Dataset Information

COHELLP: collaborative randomized controlled trial on corticosteroids in HELLP syndrome.

ABSTRACT: Hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelets (HELLP) syndrome is one of the most severe forms of preeclampsia and aggravates both maternal and perinatal prognosis. The systematic review available in Cochrane Library compared corticosteroid (dexamethasone, betamethasone, or prednisolone) given during pregnancy, just after delivery or in the postnatal period, or both before and after birth, with placebo or no treatment. Those receiving steroids showed significantly greater improvement in platelet counts which was greater for those receiving dexamethasone than those receiving betamethasone. There was no clear evidence of any effect of corticosteroids on substantive clinical outcomes. These benefits appear to be greater in Class I HELLP syndrome.To determine the effectiveness of dexamethasone for accelerating postpartum recovery in patients with Class I HELLP syndrome in a multicenter randomized controlled trial.The study is a triple blind randomized controlled trial including women with class I HELLP syndrome, and exclusion criteria were dexamethasone use in the last 15 days before diagnosis of HELLP syndrome; chronic use of corticosteroids; chronic diseases that alter laboratory parameters of HELLP Syndrome, such as chronic liver disease or purpura, patients unable to consent (coma or critical clinical condition) and without accompanying persons that may consent to study participation.Eligible patients will be invited to participate and those who agree will be included in the study and receive placebo or dexamethasone according to a random list of numbers and subjects will receive the study medication every 12 hours for two days.During the study the women will be subject to strict control of blood pressure and urine output. Laboratory tests will be performed at regular intervals during treatment and 24 hours and 48 hours after its suspension. If worsening of clinical or laboratory variables is observed, a rescue scheme of dexamethasone will be administrated. This proposal has already obtained approval of the local Institutional Review Board of the coordinating center (IMIP, Recife, Brazil), all other participating centers and of the National Council for Ethics in Research (CONEP) of the Brazilian Ministry of Health.Clinical Trials Register under the number NCT00711841.

SUBMITTER: Katz L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3664622 | biostudies-literature | 2013 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

COHELLP: collaborative randomized controlled trial on corticosteroids in HELLP syndrome.

Katz Leila L Amorim Melania M Souza João P JP Haddad Samira M SM Cecatti José G JG

Reproductive health 20130522

<h4>Background</h4>Hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelets (HELLP) syndrome is one of the most severe forms of preeclampsia and aggravates both maternal and perinatal prognosis. The systematic review available in Cochrane Library compared corticosteroid (dexamethasone, betamethasone, or prednisolone) given during pregnancy, just after delivery or in the postnatal period, or both before and after birth, with placebo or no treatment. Those receiving steroids showed significantly great ...[more]

PMID: 23697398

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPre-eclampsia is a relatively common complication of pregnancy. HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, low platelets) syndrome is a severe manifestation of pre-eclampsia with significant morbidity and mortality for pregnant women and their children. Corticosteroids are commonly used in the treatment of HELLP syndrome in the belief that they improve outcomes.ObjectivesTo determine the effects of corticosteroids on women with HELLP syndrome and their children.Search strategyWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 June 2010).Selection criteriaRandomized controlled trials comparing any corticosteroid with placebo, no treatment, or other drug; or comparing one corticosteroid with another corticosteroid or dosage in women with HELLP syndrome.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors assessed trial quality and extracted data independently.Main resultsEleven trials (550 women) compared corticosteroids with placebo or no treatment. There was no difference in the risk of maternal death (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 3.21), maternal death or severe maternal morbidity (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.12), or perinatal/infant death (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.97). The only clear effect of treatment on individual outcomes was improved platelet count (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.67, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.10). The effect on platelet count was strongest for women who commenced treatment antenatally (SMD 0.80, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.35).Two trials (76 women) compared dexamethasone with betamethasone. There was no clear evidence of a difference between groups in respect to perinatal/infant death (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.15 to 6.17) or severe perinatal/infant morbidity or death (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.48). Maternal death and severe maternal morbidity were not reported. In respect to platelet count, dexamethasone was superior to betamethasone (MD 6.02, 95% CI 1.71 to 10.33), both when treatment was commenced antenatally (MD 8.10, 95% CI 6.23 to 9.97) and postnatally (MD 3.70, 95% CI 0.96 to 6.44).Authors' conclusionsThere was no clear evidence of any effect of corticosteroids on substantive clinical outcomes. Those receiving steroids showed significantly greater improvement in platelet counts which was greater for those receiving dexamethasone than those receiving betamethasone. There is to date insufficient evidence of benefits in terms of substantive clinical outcomes to support the routine use of steroids for the management of HELLP. The use of corticosteroids may be justified in clinical situations in which increased rate of recovery in platelet count is considered clinically worthwhile.

Project description:Aims/hypothesis: Dietary restriction (DR) reduces adiposity and improves metabolism in patients with one or more symptoms of the metabolic syndrome. Nonetheless, it remains elusive whether the benefits of DR in humans are mediated by calorie or nutrient restriction. This study was conducted to identify whether isocaloric dietary protein restriction is sufficient to confer the beneficial effects of dietary restriction in patients with metabolic syndrome. Methods: We performed a prospective, randomized controlled dietary intervention under constant nutritional and medical supervision. A total of 21 individuals diagnosed with the metabolic syndrome was randomly assigned for caloric restriction (CR; n = 11, mean age 49 ± 8.5 years, female 63%; diet of 5,941 ± 686 KJ per day) or isocaloric dietary protein restriction (PR; n = 10, mean age 51.6 ± 8.9 years, female 50%; diet of 8,409 ± 2,360 KJ per day) and followed for 27 days. Results: Like CR, PR promoted weight loss (-6.6%, P= 0.0041) due to reduction in adiposity (-9.9%, P= 0.0007), associated with reductions in blood glucose (-52.7%, P= 0.0002), lipid levels (cholesterol, -35.4%, P= 0.0010; triglycerides, -39.5% P= 0.0022) and blood pressure (systolic, -37.7 P< 0.0001; diastolic, -73.2% P< 0.0001). PR resulted in enrichment of metabolic pathways related to the immune system such as B cell proliferation, lymphocyte proliferation and leukocyte proliferation in subcutaneous adipose tissue. Hence, a reduction in calorie intake or changes in the gut microbiome are not necessary to confer the metabolic benefits of DR. Instead, a reduction in protein intake with a mild increase in carbohydrate intake to maintain the isocaloric balance of the diet is sufficient to improve metabolic control. Conclusions/interpretation: Protein restriction is sufficient to confer almost the same clinical outcomes as calorie restriction without the need for a reduction in calorie intake. The isocaloric characteristic of the PR intervention makes this approach a more attractive and less drastic dietary strategy in clinical settings and has greater potential to be used as adjuvant therapy for people with the metabolic syndrome.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Intensive lifestyle intervention significantly reduces the progression to diabetes in high-risk individuals. OBJECTIVE: It is not known whether a program of moderate intervention might effectively reduce metabolic abnormalities in the general population. DESIGN: Two-arm randomized controlled 1-year trial. PATIENTS: Three hundred and thirty-five patients participated from a dysmetabolic population-based cohort of 375 adults aged 45-64 years in northwestern Italy. MEASUREMENTS: We compared the effectiveness of a general recommendation-based program of lifestyle intervention carried out by trained professionals versus standard unstructured information given by family physicians at reducing the prevalence of multiple metabolic and inflammatory abnormalities. RESULTS: At baseline, clinical/anthropometric/laboratory and lifestyle characteristics of the intervention (n = 169) and control (n = 166) groups were not significantly different. The former significantly reduced total/saturated fat intake and increased polyunsaturated fat/fiber intake and exercise level compared to the controls. Weight, waist circumference, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and most of the metabolic syndrome components decreased in the intervention group and increased in the controls after 12 months. Lifestyle intervention significantly reduced metabolic syndrome (odds ratio [OR] = 0.28; 95% CI 0.18-0.44), with a 31% (21-41) absolute risk reduction, corresponding to 3.2 (2-5) patients needing to be treated to prevent 1 case after 12 months. The intervention significantly reduced the prevalence of central obesity (OR = 0.33; 0.20-0.56), and hypertriglyceridemia (OR = 0.48; 0.31-0.75) and the incidence of diabetes (OR = 0.23; 0.06-0.85). CONCLUSION: A lifestyle intervention based on general recommendations was effective in reducing multiple metabolic/inflammatory abnormalities. The usual care by family physicians was ineffective at modifying progressive metabolic deterioration in high-risk individuals.

Project description:ContextPatients with depression and poorly controlled diabetes mellitus, coronary heart disease (CHD), or both have higher medical complication rates and higher health care costs, suggesting that more effective care management of psychiatric and medical disease control might also reduce medical service use and enhance quality of life.ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a multicondition collaborative treatment program (TEAMcare) compared with usual primary care (UC) in outpatients with depression and poorly controlled diabetes or CHD.DesignRandomized controlled trial of a systematic care management program aimed at improving depression scores and hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels.SettingFourteen primary care clinics of an integrated health care system.PatientsPopulation-based screening identified 214 adults with depressive disorder and poorly controlled diabetes or CHD.InterventionPhysician-supervised nurses collaborated with primary care physicians to provide treatment of multiple disease risk factors.Main outcome measuresBlinded assessments evaluated depressive symptoms, SBP, and HbA(1c) at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Fasting LDL-C concentration was assessed at baseline and at 12 and 24 months. Health plan accounting records were used to assess medical service costs. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were assessed using a previously developed regression model based on intervention vs UC differences in HbA(1c), LDL-C, and SBP levels over 24 months.ResultsOver 24 months, compared with UC controls, intervention patients had a mean of 114 (95% CI, 79 to 149) additional depression-free days and an estimated 0.335 (95% CI, -0.18 to 0.85) additional QALYs. Intervention patients also had lower mean outpatient health costs of $594 per patient (95% CI, -$3241 to $2053) relative to UC patients.ConclusionsFor adults with depression and poorly controlled diabetes, CHD, or both, a systematic intervention program aimed at improving depression scores and HbA(1c), SBP, and LDL-C levels seemed to be a high-value program that for no or modest additional cost markedly improved QALYs.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00468676

Dataset Information

COHELLP: collaborative randomized controlled trial on corticosteroids in HELLP syndrome.

Publications

COHELLP: collaborative randomized controlled trial on corticosteroids in HELLP syndrome.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets