scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Specific Immunotherapy with Aeroallergens in the Management of Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cita Rosita Sigit Prakoeswa ◽  
Sylvia Anggraeni ◽  
Damayanti Damayanti ◽  
Menul Ayu Umborowati ◽  
Cintya Dipta Riswanto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atopic Dermatitis ◽  
Specific Immunotherapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Placebo Control ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Central Register ◽  
And Gender

Abstract Background: Specific immunotherapy with standardized aeroallergens can reduce symptoms and increase the quality of life for related allergy patients. This therapy is still controversial for atopic dermatitis (AD). Hence, a meta-analysis to assess efficacy and safety of specific immunotherapy with aeroallergens on patients with AD could provide a clear oversight on advantages and limitations of such treatment.Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, DOAJ, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for relevant studies published Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to October 2020. Studies involving all ages and gender with AD who treated with specific immunotherapy employing aeroallergens compared with placebo/control.Results: Seven studies RCTs were identified with 832 participants. Significantly decreased of SCORAD values favoring immunotherapy were observed (MD: -5.42; 95% CI - 10.31, -0.52; p=0.03). VAS score was significantly decrease (MD: -1.21; 95% CI -2.10, -0.31; p=0.008). However, immunotherapy showed no significant local and systemic adverse events ((RR 1.77; 95% CI 0.98, 3.19, p=0.06); (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.16, 3.01, p=0.62)) and IgG4 Dermatophagoides farinae (MD: 92.36, 95% CI -89.14,273.87; p=0.32). Conclusion: Our five years meta-analysis included small number studies, indicated moderate-level evidence for immunotherapy with standardized extract of aeroallergens is effective and safe for AD patients.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Bilastine in the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aranjit Singh Randhawa ◽  
Norhayati Mohd Noor ◽  
Mohd Khairi Md Daud ◽  
Baharudin Abdullah
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Symptom Score ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Nasal Symptom ◽  
Comparable Efficacy ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Quality Of Evidence

Bilastine is a non-sedating second generation H1 oral antihistamine (OAH) for treating allergic rhinitis (AR) patients. The effect of bilastine has not previously been evaluated in a meta-analysis. The aim of this review was to determine the efficacy and safety of bilastine in treating AR. An electronic literature search was performed using Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Science Direct and Google Scholar up to March 2021. Randomized controlled trials comparing bilastine with placebo and standard pharmacotherapy were included. The included studies must have diagnosis of AR established by clinicians and the outcomes must have a minimum of 2 weeks of follow-up period. The primary outcomes assessed were total symptom score (TSS), nasal symptom score (NSS) and non-nasal symptom score (NNSS). The secondary outcomes were discomfort due to rhinitis, quality of life (QOL) and adverse events. The risk of bias and quality of evidence for all studies were appraised. The meta-analysis was done using Review Manager 5.3 software based on the random-effects model. The search identified 135 records after removal of duplicates. Following screening and review of the records, fifteen full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Five trials involving 3,329 patients met the inclusion criteria. Bilastine was superior to placebo in improving TSS, NSS, NNSS, rhinitis discomfort score and QOL but has comparable efficacy with other OAHs in TSS, NSS, NNS, rhinitis discomfort score and QOL. There was no difference in adverse effects when bilastine was compared against placebo and other OAHs except for somnolence. Bilastine has fewer incidence of somnolence compared to cetirizine. The overall quality of evidence ranged from moderate to high quality. Bilastine is effective and safe in treating the overall symptoms of AR with comparable efficacy and safety with other OAHs except somnolence. Whilst bilastine has similar efficacy to cetirizine, somnolence is notably less in bilastine.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of atropine to control myopia progression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Congling Zhao ◽  
Chunyan Cai ◽  
Qiang Ding ◽  
Hongbin Dai
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Optimal Dose ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Myopia Progression ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Atropine Treatment ◽  
Observation Period

Abstract Background The effect and safety of atropine on delaying the progression of myopia has been extensively studied, but its optimal dose is still unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to systematically evaluate the safety and effectiveness of atropine in controlling the progression of myopia, and to explore the relationship between the dose of atropine and the effectiveness of controlling the progression of myopia. Methods This work was done through the data searched from PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The Cochrane Handbook was also used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. In addition, a meta-analysis was performed using Revman5.3 software. Results A total of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Myopia progression was mitigated greater in the atropine treatment group than that in the control group, with MD = − 0.80, 95% CI (− 0.94, − 0.66) during the whole observation period. There was a statistical difference among 0.05, 0.5, and 1.0% atropine (P = 0.004). In addition, less axial elongation was shown, with MD = − 0.26, 95% CI (− 0.33, − 0.18) during the whole observation period. Conclusion The effectiveness of atropine in controlling the progression of myopia was dose related. A 0.05% atropine was likely to be the optimal dose.

scholarly journals The efficacy of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy and their combination on functioning and quality of life in depression: a meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 414-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Kamenov ◽  
C. Twomey ◽  
M. Cabello ◽  
A. M. Prina ◽  
J. L. Ayuso-Mateos
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Depressive Disorders ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Combined Treatment ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Depression Symptom ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Central Register

BackgroundThere is growing recognition of the importance of both functioning and quality of life (QoL) outcomes in the treatment of depressive disorders, but the meta-analytic evidence is scarce. The objective of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was to determine the absolute and relative effects of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy and their combination on functioning and QoL in patients with depression.MethodOne hundred and fifty-three outcome trials involving 29 879 participants with depressive disorders were identified through database searches in Pubmed, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.ResultsCompared to control conditions, psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy yielded small to moderate effect sizes for functioning and QoL, ranging from g = 0.31 to g = 0.43. When compared directly, initial analysis yielded no evidence that one of them was superior. After adjusting for publication bias, psychotherapy was more efficacious than pharmacotherapy (g = 0.21) for QoL. The combination of psychotherapy and medication performed significantly better for both outcomes compared to each treatment alone yielding small effect sizes (g = 0.32 to g = 0.39). Both interventions improved depression symptom severity more than functioning and QoL.ConclusionDespite the small number of comparative trials for some of the analyses, this study reveals that combined treatment is superior, but psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy alone are also efficacious for improving functioning and QoL. The overall relatively modest effects suggest that future tailoring of therapies could be warranted to better meet the needs of individuals with functioning and QoL problems.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Atropine to Control Myopia Progression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Congling Zhao ◽  
Chunyan Cai ◽  
Qiang Ding ◽  
Hongbin Dai
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Optimal Dose ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Myopia Progression ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Atropine Treatment ◽  
Observation Period

Abstract Background: The effect and safety of atropine on delaying the progression of myopia has been extensively studied, but its optimal effect dose is still unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to systematically evaluate the safety and effectiveness of atropine in controlling the progression of myopia, and to explore the relationship between the dose of atropine and the effect of controlling the progression of myopia. Methods: This work was done through the data search from PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The Cochrane Handbook was also used to evaluate the quality of these included studies. In addition, a meta-analysis was performed using Revman5.3 software. Results: A total of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Myopia progression was mitigated greater in the atropine treatment group than the control group, with MD = -0.80, 95% CI (-0.94, -0.66) during the whole observation period. There was a statistical difference between 0.05%, 0.5%, and 1.0% atropine (P = 0.004). In addition, less axial elongation was showed, with MD = -0.26, 95% CI (-0.33, -0.18) during the whole observation period. Conclusion: The effect of atropine in controlling the progression of myopia was dose related. A 0.05% atropine was likely to be the optimal dose.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of daptomycin: systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 204993611988646
Author(s):  
María Teresa Rosanova ◽  
David Bes ◽  
Pedro Serrano-Aguilar ◽  
Norma Sberna ◽  
Estefania Herrera-Ramos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Failure Rates ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Central Register

Background: The aim of this study was to assess whether daptomycin is safer and more efficacious than comparators for the treatment of serious infection caused by gram-positive microorganisms. Methods: Electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and clinical registered trials) were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the efficacy and safety of daptomycin versus therapy with any other antibiotic comparator. Two reviewers independently applied selection criteria, performed a quality assessment and extracted the data. Heterogeneity was assessed, and a random-effects or fixed-effects model, when appropriate, was used for estimates of risk ratio (RR). The primary outcome assessed was the risk of clinical treatment failure among the intention-to-treat population and the presence of any treatment related adverse event (AEs). Results: A total of seven trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Daptomycin treatment failure rates were no different to comparator regimens (RR = 0.96; CI 95% 0.86–1.06). No significantly different treatment related AEs were identified when comparing groups (RR = 0.91; CI 95% 0.83–1.01). Conclusions: No significant differences in treatment failure rates and safety were found using daptomycin or any of the comparators treatment.

scholarly journals HRV-Based Training for Improving VO2max in Endurance Athletes. A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (21) ◽  
pp. 7999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Granero-Gallegos ◽  
Alberto González-Quílez ◽  
Daniel Plews ◽  
María Carrasco-Poyatos
Keyword(s):  
Endurance Training ◽  
Performance Enhancement ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Training Group ◽  
Endurance Athletes ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Central Register ◽  
And Gender ◽  
And Control

This review aimed to synthesize evidence regarding interventions based on heart rate variability (HRV)-guided training for VO2max improvements in endurance athletes and address the issues that impact this performance enhancement. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Complete, the Web of Science Core Collection, Global Health, Current Contents Connect, and the SciELO citation index were searched. Inclusion criteria were: randomized controlled trials; studies with trained athletes enrolled in any regular endurance training; studies that recruited men, women, and both sexes combined; studies on endurance training controlled by HRV; studies that measured performance with VO2max. A random-effects meta-analysis calculating the effect size (ES) was used. Moderator analyses (according to the athlete’s level and gender) and metaregression (according to the number of participants in each group) were undertaken to examine differences in ES. HRV-guided training and control training enhanced the athletes’ VO2max (p < 0.0001), but the ES for the HRV-guided training group was significantly higher (p < 0.0001; ESHRVG-CG = 0.187). The amateur level and female subgroup reported better and significant results (p < 0.0001) for VO2max. HRV-guided training had a small (ES = 0.402) but positive effect on endurance athlete performance (VO2max), conditioned by the athlete’s level and sex.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Atropine to Control Myopia Progression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Congling Zhao ◽  
Chunyan Cai ◽  
Qiang Ding ◽  
Hongbin Dai
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Optimal Dose ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Myopia Progression ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Atropine Treatment ◽  
Observation Period

Abstract Background: The effect and safety of atropine on delaying the progression of myopia has been extensively studied, but its optimal effect dose is still unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to systematically evaluate the safety and effectiveness of atropine in controlling the progression of myopia, and to explore the relationship between the dose of atropine and the effect of controlling the progression of myopia. Methods: This work was done through the data search from PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The Cochrane Handbook was also used to evaluate the quality of these included studies. In addition, a meta-analysis was performed using Revman5.3 software. Results: A total of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Myopia progression was mitigated greater in the atropine treatment group than the control group, with MD = -0.80, 95% CI (-0.94, -0.66) during the whole observation period. There was a statistical difference between 0.05%, 0.5%, and 1.0% atropine (P = 0.004). In addition, less axial elongation was showed, with MD = -0.26, 95% CI (-0.33, -0.18) during the whole observation period. Conclusion: The effect of atropine in controlling the progression of myopia was dose related. A 0.05% atropine was likely to be the optimal dose.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Atropine to Control Myopia Progression: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Congling Zhao ◽  
Chunyan Cai ◽  
Qiang Ding ◽  
Hongbin Dai
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Optimal Dose ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Myopia Progression ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Atropine Treatment ◽  
Dose Dependent

Abstract Purpose: To systematically evaluate the safety and effectiveness of atropine in controlling the progression of myopia.Methods: This work was done through the data search from PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The Cochrane Handbook was also used to evaluate the quality of these included studies. In addition, a meta-analysis was performed using Revman5.3 software.Results: A total of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Myopia progression was mitigated in the atropine treatment group, with MD = -0.80, 95% CI (-0.94, -0.66). There was a statistical difference between 0.05%, 0.5%, and 1.0% atropine (P = 0.004). In addition, axial elongation was slowed, with MD = -0.26, 95% CI (-0.33, -0.18).Conclusion: The effect of atropine in controlling the progression of myopia was dose-dependent. A 0.05% atropine was most likely to be the optimal dose.

scholarly journals Effect of dexmedetomidine on hemodynamics in patients undergoing hysterectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (8) ◽  
pp. 030006052110398
Author(s):  
Zhaoqiu Li ◽  
Cuiping Li ◽  
Maoxian Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
English Language ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Cardiovascular Stress ◽  
Central Register ◽  
Indirect Comparisons

Objective We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review to evaluate the effects of dexmedetomidine on the hemodynamics of patients undergoing hysterectomy. Methods We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that allowed direct or indirect comparisons of hemodynamic indicators. We also searched nine English-language databases up to April 2021 to identify relevant research. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs was applied to assess the methodological quality of the eligible studies. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software. Results Nine trials were included in this systematic review. The effect of dexmedetomidine on heart rate during surgery was significantly smaller than that of other sedatives. Intraoperative systolic and diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure were more stable in the dexmedetomidine group compared with the control group. The postoperative modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness Score was also better in the dexmedetomidine compared with the control group. Conclusions Dexmedetomidine increases hemodynamic stability in patients undergoing hysterectomy, reduces the cardiovascular stress response during surgery, and effectively prevents postoperative adverse reactions, with good safety.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document