scholarly journals Onset of Action and Efficacy of Ibuprofen Liquigel as Compared to Solid Tablets: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 301 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanan Al Lawati ◽  
Fakhreddin Jamali
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Comparative Studies ◽  
Analgesic Effect ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Data Bases ◽  
Onset Of Action ◽  
Over The Counter ◽  
Significant Difference

Purpose. Ibuprofen liquigel has been believed to provide faster analgesic effect. However, comparative studies evaluating the efficacy of liquigel versus regular tablets are not available. Hence, we carried out a systematic review and a meta-analysis to compare the onset of action and efficacy of over-the-counter doses of ibuprofen liquigel (IBULG) vs ibuprofen tablets (IBUT).  Methods. Published clinical trials of IBULG and IBUT were identified through a systematic search of various data bases up to October, 2015. Results. In total 18 eligible studies on IBUT and 4 on IBULG were found.  There was no significant difference in the median time to the first perceptible pain relief or the proportion of patients with more than 50% pain relief between the two products. However, IBULG yielded significantly greater odd ratios in meaningful pain relief at 60, 90 and 120 min, but not at 30 min, as compared with IBUT.  Conclusion. The available evidence, although not overwhelming, suggest a faster onset of analgesia for liquigel as compared with tablets. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see “For Readers”) may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue’s contents page.

scholarly journals https://painphysicianjournal.com/current

2020 ◽  
Vol 4;23 (7;4) ◽  
pp. 335-348
Author(s):  
Nicholas Van Halm-Lutterodt
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Functional Status ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Local Anesthetic ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chronic Neck Pain ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Chronic neck pain is reportedly considered the fourth leading cause of disability. Cervical interlaminar epidural injections are among the commonly administered nonsurgical interventions for managing chronic neck pain, secondary to disc herniation and radiculitis, spinal stenosis, or chronic neck pain of discogenic origin. Objectives: To systematically review the differences in the effectiveness of cervical epidural injections with local anesthetics with or without steroids for the management of chronic neck pain. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A comprehensive search of the literature of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared epidural injections with local anesthetic with or without steroids was performed, including a search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for all years up to May 2019. Meta-analysis was done for pain relief based on the Numeric Rating Scale, functional status based on the Neck Disability Index, and opioid intake dosage. Results: Four studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 370 patients were divided into 2 groups: the experimental group received cervical epidural injection with steroid and local anesthetic, and the control group received injection with local anesthetic only. Regrading pain relief, no significant difference was observed between both groups (weighted mean difference [WMD], –0.006; 95% confidence interval (CI), –0.275 to 0.263; P = 0.963; I2 = 0.0% at 12 months). There was also no significant difference in the improvement of the functional status (WMD, 0.159; 95% CI, –1.231 to 1.549; P = 0.823; I2 = 9.8% at 12 months). Similarly, there was no significant difference in opioid dosage (WMD, –0.093; 95% CI, –5.952 to 5.766; P = 0.975; I2 = 0.0% at 12 months). Limitations: Only a few studies on this premise were found in the literature. There was also a lack of heterogeneity of the included RCT studies. Conclusions: The addition of steroids to anesthetic injectates was not associated with better pain and functional score outcomes compared with anesthetic injectate alone in patients with chronic neck pain. Key words: Chronic neck pain, cervical radiculopathy, cervical disc disease, spinal stenosis, facet joint pathology, cervical epidural injections, steroid injections, local anesthetic injections, systematic review, meta-analysis, randomized control trial

scholarly journals Opioids in Post-stroke Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Damiana Scuteri ◽  
Elisa Mantovani ◽  
Stefano Tamburin ◽  
Giorgio Sandrini ◽  
Maria Tiziana Corasaniti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Dose Response ◽  
Analgesic Effect ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Post Stroke ◽  
Pain Syndromes

Background: Post-stroke pain is one of the most common sequelae of stroke, which stands among the leading causes of death and adult-acquired disability worldwide. The role and clinical efficacy of opioids in post-stroke pain syndromes is still debated.Objectives: Due to the important gap in knowledge on the management of post-stroke pain, this systematic review aimed at assessing the efficacy of opioids in post-stroke pain syndromes.Methods: A literature search was conducted on databases relevant for medical scientific literature, i.e. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases from databases inception until August 31st, 2020 for clinical trials assessing the effects of opioids and opioid antagonists on pain reduction and pain related symptoms in patients with post-stroke pain syndromes. Studies assessing the effects of other medications (e.g., tricyclic antidepressant, pregabalin) or non - pharmacological management strategies (e.g., neurostimulation techniques) were excluded. The selected studies have been subjected to examination of the risk of bias.Results: The literature search retrieved 83,435 results. After duplicates removal, 34,285 articles were title and abstract screened. 25 full texts were assessed and 8 articles were identified to be eligible for inclusion in the qualitative summary and narrative analysis, of which three were placebo-controlled and two were dose-response. Among placebo-controlled studies, two evaluated the analgesic effect of morphine and one assessed the effects of the opioid antagonist naloxone on patients with central post-stroke pain. With regard to dose-response studies, both were on patients with central post-stroke pain, one assessing the efficacy of levorphanol, and the other on naloxone. Seven out of eight included studies showed an overall slight analgesic effect of opioids, with less consistent effects on other pain-related symptoms (e.g., mood, quality of life). The randomized controlled trials were subjected to meta-analysis and rating of the quality of evidence for the two outcomes considered according to GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) system. The overall results are inconclusive because of the small number of studies and of patients.Conclusions: The limited number of the included studies and their heterogeneity in terms of study design do not support the efficacy of opioids in post-stroke pain and in pain-related outcomes. Large double-blind randomized clinical trials with objective assessment of pain and related symptoms are needed to further investigate this topic.

scholarly journals Repurposing of drugs for Covid-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pinky Kotecha ◽  
Alexander Light ◽  
Enrico Checcucci ◽  
Daniele Amparore ◽  
Cristian Fiori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Clinical Improvement ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the data currently available regarding the repurposing of different drugs for Covid-19 treatment. Participants with suspected or diagnosed Covid-19 will be included. The interventions being considered are drugs being repurposed, and comparators will include standard of care treatment or placebo.MethodsWe searched Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, clinical trial registration site in the UK(NIHR), Europe (clinicaltrialsregister.eu), US (ClinicalTrials.gov) and internationally (isrctn.com), and reviewed the reference lists of articles for eligible articles published up to April 22, 2020. All studies in English that evaluated the efficacy of the listed drugs were included. Cochrane RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tool were used to assess study quality. This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines. The protocol is available at PROSPERO (CRD42020180915).ResultsFrom 708 identified studies or clinical trials, 16 studies and 16 case reports met our eligibility criteria. Of these, 6 were randomized controlled trials (763 patients), 7 cohort studies (321 patients) and 3 case series (191 patients). Chloroquine (CQ) had a 100% discharge rate compared to 50% with lopinavir-ritonavir at day 14, however a trial has recommended against a high dosage due to cardiotoxic events. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has shown no significant improvement in negative seroconversion rate which is also seen in our meta-analysis (p=0.68). Adverse events with HCQ have a significant difference compared to the control group (p=0.001). Lopinavir-ritonavir has shown no improvement in time to clinical improvement which is seen in our meta-analyses (p=0.1). Remdesivir has shown no significant improvement in time to clinical improvement but this trial had insufficient power.DiscussionDue to the paucity in evidence, it is difficult to establish the efficacy of these drugs in the treatment of Covid-19 as currently there is no significant clinical effectiveness of the repurposed drugs. Further large clinical trials are required to achieve more reliable findings. A risk-benefit analysis is required on an individual basis to weigh out the potential improvement in clinical outcome and viral load reduction compared to the risks of the adverse events. (1-16)

Outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with myelofibrosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7045-7045
Author(s):  
Jan Philipp Bewersdorf ◽  
Amar Sheth ◽  
Shaurey Vetsa ◽  
Alyssa Grimshaw ◽  
Smith Giri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Vocabulary ◽  
Hematopoietic Cell ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Significant Difference

7045 Background: Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT) remains the only potentially curative therapeutic modality for patients with primary or secondary myelofibrosis (MF). However, many patients (pts) are ineligible for allo-HCT and transplant-related mortality can be substantial. Data on the efficacy and safety of allo-HCT are mixed and largely derived from retrospective studies. Methods: To synthesize the available evidence, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis searching Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection from inception to October 11, 2020 for studies on allo-HCT in MF. Databases were searched using a combination of controlled vocabulary and free text terms for relevant studies on the efficacy and safety of allo-HCT in pts with primary and secondary MF. This study protocol has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020188706). Random-effects models were used to pool response rates for the co-primary outcomes of 1-year, 2-year and 5-year overall survival (OS). Results: We identified 4247 studies after duplicate removal. 393 studies were assessed as full-texts for eligibility and 43 studies (38 retrospective, 1 prospective study, 4 phase II clinical trials) with 8739 pts were included in this meta-analysis. Study quality was limited by the absence of randomized clinical trials and retrospective design of most studies. Rates of 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year OS were 66.7% (95% confidence interval: 63.5-69.8%), 64.4% (57.6-70.6%), and 55.0% (51.8-58.3%), respectively. Rates of 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year non-relapse mortality were 25.9% (23.3-28.7%), 29.7% (24.5-35.4%), and 30.5% (25.9-35.5%), respectively. Among evaluable studies, rates of 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year relapse-free survival were 65.3% (56.5-73.1%), 56.2% (41.6-69.8%), and 53.6% (39.9-66.9%), respectively. Adverse events related to all-HCT were manageable with rates of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease in 44.0% (39.6-48.4%; grade III/IV: 15.2%) and 46.5% of patients (42.2-50.8%; extensive or moderate/severe: 26.1%), respectively. Subgroup analyses did not show any significant difference between conditioning regimen intensity (myeloablative vs reduced-intensity), median patient age, and proportion of DIPSS-intermediate-2/high pts. Conclusions: Given the poor prognosis of patients not receiving transplant and in the absence of curative non-transplant therapies, our results support consideration of allo-HCT for eligible pts with MF. However, additional studies in pre- and post-allo-HCT setting are necessary to enhance patient selection (e.g. by incorporation of molecular markers), to optimize transplant strategies (e.g. peri-transplant ruxolitinib, conditioning regimens, and donor selection), symptom management and decrease non-relapse mortality.

scholarly journals The Use ofGarciniaExtract (Hydroxycitric Acid) as a Weight loss Supplement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Clinical Trials

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igho Onakpoya ◽  
Shao Kang Hung ◽  
Rachel Perry ◽  
Barbara Wider ◽  
Edzard Ernst
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Weight Loss ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Included Study ◽  
Randomised Clinical Trials ◽  
Hydroxycitric Acid ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Uncertain Future ◽  
Using Data

The aim of this systematic review is to examine the efficacy ofGarciniaextract, hydroxycitric acid (HCA) as a weight reduction agent, using data from randomised clinical trials (RCTs). Electronic and nonelectronic searches were conducted to identify relevant articles, with no restrictions in language or time. Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the methodological quality of included studies. Twenty-three eligible trials were identified and twelve were included. Nine trials provided data suitable for statistical pooling. The meta-analysis revealed a small, statistically significant difference in weight loss favouring HCA over placebo (MD: −0.88 kg; 95% CI: −1.75, −0.00). Gastrointestinal adverse events were twice as common in the HCA group compared with placebo in one included study. It is concluded that the RCTs suggest thatGarciniaextracts/HCA can cause short-term weight loss. The magnitude of the effect is small, and the clinical relevance is uncertain. Future trials should be more rigorous and better reported.

scholarly journals The efficacy of Phaseolus vulgaris as a weight-loss supplement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

2011 ◽  
Vol 106 (2) ◽  
pp. 196-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igho Onakpoya ◽  
Salsabil Aldaas ◽  
Rohini Terry ◽  
Edzard Ernst
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Weight Loss ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Randomised Clinical Trials ◽  
Herbal Supplement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Present Systematic Review

A variety of dietary supplements are presently available as slimming aids, but their efficacy has not been proven. One such slimming aid is the bean extract, Phaseolusvulgaris. The aim of the present systematic review is to evaluate the evidence for or against the efficacy of P. vulgaris. Electronic and non-electronic searches were conducted to identify relevant human randomised clinical trials (RCT). Hand searches of bibliographies were also conducted. No age, time or language restrictions were imposed. The eligibility of studies was determined by two reviewers independently, and the methodological quality of the included studies was assessed. We identified eleven eligible trials, and six were included. All the included RCT had serious methodological flaws. A meta-analysis revealed a statistically non-significant difference in weight loss between P. vulgaris and placebo groups (mean difference (MD) − 1·77 kg, 95 % CI − 3·33, 0·33). A further meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant reduction in body fat favouring P. vulgaris over placebo (MD − 1·86 kg, 95 % CI − 3·39, − 0·32). Heterogeneity was evident in both analyses. The poor quality of the included RCT prevents us from drawing any firm conclusions about the effects of P. vulgaris supplementation on body weight. Larger and more rigorous trials are needed to objectively assess the effects of this herbal supplement.

scholarly journals Brain Metastases Status and Immunotherapy Efficacy in Advanced Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Hu ◽  
Zhi-Yong Xu ◽  
Qian Zhu ◽  
Xi Liu ◽  
Si-Cong Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Advanced Lung Cancer ◽  
Tumor Type ◽  
Significant Difference

BackgroundBrain metastases (BMs) indicate poor outcomes and are commonly excluded in immunotherapy clinical trials in advanced lung cancer; moreover, the effect of BM status on immunotherapy efficacy is inconsistent and inconclusive. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the influence of BM status on immunotherapy efficacy in advanced lung cancer.MethodsElectronic databases and all major conference proceedings were searched without language restrictions according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. We extracted randomized clinical trials on lung cancer immunotherapy that had available overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS) data based on the BM status. All analyses were performed using random effects models.ResultsFourteen randomized clinical trials with 9,089 patients were identified. Immunotherapy conferred a survival advantage to BM patients [OS-hazard ratio (HR), 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.58–0.90; P = 0.004; and PFS-HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52–0.87, P = 0.003]. Non-BM patients could also derive a survival benefit from immunotherapy (OS-HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.71–0.80; P <0.001; and PFS-HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56–0.82, P <0.001). The pooled ratios of OS-HRs and PFS-HRs reported in BM patients versus non-BM patients were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.78–1.18; P = 0.72) and 0.97 (95% CI, 0.79–1.20; P = 0.78), respectively, indicating no statistically significant difference between them. Subsequent sensitivity analyses did not alter the results. Subgroup analyses according to tumor type, line of therapy, immunotherapy type, study design, and representation of BM patients reconfirmed these findings.ConclusionWe demonstrated that BM status did not significantly influence the immunotherapy efficacy in lung cancer, suggesting that both BM and non-BM patients could obtain comparable benefits.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier (CRD42020207446).

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Ginger on Pain and Function in Knee Osteoarthritis: A PRISMA Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 2;23 (4;2) ◽  
pp. E151-E163
Author(s):  
Felipe Araya-Quintanilla
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Knee Function ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Standard Mean Difference ◽  
And Function

Background: Ginger has been proposed as a complementary treatment for musculoskeletal pain. However, efficacy, type, and safety remains unclear. Objectives: To determine the effectiveness of consumption or topical application of ginger for pain relief and knee function improvement in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Study Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Methods: An electronic search was performed on Medline, Central, CINAHL, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, and LILACS databases. The eligibility criteria for selecting studies included clinical trials that compared consumption and/or topical ginger with placebo or other interventions for the pain relief and knee function in patients with medical diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis. Results: Seven clinical trials met the eligibility criteria, and for the quantitative synthesis, 4 studies were included. For the comparison capsules versus placebo, mean difference for pain was −7.88 mm; 95% confidence interval (CI), 11.92 to 3.85 (P = 0.00), and standard mean difference for knee function was −1.61 points; 95% CI, −4.30 to −1.09 (P = 0.24). For the comparison of topical ginger versus standard treatment, standard mean difference for pain was 0.79 mm; 95% CI, −1.97 to 0.39 (P = 0.19), and standard mean difference for knee function was −0.51 points; 95% CI, −1.15 to 0.13 (P = 0.12). Limitations: The current evidence is heterogeneous and has a poor methodologic quality. Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to support the use of oral ginger compared with placebo in the pain relief and function improvement in patients with knee osteoarthritis. For other comparisons, no statistically significant differences were found. Key words: Osteoarthritis, knee osteoarthritis, ginger, pain, randomized clinical trial, systematic review

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document