Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy and safety of analgesics for acute renal colic: A network meta-analysis protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Acute renal colic is one of the most common urological emergencies. While previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pairwise meta-analyses only looked at the efficacy of 1 or 2 analgesics. It is not fully understood that the comprehensive ranking of the effectiveness and safeness of analgesics from these published articles. Therefore, this network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare and rank the different analgesics for treatment of acute renal colic.

Methods and analysis

We will perform a systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify RCTs of different analgesics for acute renal colic. RCTs assessing active analgesics intervention against active comparator or placebo controls for acute renal colic will be included. We will also screen the reference lists of included studies, previous reviews and meta-analyses to identify other relevant trials. The primary outcomes will be pain variance at 30 minutes, need rescue medicine, complete pain relief or at least 50% pain relief at 30 minutes, and pain relapse within 24?hours. We will also assess secondary outcomes for safeness (side effects: dizziness, vomit, allergic, hypotension, cardiac toxicity, and drug dependence). The risk of bias of included RCTs will be assessed by using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool, and the quality of evidence will be assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) instrument. We will perform pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian NMA to compare the effectiveness and safeness of different analgesic interventions.

Results

This NMA will compare and rank the different analgesics for treatment of acute renal colic.

Conclusion

This is the first systematic review to use the NMA to comprehensively compare and rank analgesics for relieving pain of acute renal colic in adults based on most important factors deciding the choice of initial analgesia, and the results can provide implications for clinical practice and further research.

SUBMITTER: Fu S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6417635 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative efficacy and safety of analgesics for acute renal colic: A network meta-analysis protocol.

Fu Shimin S Zhang Kebiao K Gu Manping M Liu Zhiping Z Sun Wenzhuo W Xiao Mingzhao M

Medicine 20190301 10

<h4>Introduction</h4>Acute renal colic is one of the most common urological emergencies. While previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pairwise meta-analyses only looked at the efficacy of 1 or 2 analgesics. It is not fully understood that the comprehensive ranking of the effectiveness and safeness of analgesics from these published articles. Therefore, this network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare and rank the different analgesics for treatment of acute renal colic.<h4>Methods and a ...[more]

PMID: 30855462

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAcute ischemic stroke (AIS) is characterized by high morbidity, disability, mortality, recurrence, and economic burden. Clinical trials have demonstrated that the clinical efficacy of combining oral Chinese patent medicines (CPMs) with chemical drugs (CDs) is better than that of CDs alone. In this study, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) of RCTs to assess the efficacy of different CPMs in combination with CDs in the treatment of AIS.MethodsSearch 6 databases from the beginning to January 10, 2023. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. The NMA was then performed using the STATA 13.0 program. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probability values were applied to rank the studied treatments, and cluster analysis was used to compare the effects of CPMs between 2 different outcomes.ResultsA total of 94 eligible RCTs, involving 9581 participants, were included in this analysis. Nine CPMs, including Nao-mai-li granule (NML), Nao-mai-tai granule (NMT), Qi-long granule (QL), Long-sheng-zhi capsule (LSZ), Nao-xin-tong capsule (NXT), Nao-xue-shu oral liquid (NXS), Tong-xin-luo capsule (TXL), Xiao-shuan-chang-rong capsule (XSCR), and Xue-shuan-xin-mai-ning capsule (XSXMN) were included. Regarding the clinical effective rate, all types of CPMs + CDs treatments were significantly better than CDs treatments alone, with significant differences among the 9 selected CPMs. Compared with CDs, results showed that NXS + CDs performed best in improving clinical effective rate [OR = 4.73; 95% CI: 1.26-17.78; (SUCRA: 76.1%)]. TXL + CDs showed the most effective effect in alleviating National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) [MD = -3.84; 95% CI: -5.23, -2.45; (SUCRA: 81.6%)]; NXT + CDs were most effective in improving Barthel index [MD = 13.05; 95% CI: 3.98-22.12; (SUCRA: 63.5%)]. Combined with other outcome indicators and the results of cluster analysis, NXS + CDs may assist in the potential optimal treatment regimen for AIS.ConclusionIn conclusion, CPMs were found to be beneficial as adjuvant therapy in patients with AIS. Taking into account the clinical effective rate and other outcomes, NXS + CDs may be the most effective option to improve the condition of AIS patients.

Project description:IntroductionOsteoporosis (OP) is a prevalent skeletal disease with high mortality and morbidity, followed by acute and chronic back pain, severe spinal deformity and dysfunction. First-line drugs for OP work through antiresorptive or anabolic mechanisms. Although with good efficacy, these drugs still have certain limitations in clinical application due to delivery routes, medication cycles and cost issues. Nowadays, statins (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors) appear to be potentially promising drugs for OP. Despite the controversy, previous studies have shown the efficacy of statins in treating OP. Other studies have further indicated that the therapeutic effect of OP in statin-treated patients is dose dependent. However, scientists have not yet reached a consensus on the use of statins for the treatment or which statin to choose first. This study aims to review the literature, ascertaining the relative efficacy and safety of statins for patients with OP using a Bayesian network meta-analysis.Methods and analysisWe will systematically search the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, China Science and Technology Journal Database, Chinese BioMedical Literature Database and preprint servers to include randomised controlled trials that compare different statins for treating OP. Primary outcomes are the incidence of overall fractures and bone mineral density changes. Secondary outcomes contain adverse effects and bone turnover markers. All items of this review will comply with the Cochrane Handbook, and the quality of evidence will be evaluated by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. A traditional pairwise meta-analysis and the Bayesian network meta-analysis will be performed to compare the efficacy of different statins.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required since this is a protocol study for meta-analyses. Results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42021242619.Search datesFrom database inception to February 2022.

Project description:BackgroundHead lice infestation is a major public health problem around the globe. Its treatment is challenging due to product failures resulting from rapidly emerging resistance to existing treatments, incorrect treatment applications and misdiagnosis. Various head lice treatments with different mechanism of action have been developed and explored over the years, with limited report on systematic assessments of their efficacy and safety. This work aims to present a robust evidence summarising the interventions used in head lice.MethodThis is a systematic review and network meta-analysis which will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement for network meta-analyses. Selected databases, including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched for randomised controlled trials exploring head lice treatments. Searches will be limited to trials published in English from database inception till 2021. Grey literature will be identified through Open Grey, AHRQ, Grey Literature Report, Grey Matters, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number registry. Additional studies will be sought from reference lists of included studies. Study screening, selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will be undertaken by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved via a third reviewer. The primary outcome measure is the relative risk of cure at 7 and 14 days postinitial treatment. Secondary outcome measures may include adverse drug events, ovicidal activity, treatment compliance and acceptability, and reinfestation. Information from direct and indirect evidence will be used to generate the effect sizes (relative risk) to compare the efficacy and safety of individual head lice treatments against a common comparator (placebo and/or permethrin). Risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations guideline for network meta-analysis. All quantitative analyses will be conducted using STATA V.16.DiscussionThe evidence generated from this systematic review and meta-analysis is intended for use in evidence-driven treatment of head lice infestations and will be instrumental in informing health professionals, public health practitioners and policy-makers.Prospero registration numberCRD42017073375.

Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy and safety of analgesics for acute renal colic: A network meta-analysis protocol.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Comparative efficacy and safety of analgesics for acute renal colic: A network meta-analysis protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets