scholarly journals Inhaled Corticosteroids and Placebo Treatment Effects in Adult Patients With Cough: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 856 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seung-Eun Lee ◽  
Ji-Hyang Lee ◽  
Hyun Jung Kim ◽  
Byung-Jae Lee ◽  
Sang-Heon Cho ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonardo R ◽  
Elmiro SR ◽  
Angelica LDD ◽  
Nilson PS ◽  
João Lucas OC ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e049866
Author(s):  
Chenghui Zhou ◽  
Baohui Lou ◽  
Hui Li ◽  
Xin Wang ◽  
Hushan Ao ◽  
...  

IntroductionEmerging evidence has shown that COVID-19 infection may result in right ventricular (RV) disturbance and be associated with adverse clinical outcomes. The aim of this meta-analysis is to summarise the incidence, risk factors and the prognostic effect of imaging RV involvement in adult patients with COVID-19.MethodsA systematical search will be performed in PubMed, EMBase, ISI Knowledge via Web of Science and preprint databases (MedRxiv and BioRxiv) (until October 2021) to identify all cohort studies in adult patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome will be the incidence of RV involvement (dysfunction and/or dilation) assessed by echocardiography, CT or MRI. Secondary outcomes will include the risk factors for RV involvement and their association with all-cause mortality during hospitalisation. Additional outcomes will include the RV global or free wall longitudinal strain (RV-GLS or RV-FWLS), tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), fractional area change (FAC) and RV diameter. Univariable or multivariable meta-regression and subgroup analyses will be performed for the study design and patient characteristics (especially acute or chronic pulmonary embolism and pulmonary hypertension). Sensitivity analyses will be used to assess the robustness of our results by removing each included study at one time to obtain and evaluate the remaining overall estimates of RV involvement incidence and related risk factors, association with all-cause mortality, and other RV parameters (RV-GLS or RV-FWLS, TAPSE, S’, FAC and RV diameter). Both linear and cubic spline regression models will be used to explore the dose–response relationship between different categories (>2) of RV involvement and the risk of mortality (OR or HR).Ethics and disseminationThere was no need for ethics approval for the systematic review protocol according to the Institutional Review Board/Independent Ethics Committee of Fuwai Hospital. This meta-analysis will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal for publication.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021231689.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1087.1-1087
Author(s):  
M. Van den Dikkenberg, Msc ◽  
N. Luurssen-Masurel ◽  
M. Kuijper ◽  
M. R. Kok ◽  
P. De Jong ◽  
...  

Background:The need to involve patient reported outcomes (PROs) in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) increases, since PROs quantify patient relevant outcomes. Although PROs have been incorporated in the core-outcome sets in clinical trials, knowledge about the treatment effects on these PROs is scarce. Therefore, we performed a systematic review on the effects of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), of any type, on relevant PRO domains mentioned in the ICHOM standard set. This might support rheumatologists and RA patients during treatment decisions.Objectives:To get insight in the treatment effects of DMARDs of any type on three PRO domains that matter to patients (pain, activity limitations and fatigue).Methods:A systematic review was performed in Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane and Google Scholar. Included were all studies that were published before August 2019 and showed DMARD treatment effects in RA on PROs that are part of the ICHOM standard set. Three Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed for the PRO domains pain, activity limitations and fatigue. Preliminary results of DMARDs (in)directly compared to placebo were visualized by forest plots using R.Results:The search strategy yielded n=5974 articles. After selection was performed by 2 independent researchers, n=70 individual articles representing n=53 studies were extracted, over the three PRO domains; pain (n=31), activity limitations (n=41) and fatigue (n=21). In all RCTs, PROs were only reported as secondary or tertiary endpoints. In figure 1, we show the effects on PROs for any type of DMARD investigated compared to placebo. Overall, DMARDs show a greater reduction in pain (standardized mean difference (SMD); -0.97 – -0.22) and most of them in activity limitations (SMD; -0.81 – 0.56). In fatigue, this clear direction is lacking (SMD; -0.86 – 3.5). csDMARDs and anti-TNF seem to perform slightly, but nog significantly, worse than other bDMARDs and tsDMARDs in the first two domains.Conclusion:Within in this systematic review we report a reduction for DMARDs of any type on the domains of pain and activity limitations compared to placebo. However, results are still preliminary and should be interpreted with care. A more comprehensive network analysis might give a more definitive answer which DMARD performs best.Figure 1.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2018 ◽  
Vol 102 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Zieschang ◽  
Rainer Koch ◽  
Manfred P. Wirth ◽  
Michael Froehner

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document