Dataset Information

Antibiotic treatment for pyelonephritis in children: multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare the efficacy of oral antibiotic treatment alone with treatment started parenterally and completed orally in children with a first episode of acute pyelonephritis.

Design

Multicentre, randomised controlled, open labelled, parallel group, non-inferiority trial.

Setting

28 paediatric units in north east Italy.

Participants

502 children aged 1 month to <7 years with clinical pyelonephritis.

Intervention

Oral co-amoxiclav (50 mg/kg/day in three doses for 10 days) or parenteral ceftriaxone (50 mg/kg/day in a single parenteral dose) for three days, followed by oral co-amoxiclav (50 mg/kg/day in three divided doses for seven days). Main outcomes measures Primary outcome was the rate of renal scarring. Secondary measures of efficacy were time to defervescence (<37 degrees C), reduction in inflammatory indices, and percentage with sterile urine after 72 hours. An exploratory subgroup analysis was conducted in the children in whom pyelonephritis was confirmed by dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) scintigraphy within 10 days after study entry.

Results

Intention to treat analysis showed no significant differences between oral (n=244) and parenteral (n=258) treatment, both in the primary outcome (scarring scintigraphy at 12 months 27/197 (13.7%) v 36/203 (17.7%), difference in risk -4%, 95% confidence interval -11.1% to 3.1%) and secondary outcomes (time to defervescence 36.9 hours (SD 19.7) v 34.3 hours (SD 20), mean difference 2.6 (-0.9 to 6.0); white cell count 9.8x10(9)/l (SD 3.5) v 9.5x10(9)/l (SD 3.1), mean difference 0.3 (-0.3 to 0.9); percentage with sterile urine 185/186 v 203/204, risk difference -0.05% (-1.5% to 1.4%)). Similar results were found in the subgroup of 278 children with confirmed acute pyelonephritis on scintigraphy at study entry.

Conclusions

Treatment with oral antibiotics is as effective as parenteral then oral treatment in the management of the first episode of clinical pyelonephritis in children.

Trial registration

Clinical Trials NCT00161330 [ClinicalTrials.gov].

SUBMITTER: Montini G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1955287 | biostudies-literature | 2007 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Antibiotic treatment for pyelonephritis in children: multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

Montini Giovanni G Toffolo Antonella A Zucchetta Pietro P Dall'Amico Roberto R Gobber Daniela D Calderan Alessandro A Maschio Francesca F Pavanello Luigi L Molinari Pier Paolo PP Scorrano Dante D Zanchetta Sergio S Cassar Walburga W Brisotto Paolo P Corsini Andrea A Sartori Stefano S Da Dalt Liviana L Murer Luisa L Zacchello Graziella G

BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20070704 7616

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the efficacy of oral antibiotic treatment alone with treatment started parenterally and completed orally in children with a first episode of acute pyelonephritis.<h4>Design</h4>Multicentre, randomised controlled, open labelled, parallel group, non-inferiority trial.<h4>Setting</h4>28 paediatric units in north east Italy.<h4>Participants</h4>502 children aged 1 month to <7 years with clinical pyelonephritis.<h4>Intervention</h4>Oral co-amoxiclav (50 mg/kg/day in three ...[more]

PMID: 17611232

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAppendectomy is considered the gold standard treatment for acute appendicitis. Recently the need for surgery has been challenged in both adults and children. In children there is growing clinician, patient and parental interest in non-operative treatment of acute appendicitis with antibiotics as opposed to surgery. To date no multicentre randomised controlled trials that are appropriately powered to determine efficacy of non-operative treatment (antibiotics) for acute appendicitis in children compared with surgery (appendectomy) have been performed.MethodsMulticentre, international, randomised controlled trial with a non-inferiority design. Children (age 5-16 years) with a clinical and/or radiological diagnosis of acute uncomplicated appendicitis will be randomised (1:1 ratio) to receive either laparoscopic appendectomy or treatment with intravenous (minimum 12 hours) followed by oral antibiotics (total course 10 days). Allocation to groups will be stratified by gender, duration of symptoms (> or <48 hours) and centre. Children in both treatment groups will follow a standardised treatment pathway. Primary outcome is treatment failure defined as additional intervention related to appendicitis requiring general anaesthesia within 1 year of randomisation (including recurrent appendicitis) or negative appendectomy. Important secondary outcomes will be reported and a cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed. The primary outcome will be analysed on a non-inferiority basis using a 20% non-inferiority margin. Planned sample size is 978 children.DiscussionThe APPY trial will be the first multicentre randomised trial comparing non-operative treatment with appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis in children. The results of this trial have the potential to revolutionise the treatment of this common gastrointestinal emergency. The randomised design will limit the effect of bias on outcomes seen in other studies.Trial registration numberclinicaltrials.gov: NCT02687464. Registered on Jan 13th 2016.

Project description:IntroductionHaemorrhoidal disease (HD) is a common condition with significant epidemiologic and economic implications. While it is possible to treat symptomatic grade 1-2 haemorrhoids with rubber band ligation (RBL) or sclerotherapy (SCL), the effectiveness of these treatments compatible with current standards has not yet been investigated with a randomised controlled trial. The hypothesis is that SCL is not inferior to RBL in terms of symptom reduction (patient-related outcome measures (PROMs)), patient experience, complications or recurrence rate.Methods and analysisThis protocol describes the methodology of a non-inferiority, multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing rubber band ligation and sclerotherapy for symptomatic grade 1-2 haemorrhoids in adults (> 18 years). Patients are preferably randomised between the two treatment arms. However, patients with a strong preference for one of the treatments and refuse randomisation are eligible for the registration arm. Patients either receive 4 cc Aethoxysklerol 3% SCL or 3 × RBL. The primary outcome measures are symptom reduction by means of PROMs, recurrence and complication rates. Secondary outcome measures are patient experience, number of treatments and days of sick leave from work. Data are collected at 4 different time points.DiscussionThe THROS trial is the first large multicentre randomised trial to study the difference in effectivity between RBL and SCL for the treatment of grade 1-2 HD. It will provide information as to which treatment method (RBL or SCL) is the most effective, gives fewer complications and is experienced by the patient as the best option.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol has been approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee of the Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location AMC (nr. 2020_053). The gathered data and results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and spread to coloproctological associations and guidelines.Trial registrationDutch Trial Register NL8377 . Registered on 12-02-2020.

Project description:IntroductionUp to 40% of orthopaedic injuries in children require a closed reduction, almost always necessitating procedural sedation. Intravenous ketamine is the most commonly used sedative agent. However, intravenous insertion is painful and can be technically difficult in children. We hypothesise that a combination of intranasal dexmedetomidine plus intranasal ketamine (Ketodex) will be non-inferior to intravenous ketamine for effective sedation in children undergoing a closed reduction.Methods and analysisThis is a six-centre, four-arm, adaptive, randomised, blinded, controlled, non-inferiority trial. We will include children 4-17 years with a simple upper limb fracture or dislocation that requires sedation for a closed reduction. Participants will be randomised to receive either intranasal Ketodex (one of three dexmedetomidine and ketamine combinations) or intravenous ketamine. The primary outcome is adequate sedation as measured using the Paediatric Sedation State Scale. Secondary outcomes include length of stay, time to wakening and adverse effects. The results of both per protocol and intention-to-treat analyses will be reported for the primary outcome. All inferential analyses will be undertaken using a response-adaptive Bayesian design. Logistic regression will be used to model the dose-response relationship for the combinations of intranasal Ketodex. Using the Average Length Criterion for Bayesian sample size estimation, a survey-informed non-inferiority margin of 17.8% and priors from historical data, a sample size of 410 participants will be required. Simulations estimate a type II error rate of 0.08 and a type I error rate of 0.047.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from Clinical Trials Ontario for London Health Sciences Centre and McMaster Research Ethics Board. Other sites have yet to receive approval from their institutions. Informed consent will be obtained from guardians of all participants in addition to assent from participants. Study data will be submitted for publication regardless of results.Trial registration numberNCT0419525.

Project description:IntroductionPulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) is an available treatment for knee osteoarthritis (KOA), which is the most common cause of pain and disability. Nonetheless, whether the clinical effects are like that of most used drugs is unclear. Thus, this study aims to determine the effect of PEMF on pain relief by comparing them with the positive drug (celecoxib). Furthermore, this clinical trial aims to evaluate the effect of PEMF on function and quality of life with a long-term follow-up.Methods and analysisThis two-armed, non-inferiority, randomised, controlled trial will be conducted in the outpatient physiatry/physiotherapy clinic or inpatient ward of 17 hospitals in China. A total of 428 individuals will be included who are more than 40 years of age with diagnosed KOA. The participants will be randomly allocated to the PEMF group: receiving a 6-week PEMF (15 Hz, 30 mT) at a frequency of 40 min per day, 5 days per week plus sham drug (n=214), or drug group: receiving a 6-week celecoxib 200 mg combined with sham PEMF (n=214). Clinical outcomes will be measured at baseline (T0), mid-term of intervention (T1), post-intervention (T2), 10, 18 and 30 weeks (T3-5) of follow-up after randomisation. The primary outcome will be the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) pain index. The secondary outcomes will be WOMAC function and stiffness, pain measured by numerical rating score, quality of life, 6-minute walk test, pain catastrophising scale and responder index.Ethics and disseminationThe trial is performed following the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol and consent form have been approved by the Ethics Committee on Biomedical Research of West China Hospital of Sichuan University (#2021-220). All patients will give informed consent before participation and the trial is initiated after approval. Results of this trial will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberChiCTR2100052131.

Project description:BackgroundRenal stone disease is common and can cause emergency presentation with acute pain due to ureteric colic. International guidelines have stated the need for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to determine whether a non-invasive outpatient (shockwave lithotripsy [SWL]) or surgical (ureteroscopy [URS]) intervention should be the first-line treatment for those needing active intervention. This has implications for shaping clinical pathways.ObjectiveTo report a pragmatic multicentre non-inferiority RCT comparing SWL with URS.Design, setting, and participantsThis trial tested for non-inferiority of up to two sessions of SWL compared with URS as initial treatment for ureteric stones requiring intervention.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe primary outcome was whether further intervention was required to clear the stone, and secondary outcomes included quality of life assessment, severity of pain, and serious complications; these were based on questionnaires at baseline, 8 wk, and 6 mo. We included patients over 16 yr with a single ureteric stone clinically deemed to require intervention. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were planned.Results and limitationsThe study recruited between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2017. We recruited 613 participants from a total of 1291 eligible patients, randomising 306 to SWL and 307 to URS. Sixty-seven patients (22.1%) in the SWL arm needed further treatment compared with 31 patients (10.3%) in the URS arm. The absolute risk difference was 11.7% (95% confidence interval 5.6%, 17.8%) in favour of URS, which was inside the 20% threshold we set for demonstrating noninferiority of SWL.ConclusionsThis RCT was designed to test whether SWL is non-inferior to URS and confirmed this; although SWL is an outpatient noninvasive treatment with potential advantages both for patients and for reducing the use of inpatient health care resources, the trial showed a benefit in overall clinical outcomes with URS compared with SWL, reflecting contemporary practice. The Therapeutic Interventions for Stones of the Ureter (TISU) study provides new evidence to help guide the choice of modality for this common health condition.Patient summaryWe present the largest trial comparing ureteroscopy versus extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for ureteric stones. While ureteroscopy had marginally improved outcome in terms of stone clearance, as expected, shockwave lithotripsy had better results in terms of health care costs. These results should enable patients and health care providers to optimise treatment pathways for this common urological condition.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough amoxicillin-clavulanate is the recommended first-line empirical oral antibiotic treatment for non-severe exacerbations in children with bronchiectasis, azithromycin is also often prescribed for its convenient once-daily dosing. No randomised controlled trials involving acute exacerbations in children with bronchiectasis have been published to our knowledge. We hypothesised that azithromycin is non-inferior to amoxicillin-clavulanate for resolving exacerbations in children with bronchiectasis.MethodsWe did this parallel-group, double-dummy, double-blind, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial in three Australian and one New Zealand hospital between April, 2012, and August, 2016. We enrolled children aged 1-19 years with radiographically proven bronchiectasis unrelated to cystic fibrosis. At the start of an exacerbation, children were randomly assigned to oral suspensions of either amoxicillin-clavulanate (22·5 mg/kg, twice daily) and placebo or azithromycin (5 mg/kg per day) and placebo for 21 days. We used permuted block randomisation (stratified by age, site, and cause) with concealed allocation. The primary outcome was resolution of exacerbation (defined as a return to baseline) by 21 days in the per-protocol population, with a non-inferiority margin of -20%. We assessed several secondary outcomes including duration of exacerbation, time to next exacerbation, laboratory, respiratory, and quality-of-life measurements, and microbiology. This trial was registered with the Australian/New Zealand Registry (ACTRN12612000010897).FindingsWe screened 604 children and enrolled 236. 179 children had an exacerbation and were assigned to treatment: 97 to amoxicillin-clavulanate, 82 to azithromycin). By day 21, 61 (84%) of 73 exacerbations had resolved in the azithromycin group versus 73 (84%) of 87 in the amoxicillin-clavulanate group. The risk difference showed non-inferiority (-0·3%, 95% CI -11·8 to 11·1). Exacerbations were significantly shorter in the amoxicillin-clavulanate group than in the azithromycin group (median 10 days [IQR 6-15] vs 14 days [8-16]; p=0·014). Adverse events were attributed to the trial medication in 17 (21%) of 82 children in the azithromycin group versus 23 (24%) of 97 in the amoxicillin-clavulanate group (relative risk 0·9, 95% CI 0·5 to 1·5).InterpretationBy 21 days of treatment, azithromycin is non-inferior to amoxicillin-clavulanate for resolving exacerbations in children with non-severe bronchiectasis. In some patients, such as those with penicillin hypersensitivity or those likely to have poor adherence, azithromycin provides another option for treating exacerbations, but must be balanced with risk of treatment failure (within a 20% margin), longer exacerbation duration, and the risk of inducing macrolide resistance.FundingAustralian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Project description:IntroductionThe current evidence on the efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) in reducing the risk of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) after primary joint reconstruction is insufficient. In several European countries, the use of ALBC is routine practice unlike in the USA where ALBC use is not approved in low-risk patients. Therefore, we designed a double-blinded pragmatic multicentre register-based randomised controlled non-inferiority trial to investigate the effects of ALBC compared with plain bone cement in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).Methods and analysisA minimum of 9,172 patients undergoing full-cemented primary TKA will be recruited and equally randomised into the ALBC group and the plain bone cement group. This trial will be conducted in Norwegian hospitals that routinely perform cemented primary TKA. The primary outcome will be risk of revision surgery due to PJI at 1-year of follow-up. Secondary outcomes will be: risk of revision due to any reason including aseptic loosening at 1, 6, 10 and 20 years of follow-up; patient-related outcome measures like function, pain, satisfaction and health-related quality of life at 1, 6 and 10 years of follow-up; risk of changes in the microbial pattern and resistance profiles of organisms cultured in subsequent revisions at 1, 6, 10 and 20 years of follow-up; cost-effectiveness of routine ALBC versus plain bone cement use in primary TKA. We will use 1:1 randomisation with random permuted blocks and stratify by participating hospitals to randomise patients to receive ALBC or plain bone cement. Inclusion, randomisation and follow-up will be through the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.Ethics and disseminationThe trial was approved by the Western Norway Regional Committees on Medical and Health Research Ethics (reference number: 2019/751/REK vest) on 21 June 2019. The findings of this trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.Trial registration numberNCT04135170.

Project description:BackgroundMinimal change nephropathy (MCN) is a common cause of nephrotic syndrome in both adults and children. International guidelines recommend treatment with prednisolone 1 mg/kg/day to adults. This dose is derived from an empirically established dose in children, although children generally attain remission faster and relapse more rapidly than adults. Prednisolone is associated with multiple and serious adverse events. Activated vitamin D has been shown to reduce albuminuria in other glomerular renal diseases with a minimum of adverse events. This study tests the hypothesis that a new treatment regimen in MCN combining reduced dose prednisolone and active vitamin D is as efficient in inducing remission and has fewer and less severe adverse events than standard prednisolone. Furthermore, we aim to establish models allowing for more personalized medicine based on assessment of the individual's prednisolone metabolism.MethodsA randomised controlled multicentre non-inferior unblinded trial including 96 adult, incident patients with biopsy-proven MCN, albuminuria > 3 g/day, and an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) > 30 ml/min from renal departments in Denmark. Patients are randomised to standard prednisolone (1 mg/kg/day) or reduced prednisolone (0.5 mg/kg/day) and alfacalcidol (0.5 μg/day). The primary outcome is the rate of remissions after 16 weeks and the time from diagnosis to remission. The study will include a saliva test to characterise prednisolone pharmacokinetics and compare them to genetic variations in specific liver enzymes responsible for prednisolone metabolism.DiscussionReducing the prednisolone dose is expected to reduce the number of severe adverse events. This study will examine if reduced prednisolone dose with active vitamin D but without additional immunosuppression is feasible in the treatment of MCN and will reduce the number of adverse events. The findings can potentially change current guidelines for treatment of MCN in adults. Additional outcomes on inter-individual pharmacokinetic and metabolic variations may allow for a more personalised treatment strategy.Trial registrationEudraCT 2017-001206-16, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03210688 . Registered on June 3, 2017.

Project description:IntroductionBronchiolitis is one of the most common reasons for hospital admissions in early childhood. As supportive treatment, some treatment guidelines suggest using nasal irrigation with normal saline (NS) to facilitate clearance of mucus from the airways. In addition, most paediatric departments in Denmark use nebulised NS for the same purpose, which can mainly be administered as inpatient care. However, no studies have ever directly tested the effect of saline in children with bronchiolitis.Methods and analysisThe study is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled non-inferiority trial and will be performed at six paediatric departments in eastern Denmark. We plan to include 300 children aged 0-12 months admitted to hospital with bronchiolitis. Participating children are randomised 1:1:1 to nebulised NS, nasal irrigation with NS or no saline therapy. All other treatment will be given according to standard guidelines.The primary outcome is duration of hospitalisation, analysed according to intention-to-treat analysis using linear regression and Cox regression analysis. By including at least 249 children, we can prove non-inferiority with a limit of 12 hours admission, alpha 2.5% and a power of 80%. Secondary outcomes are need for respiratory support with nasal continuous positive airway pressure or high-flow oxygen therapy and requirement of fluid supplements (either by nasogastric tube or intravenous).Ethics and disseminationThis study may inform current practice for supportive treatment of children with bronchiolitis. First, if NS is found to be helpful, it may be implemented into global guidelines. If no effect of NS is found, we can stop spending resources on an ineffective treatment. Second, if NS is effective, but nasal irrigation is non-inferior to nebulisation, it may reduce the workload of nurses, and possible duration of hospitalisation because the treatment can be delivered by the parents at home.Trial registration numberNCT05902702.

Project description:IntroductionCurrent treatment guidelines for European Lyme neuroborreliosis (LNB) recommend cephalosporins, penicillin or doxycycline for 14-28 days but evidence for optimal treatment length is poor. Treatment lengths in clinical practice tend to exceed the recommendations. Most patients experience a rapid improvement of symptoms and neurological findings within days of treatment, but some report long-term complaints. The underlying mechanisms of remaining complaints are debated, and theories as ongoing chronic infection with Borrelia burgdorferi, dysregulated immune responses, genetic predisposition, coinfection with multiple tick-borne pathogens, structural changes in CNS and personal traits have been suggested. The main purpose of our trial is to address the hypothesis of improved outcome after long-term antibiotic treatment of LNB, by comparing efficacy of treatment with 2 and 6 weeks courses of doxycycline.Methods and analysisThe trial has a multicentre, non-inferiority, double-blinded design. One hundred and twenty patients diagnosed with LNB according to European Federation of Neurological Societies (EFNS)guidelines will be randomised to 6 or 2 weeks treatment with oral doxycycline. The patients will be followed for 12 months. The primary endpoint is improvement on a composite clinical score (CCS) from baseline to 6 months after inclusion. Secondary endpoints are improvements in the CCS 12 months after inclusion, fatigue scored on Fatigue Severity Scale, subjective symptoms on the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 scale, health-related quality of life scored on RAND 36-item short form health survey and safety as measured by side effects of the two treatment arms. Blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) are collected from inclusion and throughout the follow-up and a biobank will be established. The study started including patients in November 2015 and will continue throughout December 2019.Ethics and disseminationThe study is approved by the Norwegian regional committees for medical and health research ethics and the Norwegian Medicines Agency. Data from the study will be published in peer-reviewed medical journals.Trial registration number2015-001481-25.

Dataset Information

Antibiotic treatment for pyelonephritis in children: multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Intervention

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

Antibiotic treatment for pyelonephritis in children: multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets