In 13 studies that reported the data of FMS in pediatrics (n=6636) and adults (n=877), the FMS prevalence was 10.8% (95% CI: 8.1-14.2) and 15.5% (95% CI: 13.8-17.4), respectively. Considering the data of 9 studies, the prevalence of FMS in males (n=5243) and females (n=11503) patients was calculated to be 13.7% (95% CI: 10.1-18.2) and 15.4% (95% CI: 10.3-22.4), respectively. The odds ratio of male/female in FMS cases was not statistically significant (OR= 0.9; 95% CI: 0.6-1.2, P=0.55). Subgroup analysis demonstrated a significant difference in the prevalence of FMS between the geographical areas (P= 0.007). The meta-regression model for FMS prevalence was significantly lower in terms of higher latitude (P< 0.001) and increased MS prevalence (P< 0.001). In contrast, meta-regression based on prevalence day was not statistically significant (P=0.29).Conclusions: The prevalence of FMS is more in the pediatric group than that of adults, is distinct between geographical areas, and diminishes with the increment of MS prevalence and latitude. Also, the symptoms initiate relatively at lower ages in FMS cases. By contrast with multifactorial diseases, our analysis unveiled that the prevalence of FMS was not more prevalent in men than women and the risk of MS development in relatives was not more when the affected proband was male.


2015 ◽  
Vol 101 (3) ◽  
pp. 234-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morris Gordon ◽  
Anthony Akobeng

ObjectiveRacecadotril is an antisecretory agent that can prevent fluid/electrolyte depletion from the bowel as a result of acute diarrhoea without affecting intestinal motility. An up-to-date systematic review is indicated to summarise the evidence on racecadotril for the treatment of acute diarrhoea in children.DesignA Cochrane format systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Data extraction and assessment of methodological quality were performed independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.PatientsChildren with acute diarrhoea, as defined by the primary studies.InterventionsRCTs comparing racecadotril with placebo or other interventions.Main outcome measursDuration of illness, stool output/volume and adverse events.ResultsSeven RCTs were included, five comparing racecadotril with placebo or no intervention, one with pectin/kaolin and one with loperamide. Moderate to high risk of bias was present in all studies. There was no significant difference in efficacy or adverse events between racecadotril and loperamide. A meta-analysis of three studies with 642 participants showed significantly shorter duration of symptoms with racecadotril compared with placebo (mean difference −53.48 h, 95% CI −65.64 to −41.33). A meta-analysis of five studies with 949 participants showed no significant difference in adverse events between racecadotril and placebo (risk ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.34).ConclusionsThere is some evidence that racecadotril is more effective than placebo or no intervention in reducing the duration of illness and stool output in children with acute diarrhoea. However, the overall quality of the evidence is limited due to sparse data, heterogeneity and risk of bias. Racecadotril appears to be safe and well tolerated.


2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaochen Wang ◽  
Guiqiu Zhao ◽  
Jing Lin ◽  
Nan Jiang ◽  
Qian Wang ◽  
...  

Aims. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of timolol in the treatment of myopic regression after laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).Methods. We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Chinese Biological Medicine (CBM) from the inception to July 2015 for relevant randomized controlled trials that examined timolol therapy for myopic regression. The methodological quality of the studies included was assessed using the Revman 5.3 software.Results. We included six clinical trials involving 483 eyes in this review, including 246 eyes in treated group and 237 eyes in controlled group. We observed statistically significant improvements on the postoperative SE in the 3 months. However, the change of CCT was not statistically different between the control group and the experimental group. There were fewer cases of IOP, UDVA, and CDVA in treated group having significant difference from the controlled group.Conclusions. Topical timolol could be an effective treatment for reduction of myopic regression especially the spherical errors after myopic LASIK. Further RCTs with larger sample sizes for these trials are warranted to determine the efficacy and limitation for myopic regression after LASIK.


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e022499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Collins Zamawe ◽  
Carina King ◽  
Hannah Maria Jennings ◽  
Chrispin Mandiwa ◽  
Edward Fottrell

ObjectiveThe use of herbal medicines for induction of labour (IOL) is common globally and yet its effects are not well understood. We assessed the efficacy and safety of herbal medicines for IOL.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of published literature.Data sourcesWe searched in MEDLINE, AMED and CINAHL in April 2017, updated in June 2018.Eligibility criteriaWe considered experimental and non-experimental studies that compared relevant pregnancy outcomes between users and non-user of herbal medicines for IOL.Data extraction and synthesisData were extracted by two reviewers using a standardised form. A random-effects model was used to synthesise effects sizes and heterogeneity was explored through I2statistic. The risk of bias was assessed using ‘John Hopkins Nursing School Critical Appraisal Tool’ and ‘Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool’.ResultsA total of 1421 papers were identified through the searches, but only 10 were retained after eligibility and risk of bias assessments. The users of herbal medicine for IOL were significantly more likely to give birth within 24 hours than non-users (Risk Ratio (RR) 4.48; 95% CI 1.75 to 11.44). No significant difference in the incidence of caesarean section (RR 1.19; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.86), assisted vaginal delivery (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.14), haemorrhage (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.44 to 1.60), meconium-stained liquor (RR 1.20; 95% CI 0.65 to 2.23) and admission to nursery (RR 1.08; 95% CI 0.49 to 2.38) was found between users and non-users of herbal medicines for IOL.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that herbal medicines for IOL are effective, but there is inconclusive evidence of safety due to lack of good quality data. Thus, the use of herbal medicines for IOL should be avoided until safety issues are clarified. More studies are recommended to establish the safety of herbal medicines.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document