Dataset Information

Mesalazine for People with Diverticular Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Diverticular disease treatment is limited to fibres, antibiotics, and surgery. There is conflicting evidence on mesalazine benefits and harms.

Aim

We systematically reviewed current evidence on benefits and harms of mesalazine versus all other treatments in people with diverticular disease.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published to July 2018. We estimated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (disease remission/recurrence, acute diverticulitis in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease, need for surgery/hospitalization, all-cause/disease-related mortality, adverse events), mean differences (MD) or standardized MD (SMD) for continuous outcomes (quality of life, symptoms score, time to recurrence/remission), and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. We quantified heterogeneity by Chi² and I² tests. We performed subgroup analyses by disease subtype, comparator, follow-up duration, mesalazine dose, and mode of administration.

Results

We identified 13 randomized trials (n=3028 participants). There was a higher likelihood of disease remission with mesalazine than controls in acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (1 trial, 81 participants, RR=2.67, 95%CI=1.05-6.79), but not in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (1 trial, 123 participants, RR=1.04, 95%CI=0.81-1.34). There was a lower likelihood of disease recurrence with mesalazine than controls in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (2 trials, 216 participants, RR=0.52, 95%CI=0.28-0.97), but not in acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (7 trials, 2196 participants, RR=0.90, 95%CI=0.61-1.33). There was no difference in the likelihood of developing acute diverticulitis in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease between the two groups (3 trials, 484 participants, RR=0.26, 95%CI=0.06-1.20). There was a higher global symptoms score reduction with mesalazine than controls in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (2 trials, 326 participants, SMD=-1.01, 95%CI=-1.51,-0.52) and acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (2 trials, 153 participants, SMD=-0.56, 95%CI=-0.88,-0.24).

Conclusions

Mesalazine may reduce recurrences in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease. There is uncertainty on the effect of mesalazine in achieving diverticular disease remission. Mesalazine may not prevent acute diverticulitis in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease.

SUBMITTER: Iannone A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6167594 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mesalazine for People with Diverticular Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Iannone Andrea A Ruospo Marinella M Wong Germaine G Barone Michele M Principi Mariabeatrice M Di Leo Alfredo A Strippoli Giovanni F M GFM

Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology 20180916

<h4>Background</h4>Diverticular disease treatment is limited to fibres, antibiotics, and surgery. There is conflicting evidence on mesalazine benefits and harms.<h4>Aim</h4>We systematically reviewed current evidence on benefits and harms of mesalazine versus all other treatments in people with diverticular disease.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published to July 2018. We estimated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (disease remission/ ...[more]

PMID: 30320044

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction:Pharmacoacupuncture is a new acupuncture treatment that stimulates acupuncture points by injecting herbal medicine into them. Recently, pharmacoacupuncture has been widely used in the treatment of idiopathic Parkinson's disease in traditional East Asian medicine. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmacoacupuncture in the treatment of idiopathic Parkinson's disease. Methods:The following electronic databases were searched for studies published in or before December 2016: Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, OASIS, and CNKI, without language restriction. The main outcome assessed was the total Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score. The details of the pharmacoacupuncture intervention, such as the herbal medicine and acupuncture points used, were also investigated. Results:From 138 studies, 3 randomized controlled trials were included; the number of patients analyzed was 134. Most of the studies showed considerable methodological flaws. There was heterogeneity of the intervention type and treatment duration in the included studies. Therefore, we could not conduct a meta-analysis. In one study, adjunctive bee venom pharmacoacupuncture therapy significantly improved total UPDRS scores compared with conventional therapy alone. Another study, which used adjunctive Kakkonein pharmacoacupuncture, did not reveal significant improvement compared with conventional therapy alone. A third study reported that Mailuoning pharmacoacupuncture was able to significantly improve the modified Webster Symptom Score when compared with no treatment. Adverse events related to the pharmacoacupuncture were reported in only one case, itching caused by the bee venom. Conclusions:Our findings regarding the efficacy of pharmacoacupuncture as a therapy for idiopathic Parkinson's disease are currently inconclusive. Further large and rigorous clinical trials are needed.

Project description:BackgroundThis systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of process interventions (education for clinicians, parent presence, education of parents [before and on day of vaccination], and education of patients on day of vaccination) on reducing vaccination pain, fear, and distress and increasing the use of interventions during vaccination.Design/methodsDatabases were searched using a broad search strategy to identify relevant randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Critical outcomes were pain, fear, distress (when applicable), and use of pain management interventions. Data were extracted according to procedure phase (preprocedure, acute, recovery, combinations of these) and pooled using established methods. Analyses were conducted using standardized mean differences (SMD) and risk ratios (RR).ResultsThirteen studies were included. Results were generally mixed. On the basis of low to very low-quality evidence, the following specific critical outcomes showed significant effects suggesting: (1) clinicians should be educated about vaccine injection pain management (use of interventions: SMD 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.47, 0.85); (2) parents should be present (distress preprocedure: SMD -0.85; 95% CI: -1.35, -0.35); (3) parents should be educated before the vaccination day (use of intervention preprocedure: SMD 0.83; 95% CI: 0.25, 1.41 and RR, 2.08; 95% CI: 1.51, 2.86; distress acute: SMD, -0.35; 95% CI: -0.57, -0.13); (4) parents should be educated on the vaccination day (use of interventions: SMD 1.02; 95% CI: 0.22, 1.83 and RR, 2.42; 95% CI: 1.47, 3.99; distress preprocedure+acute+recovery: SMD -0.48; 95% CI: -0.82, -0.15); and (5) individuals 3 years of age and above should be educated on the day of vaccination (fear preprocedure: SMD -0.67; 95% CI: -1.28, -0.07).ConclusionsEducating individuals involved in the vaccination procedure (clinicians, parents of children being vaccinated; individuals above 3 y of age) is beneficial to increase use of pain management strategies, reduce distress surrounding with vaccination, and to reduce fear. When possible, parent presence is also recommended for children undergoing vaccination.

Project description:BackgroundTelemedicine modalities, such as videoconferencing, are used by health care providers to remotely deliver health care to patients. Telemedicine use in pediatrics has increased in recent years. This has resulted in improved health care access, optimized disease management, progress in the monitoring of health conditions, and fewer exposures to patients with illnesses during pandemics (eg, the COVID-19 pandemic).ObjectiveWe aimed to systematically evaluate the most recent evidence on the feasibility and accessibility of telemedicine services, patients' and care providers' satisfaction with these services, and treatment outcomes related to telemedicine service use among pediatric populations with different health conditions.MethodsStudies were obtained from the PubMed database on May 10, 2020. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. In this review, we included randomized controlled trials from the last 10 years that used a telemedicine approach as a study intervention or assessed telemedicine as a subspecialty of pediatric care. Titles and abstracts were independently screened based on the eligibility criteria. Afterward, full texts were retrieved and independently screened based on the eligibility criteria. A standardized form was used to extract the following data: publication title, first author's name, publication year, participants' characteristics, study design, the technology-based approach that was used, intervention characteristics, study goals, and study findings.ResultsIn total, 11 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. All studies were categorized as randomized controlled trials (8/11, 73%) or cluster randomized trials (3/11, 27%). The number of participants in each study ranged from 22 to 400. The health conditions that were assessed included obesity (3/11, 27%), asthma (2/11, 18%), mental health conditions (1/11, 9%), otitis media (1/11, 9%), skin conditions (1/11, 9%), type 1 diabetes (1/11, 9%), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (1/11, 9%), and cystic fibrosis-related pancreatic insufficiency (1/11). The telemedicine approaches that were used included patient and doctor videoconferencing visits (5/11, 45%), smartphone-based interventions (3/11, 27%), telephone counseling (2/11, 18%), and telemedicine-based screening visits (1/11, 9%). The telemedicine interventions in all included studies resulted in outcomes that were comparable to or better than the outcomes of control groups. These outcomes were related to symptom management, quality of life, satisfaction, medication adherence, visit completion rates, and disease progression.ConclusionsAlthough more research is needed, the evidence from this review suggests that telemedicine services for the general public and pediatric care are comparable to or better than in-person services. Patients, health care professionals, and caregivers may benefit from using both telemedicine services and traditional, in-person health care services. To maximize the potential of telemedicine, future research should focus on improving patients' access to care, increasing the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine services, and eliminating barriers to telemedicine use.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Colchicine has unique anti-inflammatory properties that may be beneficial in various cardiovascular conditions. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examines this issue. METHODS:We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database from inception to June 2014 for RCTs using colchicine in adult patients with cardiac diseases. Results were pooled using random effects. RESULTS:15 RCTs (n?=?3431 patients, median treatment 3 and follow-up 15 months) were included. All but 2 used colchicine 1 mg/day. In 5 trials, n?=?1301) at risk for cardiovascular disease (coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndrome or stroke, post-angioplasty [2 RCTs], or congestive heart failure), colchicine reduced composite cardiovascular outcomes by ~60 % (risk ratio [RR] 0.44, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.28-0.69, p?=?0.0004; I(2)?=?0 %) and showed a trend towards lower all-cause mortality (RR 0.50, 95 % CI 0.23-1.08, p?=?0.08; I(2)?=?0 %). In pericarditis or post-cardiotomy, colchicine decreased recurrent pericarditis or post-pericardiotomy syndrome (RR 0.50, 95 % CI 0.41-0.60, p?<?0.0001; I(2)?=?0 %; 8 RCTs, n?=?1635), and post-pericardiotomy or ablation induced atrial fibrillation (RR 0.65, 95 % CI 0.51-0.82, p?=?0.0003; I(2)?=?31 %; 4 RCTs, n?=?1118). The most common adverse event was diarrhea. Treatment discontinuation overall and due to adverse events (RR 4.34, 95 % CI 1.70-11.07, p?=?0.002; I(2)?=?29 %; 7 RCTs, 83/790 [10.5 %] vs. 11/697 [1.6 %]) was higher in colchicine-assigned patients. CONCLUSIONS:Current RCT data suggests that colchicine may reduce the composite rate of cardiovascular adverse outcomes in a range of patients with established cardiovascular disease. Furthermore, colchicine reduces rates of recurrent pericarditis, post-pericardiotomy syndrome, and peri-procedural atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery. Further RCTs evaluating the potential of colchicine for secondary prevention of cardiovascular events would be of interest.

Project description:Patients with kidney disease (KD) are at increased risk for cerebrovascular disease (CVD) and CVD patients with KD have worse outcomes. We aimed to determine the representation of KD patients in major randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CVD interventions. We searched MEDLINE for reports of major CVD trials published through February 9, 2017. We excluded trials that did not report mortality outcomes, enrolled fewer than 100 participants, or were subgroup, follow-up, or post-hoc analyses. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. We included 135 RCTs randomizing 194,977 participants. KD patients were excluded in 48 (35.6%) trials, but were less likely to be excluded from trials of class I/II recommended interventions (n = 7; 15.9%; p = 0.001) and more likely to be excluded in trials with registered protocols (45.5% vs. 22.4%; p = 0.007). Exclusion was lower in trials supported by academic or governmental grants compared to industry or combined funding (21.2% vs. 42.0% and 47.8%; p = 0.033 and 0.028, respectively). Among trials excluding KD patients, 24 (50.0%) used serum creatinine, 7 (14.6%) used estimated glomerular filtration rate or creatinine clearance, 7 (14.6%) used renal replacement therapy, and 19 (39.6%) used non-specific kidney-related criteria. Only 4 (3.0%) trials reported baseline renal function. No trials prespecified or reported subgroup analyses by baseline renal function. Although 19 (14.1%) trials reported the incidence of acute kidney injury, no trial examined adverse event rates according to renal function. In summary, more than one third of major CVD trials excluded patients with KD, primarily based on serum creatinine or non-specific criteria, and outcomes were not stratified by renal parameters. Therefore, purposeful efforts to increase inclusion of KD patients in CVD trials and evaluate the impact of renal function on efficacy and safety are needed to improve the quality of evidence for interventions in this vulnerable population.

Project description:In 2012, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning regarding potential adverse effects of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) on cognition, based on the Adverse Events Reporting System and a review of the medical literature. We aimed to synthesize randomized clinical trial (RCTs) evidence on the association between statin therapy and cognitive outcomes.We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL through December 2012, and reviewed published systematic reviews of statin treatment. We sought RCTs that compared statin treatment versus placebo or standard care, and reported at least one cognitive outcome (frequency of adverse cognitive events or measurements using standard neuropsychological cognitive test scores). Studies reporting sufficient information to calculate effect sizes were included in meta-analyses. Standardized and unstandardized mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes for global cognition and for pre-specified cognitive domains. The main outcome was change in cognition measured by neuropsychological tests; an outcome of secondary interest was the frequency of adverse cognitive events observed during follow-up.We identified 25 RCTs (all placebo-controlled) reporting cognitive outcomes in 46,836 subjects, of which 23 RCTs reported cognitive test results in 29,012 participants. Adverse cognitive outcomes attributable to statins were rarely reported in trials involving cognitively normal or impaired subjects. Furthermore, meta-analysis of cognitive test data (14 studies; 27,643 participants) failed to show significant adverse effects of statins on all tests of cognition in either cognitively normal subjects (standardized mean difference 0.01, 95% confidence interval, CI, -0.01 to 0.03, p?=?0.42) or Alzheimer's disease subjects (standardized mean difference -0.05, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.10, p?=?0.38).Statin therapy was not associated with cognitive impairment in RCTs. These results raise questions regarding the continued merit of the FDA warning about potential adverse effects of statins on cognition.

Dataset Information

Mesalazine for People with Diverticular Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Mesalazine for People with Diverticular Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets