Review of Systemic Antibiotic Treatments in Children with Rhinosinusitis

Antibiotic treatment in paediatric rhinosinusitis is still a matter of debate, as the current guidelines have been drafted mainly based on clinical studies published before 2013. Recent modifications in the epidemiological basis of the disease might mean that current treatments are not completely adequate considering the evolving microbiological profile of the disease. The present paper reviews the role of systemic antibiotics in children with acute (ARS), chronic (CRS), recurrent (RARS), and complicated acute (CoARS) rhinosinusitis. A total of 14 studies (including 3 prospective non-randomised studies, 8 retrospective studies, and 3 prospective randomised studies) of the 115 initially identified papers were included in this review, corresponding to 13,425 patients. Five papers dealt with ARS, four papers with RARS or CRS, and five papers with CoARS; the remaining papers included patients with either ARS or CRS. Data about the effectiveness of antibiotic treatment in children with ARC, CRS, and CoARS is scarce, as only three randomised controlled trials have been published in the last decade, with contrasting results. There is an urgent need for dedicated controlled trials not only to test the actual clinical benefits deriving from the routine use of systemic antibiotics in different categories of patients but also to compare the effectiveness of various therapeutic protocols in terms of the type of antibacterial molecules and the duration of treatment.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors and PD-L1 expression status in cancer: meta-analysis

BMJ ◽

10.1136/bmj.k3529 ◽

2018 ◽

pp. k3529 ◽

Cited By ~ 108

Author(s):

Xian Shen ◽

Bin Zhao

Keyword(s):

Cell Death ◽

Programmed Cell Death ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Control Group ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Clinical Benefits ◽

American Society ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Expression Status

Abstract Objective To evaluate the relative efficacy of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors versus conventional drugs in patients with cancer that were PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative. Design Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources PubMed, Embase, Cochrane database, and conference abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society of Medical Oncology up to March 2018. Review methods Studies of PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors (avelumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) that had available hazard ratios for death based on PD-L1 positivity or negativity were included. The threshold for PD-L1 positivity or negativity was that PD-L1 stained cell accounted for 1% of tumour cells, or tumour and immune cells, assayed by immunohistochemistry staining methods. Results 4174 patients with advanced or metastatic cancers from eight randomised controlled trials were included in this study. Compared with conventional agents, PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors were associated with significantly prolonged overall survival in both patients that were PD-L1 positive (n=2254, hazard ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.74) and PD-L1 negative (1920, 0.80, 0.71 to 0.90). However, the efficacies of PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade treatment in patients that were PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative were significantly different (P=0.02 for interaction). Additionally, in both patients that were PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative, the long term clinical benefits from PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade were observed consistently across interventional agent, cancer histotype, method of randomisation stratification, type of immunohistochemical scoring system, drug target, type of control group, and median follow-up time. Conclusions PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade therapy is a preferable treatment option over conventional therapy for both patients that are PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative. This finding suggests that PD-L1 expression status alone is insufficient in determining which patients should be offered PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade therapy.

Download Full-text

The Role of Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Treatment of the Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Review and Quantitative Analysis

Anaesthesia and Intensive Care ◽

10.1177/0310057x0803600203 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 36 (2) ◽

pp. 152-161 ◽

Cited By ~ 29

Author(s):

R. P. Chalwin ◽

J. L. Moran ◽

P. L. Graham

Keyword(s):

Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽

Respiratory Distress ◽

Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽

Randomised Controlled Trials ◽

Distress Syndrome ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽

Membrane Oxygenation ◽

Randomised Controlled

The role of Extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has not been formally validated for patients with adult respiratory distress syndrome. In anticipation of publication of the conventional ventilation versus ECMO in severe adult respiratory failure (CESAR) trial, the role of ECMO in this setting was reviewed. An electronic search for studies reporting the use of ECMO for the treatment of adult respiratory distress syndrome revealed two randomised controlled trials and three non-controlled trials. Bayesian analysis on the two randomised controlled trials produced an odds ratio mortality of 1.28 (credible interval 0.24 to 6.55) demonstrating no significant harm or benefit. Pooling was not possible for the non-controlled studies because of differing admission status and ECMO selection criteria and an inability to control for these differences in the absence of individual patient data. A large number (n=35) of case series have been published with generally more positive results. We also present a comprehensive narrative commentary on the history, current practice and future for ECMO. ECMO, as rescue therapy for adult respiratory distress syndrome, appears to be an unvalidated rescue treatment option. Analysis and review of trial data does not support its application; however the body of reported cases suggests otherwise. Until the CESAR trial provides an authoritative answer ECMO will continue to be offered on a case by case basis.

Download Full-text