Dataset Information

The effects of macrolides in children with reactive airway disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Childhood reactive airway diseases (RADs) are concerning problems in children's airways and may be preceded by bronchiolitis and may progress to childhood asthma. The severity of the disease is indicated by deterioration in pulmonary functions, increased usage of rescue medications, and recurrent wheezing episodes. Macrolides have both antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory functions and have been used as adjunctive therapy in childhood RADs.

Patients and methods

We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of macrolides in children with RAD. Literature searches were systematically conducted using an electronic database from inception to August 2018. The Cochrane review risk of bias assessment tool was used to assess the quality of each randomized controlled trial.

Results

Sixteen randomized controlled trials comprising 1,415 participants were investigated in this meta-analysis. Children treated with macrolide therapy showed significantly better pulmonary functions in both forced expiratory volume in one second (% predicted) (difference in means=-9.77, 95% CI=-14.18 to -5.35, P<0.001; I ²=0%) and forced expiratory flow 25-75 (% predicted) (difference in means=-14.14, 95% CI=-26.11 to -2.18, P=0.02; I ²=29.56%). In addition, the short-acting ?-agonist usage days and recurrent wheezing risk were significantly lowered in children with macrolide treatment (standardized difference in means=-0.34, 95% CI=-0.59 to -0.09, P=0.007, I ²=27.05% and standardized difference in means=-0.53, 95% CI=-0.81 to -0.26, P<0.001, I ²=0%, respectively). Furthermore, the growth of Moraxella catarrhalis from nasal swabs was less in children treated with macrolides (odds ratio=0.19, 95% CI=0.11-0.35, P<0.001). Children who took macrolides had a lower risk of adverse events (risk ratio=0.83, 95% CI=0.70-0.98, P=0.024, I ²=0%).

Conclusion

This current meta-analysis suggested that adjunctive therapy with macrolides is safe and effective for achieving better outcomes in childhood RAD.

SUBMITTER: Lei WT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6231435 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The effects of macrolides in children with reactive airway disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Lei Wei-Te WT Lin Hsin Hui HH Tsai Mu-Chieh MC Hung Hua-His HH Cheng Yu-Jyun YJ Liu Shu-Jung SJ Lin Chien Yu CY Yeh Tzu-Lin TL

Drug design, development and therapy 20181108

<h4>Purpose</h4>Childhood reactive airway diseases (RADs) are concerning problems in children's airways and may be preceded by bronchiolitis and may progress to childhood asthma. The severity of the disease is indicated by deterioration in pulmonary functions, increased usage of rescue medications, and recurrent wheezing episodes. Macrolides have both antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory functions and have been used as adjunctive therapy in childhood RADs.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>We conducted ...[more]

PMID: 30510399

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) represent one of the main health problems in children. Probiotics are viable bacteria that colonize the intestine and affect the host intestinal microbial balance. Accumulating evidence suggests that probiotic consumption may decrease the incidence of or modify RTIs. The authors systematically reviewed data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate the effect of probiotic consumption on RTIs in children.MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for RCTs regarding the effect of probiotics on RTIs in children. The outcomes included number of children experienced with at least 1 RTI episode, duration of illness episodes, days of illness per subject, and school/day care absenteeism due to infection. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled relative risks, or mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).A total of 23 trials involving 6269 children were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. None of the trials showed a high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence of outcomes was moderate. The age range of subjects was from newborn to 18 years. The results of meta-analysis showed that probiotic consumption significantly decreased the number of subjects having at least 1 RTI episode (17 RCTs, 4513 children, relative risk 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.96, P?=?0.004). Children supplemented with probiotics had fewer numbers of days of RTIs per person compared with children who had taken a placebo (6 RCTs, 2067 children, MD -0.16, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.02, P?=?0.03), and had fewer numbers of days absent from day care/school (8 RCTs, 1499 children, MD -0.94, 95% CI -1.72 to -0.15, P?=?0.02). However, there was no statistically significant difference of illness episode duration between probiotic intervention group and placebo group (9 RCTs, 2817 children, MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.49 to 0.30, P?=?0.19).Based on the available data and taking into account the safety profile of RCTs, probiotic consumption appears to be a feasible way to decrease the incidence of RTIs in children.

Project description:BACKGROUND:As a new generation antihistamine, fexofenadine has been widely used in allergic diseases. However, there is still a lack of collective evidence regarding the antihistamine effects and safety profiles of fexofenadine relative to other antihistamine drugs and placebo. Therefore, we aimed to systematically evaluate the antihistamine effects and safety of fexofenadine. METHODS:An electronic literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed using Embase, Cochrane and PubMed from establishment to January 1st, 2018. RCTs comparing the antihistamine effects or safety (adverse events, sedative effects, and cognitive/psychomotor function) of fexofenadine with either other antihistamines or placebo for healthy subjects and patients with allergy were selected. RESULTS:Fifty-one studies of 14,551 participants met the inclusion criteria. When compared with the first-generation antihistamines, fexofenadine produced significantly lower adverse events frequency (OR = 0.446; 95% CI: 0.214 to 0.929, P = 0.031), significantly lower sedative effects frequency (OR = 0.265; 95% CI: 0.072 to 0.976, P = 0.046) and significantly less change of all cognitive/psychomotor function. When compared with the second-generation antihistamines, fexofenadine produced significantly marginal sedative effects (OR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.93; P = 0.02) and significantly less change of most of the cognitive/psychomotor function. When compared with placebo, fexofenadine produced more significant antihistamine effects. CONCLUSIONS:Fexofenadine has a positive antihistamine effect, which is probably no worse than the second-generation antihistamines. Fexofenadine probably has a favorable safety profile, which is more likely better than that of the first-generation antihistamines. There is lack of data to support that fexofenadine has a better overall safety profile compared to the second-generation antihistamines, however, some presently available evidence on sedative effects and certain aspects of cognitive/psychomotor function favors fexofenadine. Therefore, fexofenadine may be worthy of recommendation for safety related workers.

Dataset Information

The effects of macrolides in children with reactive airway disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Purpose

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The effects of macrolides in children with reactive airway disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets