scholarly journals Dexmedetomidine Versus Propofol Sedation in Flexible Bronchoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial and a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barak Pertzov ◽  
Boris Krasulya ◽  
Karam Azem ◽  
Yael Shostak ◽  
Shimon Izhakian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Flexible Bronchoscopy ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Alpha2 Adrenoceptor ◽  
And Control

Abstract Background:Dexmedetomidine (DEX), is a highly selective alpha2 adrenoceptor (α2-AR) agonist, successfully used in various procedures including flexible bronchoscopy. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating DEX sedation during bronchoscopy report equivocal results regarding respiratory and hemodynamic outcomes. Methods We conducted an RCT to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine compared to propofol for sedation during bronchoscopy. The primary outcome was desaturation events, secondary outcomes were transcutaneous Pco2 level, hemodynamic adverse events and physician and patient satisfaction. We have also conducted A systematic review and meta-analysis of all RCTs evaluating DEX sedation during flexible bronchoscopy, included current study results.ResultsOverall, 63 patients were included, 30 and 33 in the DEX and propofol groups, respectively. The number of desaturation events was similar between groups, median (IQR) 1 (0-1) and 1 (0-2) in the DEX and control groups, respectively (P=0.29). Median desaturation time was 1 (0-2) and 1 (0-3) minutes in the DEX and control groups, respectively (P=0.48). Adverse events included hypotension, 33% vs 21.1% in intervention and control groups, respectively (P=0.04), bradycardia, cough, and delayed recovery from sedation. Total adverse events were 22 and 7 in DEX and propofol groups, respectively (P=0.009). The pooled meta-analysis included 13 trials (1604 participants) showed a significantly lower rate of desaturation events in the DEX group (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.79) with a significantly higher rate of hypotension and bradycardia events (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.06 and RR 1.91, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.5, respectively)ConclusionDexmedetomidine sedation resulted in a significantly reduced rate of desaturation events in comparison to propofol, midazolam and fentanyl. However, it was also associated with a higher rate of hypotension and bradycardia.Trial registration : NCT04211298, registration date: 26/12/2019

scholarly journals Protocol violations in López-Medina et al.: 38 switched ivermectin (IVM) and placebo doses, failure of blinding, widespread IVM sales OTC in Cali, and nearly identical AEs for the IVM and control groups

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Scheim ◽  
Jennifer A. Hibberd ◽  
Juan Chamie-Quintero
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Control Group ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Over The Counter ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Widespread Availability ◽  
And Control

A randomized controlled trial for treatment of mild cases of COVID-19 conducted in Cali, Colombia reported no statistically significant differences in outcomes for its ivermectin (IVM) and placebo arms. A striking anomaly, however, was that certain adverse events (AEs) that are distinctive for the study’s high-dose IVM use occurred at nearly identical rates in its IVM and placebo arms. The backdrop for these indicators of IVM use in study controls was widespread sales of IVM for COVID-19 in the Cali area during the study period, with 1.6 IVM doses sold over the counter for each case of COVID-19. The study compounded these risks of contamination of the control arm with critical errors in blinding and segregation of IVM v. placebo doses. A labeling error substituted IVM for placebo doses of 38 patients. Also, 5% dextrose solution was used for several weeks as a placebo, easily distinguishable from bitter tasting IVM. Given widespread availability and sales of IVM in Cali, lapses in segregation and blinding of IVM and control doses, and IVM-characteristic AEs in controls, the integrity of the study’s control arm was violated. Some useful information can nevertheless be salvaged from outcomes of this study’s IVM treatment arm, which had 0 deaths and generally mild symptoms, with AEs typical for high-dose IVM (replicated in the control group) that were generally mild and transient.

scholarly journals Novel Tetracyclines Versus Alternative Antibiotics for Treating Acute Bacterial Infection: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Antibiotics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shao-Huan Lan ◽  
Wei-Ting Lin ◽  
Shen-Peng Chang ◽  
Li-Chin Lu ◽  
Chih-Cheng Lai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Bacterial Infections ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Acute Bacterial Infections ◽  
And Control

This meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of novel tetracyclines for treating acute bacterial infections. Data from PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, Cochrane databases, Ovid Medline, and Embase databases were accessed until 11 July 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of novel tetracyclines with that of other antibiotics for treating acute bacterial infections were included. Primary outcomes included the clinical response, microbiological response, and risk of adverse events (AEs). A total of eight RCTs were included, involving 2283 and 2197 patients who received novel tetracyclines and comparators, respectively. Overall, no significant difference was observed in the clinical response rate at test of cure between the experimental and control groups (for modified intent-to-treat [MITT] population, risk ratio [RR]: 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.99–1.05; for clinically evaluable [CE] population, RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00–1.04; and for microbiological evaluable [ME] population, RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.99–1.04). No significant difference in the microbiological response at the end of treatment was observed between the experimental and control groups (for ME population, RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.99–1.03; for microbiological MITT population, RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.96–1.07). No difference was observed concerning the risk of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events, and discontinuation of treatment due to TEAEs and all-cause mortality between the two groups. In conclusion, clinical efficacy and safety profile for novel tetracyclines in the treatment of acute bacterial infections were found to be similar to those for other available antibiotics.

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.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of Auditory Stimuli from Murottal Quran to Improve Comfort and Weight in Low Birth Weight Infants: Randomized Controlled Trial

Jurnal NERS ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 111
Author(s):  
Desriati Devi ◽  
Yeni Rustina ◽  
Defi Efendi
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Birth Weight ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Auditory Stimuli ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Low Birth Weight Infants ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
And Control

Introduction: Low birth weight (LBW) infants who have been hospitalized are exposed to various conditions that provoke discomfort, which could trigger a stress response and growth disorders. This study aimed to identify the effects of auditory stimuli from Murottal Quran when it comes to the comfort and weight of LBW infants.Methods: This study used a clinical randomized controlled trial design involving 52 low birth weight infants. The infants were randomly assigned to either the intervention group (n=26) or the control (n=26). The intervention of Murottal Quran was given using a speaker 4 times a day for 20 minutes every 3 hours. This intervention was conducted for three days.Results: The results of this study show that there is a significant difference in the comfort of  low birth weight infants after Murottal Qur’an on the first, second, and third days between the intervention and control groups (p=0.014; <0.001; <0.001). There was no significant difference in the weight between the intervention and control groups in the first, second, and third days (p=0.481; 0.481; 0.464).Conclusion: The auditory stimuli of Murottal Quran can help to improve the comfort level of low birth weight infants during hospitalization. It can therefore be used as a supportive therapy to facilitate low birth weight infant and premature infant development.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness and Safety of Probiotic Supplements for Psoriasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Preclinical Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Liuting Zeng ◽  
Ganpeng Yu ◽  
Yang Wu ◽  
Wensa Hao ◽  
Hua Chen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intestinal Flora ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Skin Thickness ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Probiotic Treatment ◽  
Preclinical Trials

Background. Patients with psoriasis need long-term medication to control their condition. Recent studies suggest that changing the intestinal flora may be a potential treatment. Methods. The databases were utilized to search the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and preclinical trials about probiotic supplement in the treatment of psoriasis. The retrieval time is from the establishment of these databases to December 2020. RevMan5.3 was used for the risk assessment of bias and meta-analysis. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021232756). Results. A total of 3 RCTs involving 164 participants were included. Two RCTs showed that probiotics can improve PASI and thereby improve the condition. For inflammation-related indicators, only one RCT showed that probiotics can improve the levels of CRP and TNF-α but have no obvious improvement effect on IL6. One RCT demonstrated the total effective rate of probiotics in the treatment of psoriasis. For adverse events, one RCT showed that the incidence of adverse events of probiotic treatment was low. Preclinical studies showed that continuous intervention with oral probiotics can significantly improve the progression of psoriasis and reduce the expression of inflammatory factors. The meta-analysis showed that the PASI between two groups was of no statistical significance (SMD 1.83 [-0.41, 4.07], P = 0.11 ). Meanwhile, probiotics may improve skin thickness (SMD -5.87 [-11.34, -0.41], P = 0.04 ) in animal model. Conclusion. Prebiotics may have a positive effect on alleviating the clinical symptoms of psoriasis, but a large sample of RCTs is still needed to support its therapeutic effect in psoriasis.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of Tocilizumab in the Treatment of COVID-19 in Adults: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun Chen ◽  
ZeMei Zhou ◽  
Jing Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Hospital Discharge ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Composite Outcome ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Serious Infection ◽  
And Control

Abstract Background: Since December 2019, COVID-19 has spread to the world which leads to a global health threat. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of tocilizumab on COVID-19 patients.Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and WHO international Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) from their inception to March 10, 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on tocilizumab supplementation in adults with COVID-19 disease. The primary outcomes were mortality at 28-30 day and 60-day, incidence of mechanical ventilation (MV), composite outcome of death or MV, time to hospital discharge, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to pool studies. Results: Eleven studies with a total of 6,579 patients were included in our meta-analysis, of which 3,406 and 3,173 were respectively assigned to the tocilizumab and control groups. Tocilizumab could significantly reduce 28-30 day mortality (RR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.80-0.99, P = 0.04), incidence of MV (RR= 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89, P = 0.0001), composition outcome of MV or death (RR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.90, P = 0.0002), time to hospital discharge (HR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.16-1.45, P ＜ 0.00001 ), ICU admissions (RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.47-0.88, P = 0.006), serious infection (RR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.94, P = 0.02) and events of serious adverse advents (RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.47-0.86, P = 0.004). There was no significant difference between tocilizumab and control groups in 60-day mortality and adverse events (AEs).Conclusions: Tocilizumab could reduce the short-term mortality, incidence of MV, composite outcome of death or MV, ICU admissions, serious infection and events of serious adverse advents, and shorten the time to hospital discharge in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The optimal effective dose needs to be confirmed by further studies.

scholarly journals A randomized controlled trial of combination of peppermint, lavender, and turmeric oil for antipruritic agent in pregnant women

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-44
Author(s):  
Fransisca Retno Asih ◽  
Farid Husin ◽  
Oki Suwarsa ◽  
Irda Fidrianny ◽  
Dany Hilmanto
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Analog Scale ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Herbal Products ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Level I ◽  
And Control ◽  
Single Blind

BACKGROUND Pruritus is the most common dermatological complaint that occurs during pregnancy, which is around 14–20%. No research related to herbal products to reduce some of the characteristics of pruritus at once has been conducted. This study aimed to assess the effect of blending oil to reduce pruritus based on visual analog scale (VAS). METHODS This was a single-blind, randomized clinical trial that included 57 pregnant women who were at 25–38 weeks of gestation, had a pruritus during pregnancy, a single pregnancy, a level I and II pruritus and a moderate to severe pruritus based on VAS. Pruritus scores were measured using VAS in both the treatment and control groups. The treatment and control groups applied blending oil and placebo, respectively, twice a day after bathing for 2 weeks. Mann–Whitney U, paired t, and chi-square tests were used for the analysis. RESULTS Pruritus reduction in pregnant women who received blending oil was higher than those using placebo (61.08% versus 12.41%, p<0.05). 83% of subjects using blending oils had a reduction of pruritus by >25 mm. Pregnant women who used placebo had a six times greater risk of experiencing pruritus than those who used blending oil (RR = 5.8, 95% CI = 2.613–12.874). CONCLUSIONS Blending oil can be used topically to treat a pruritus in pregnant women.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document