Project description:ObjectiveCorticosteroids are a common option used in sepsis treatment. However, the efficacy and potential risk of corticosteroids in septic patients have not been well assessed. This review was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched from inception to March 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of corticosteroids on patients with sepsis were included. The quality of outcomes in the included articles was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. The data were pooled by using risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD). The random-effects model was used to evaluate the pooled MD or RR and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsFifty RCTs that included 12,304 patients with sepsis were identified. Corticosteroids were not associated with the mortality in 28-day (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.87-1.02; evidence rank, moderate) and long-term mortality (>60 days) (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.88-1.05) in patients with sepsis (evidence rank, low). However, corticosteroids may exert a significant effect on the mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU) (RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.83-0.97), in-hospital (RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.82-0.99; evidence rank, moderate) in patients with sepsis or septic shock (evidence rank, low). Furthermore, corticosteroids probably achieved a tiny reduction in the length of hospital stay and ICU. Corticosteroids were associated with a higher risk of hypernatremia and hyperglycemia; furthermore, they appear to have no significant effect on superinfection and gastroduodenal bleeding.ConclusionsCorticosteroids had no significant effect on the 28-day and long-term mortality; however, they decreased the ICU and hospital mortality. The findings suggest that the clinical corticosteroids may be an effective therapy for patients with sepsis during the short time.Systematic review registrationhttps://inplasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/INPLASY-Protocol-1074-4.pdf.

Project description:BackgroundOptic neuritis is an inflammatory disease of the optic nerve. It occurs more commonly in women than in men. Usually presenting with an abrupt loss of vision, recovery of vision is almost never complete. Closely linked in pathogenesis to multiple sclerosis, it may be the initial manifestation for this condition. In certain patients, no underlying cause can be found.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of corticosteroids on visual recovery of patients with acute optic neuritis.Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 1), MEDLINE (January 1950 to February 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to February 2012), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to February 2012), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). There were no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. The electronic databases were last searched on 21 February 2012. We also searched reference lists of identified trial reports to find additional trials.Selection criteriaWe included randomized trials that evaluated corticosteroids, in any form, dose or route of administration, in people with acute optic neuritis.Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently extracted the data on methodological quality and outcomes for analysis.Main resultsWe included six randomized trials which included a total of 750 participants. Two trials evaluated low dose oral corticosteroids while one trial evaluated low dose intravenous corticosteroids across two treatment arms and two trials evaluated a higher dose of intravenous corticosteroids. One three-arm trial evaluated low-dose oral corticosteroids and high-dose intravenous corticosteroids against placebo. Trials evaluating oral corticosteroids compared varying doses of corticosteroids with placebo. Hence, we did not conduct a meta-analysis of such trials. In a meta-analysis of trials evaluating corticosteroids with total dose greater than 3000 mg administered intravenously, the relative risk of normal visual acuity with intravenous corticosteroids compared with placebo was 1.06 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.27) at six months and 1.06 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.22) at one year. The risk ratio of normal contrast sensitivity for the same comparison was 1.10 (95% CI 0.92 to 1.32) at six months follow up. We did not conduct a meta-analysis for this outcome at one year follow up since there was substantial statistical heterogeneity. The risk ratio of normal visual field for this comparison was 1.08 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.22) at six months and 1.02 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.20) at one year. Quality of life was assessed and reported in one trial.Authors' conclusionsThere is no conclusive evidence of benefit in terms of recovery to normal visual acuity, visual field or contrast sensitivity with either intravenous or oral corticosteroids at the doses evaluated in trials included in this review.

Project description:IntroductionSepsis is associated with a dysregulated host response to infection and impaired endogenous corticosteroid metabolism. As such, therapeutic use of exogenous corticosteroids is a promising adjunctive intervention. Despite a large number of trials examining this research question, uncertainty persists regarding the effect of corticosteroids on survival in sepsis. Several large randomised controlled trials have been published recently prompting a re-evaluation of the available literature.Methods and analysisA rigorous and reproducible search and screening process from a Cochrane review on the same topic was comprehensive to October 2014. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Cochrane trial registry and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible randomised controlled trials investigating the use of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis from September 2014. Outcomes have been chosen by a semi-independent guideline panel, created in the context of a parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendation on the topic. This panel includes clinicians, content experts, methodologists and patient representatives, who will help identify patient-important outcomes that are critical for deciding whether to use or not use corticosteroids in sepsis. Two reviewers will independently screen and identify eligible studies; a third reviewer will resolve any disagreements. We will use RevMan to pool effect estimates from included studies for each outcome using a random-effect model. We will present the results as relative risk with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes and as mean difference or standardised mean difference for continuous outcomes with 95% CI. We will assess the certainty of evidence at the outcome level using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. We will conduct a priori subgroup analyses, which have been chosen by the parallel BMJ Rapid Recommendation panel.Ethics and disseminationThe aim of this systematic review is to summarise the updated evidence on the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis.Trial registration numberCRD42017058537.

Project description:Importance:Intravenous (IV) administration of corticosteroids is the standard of care in the treatment of acute optic neuritis. However, it is uncertain whether a bioequivalent dose of corticosteroid administered orally, which may be more cost-efficient and convenient for patients, is as effective as IV administration in the treatment of acute optic neuritis. Objective:To determine whether recovery of vision following treatment of acute optic neuritis with a high-dose IV corticosteroid is superior to that with a bioequivalent dose of an oral corticosteroid. Design, Setting, and Participants:This single-blind (participants unblinded) randomized clinical trial with 6-month follow-up was conducted at a single tertiary care center in London, Ontario, Canada. Participants were enrolled from March 2012 to May 2015, with the last participant's final visit occurring November 2015. Patients 18 to 64 years of age presenting within 14 days of acute optic neuritis onset, without any recovery at time of randomization and without history of optic neuritis in the same eye, were screened. Inclusion criteria included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 20/40 or worse and corticosteroids deemed required by treating physician. In total, 89 participants were screened; 64 were eligible, but 9 declined to participate. Thus, 55 participants were enrolled and randomized. Primary analysis was unadjusted and according to the intention-to-treat principle. Interventions:Participants were randomized 1:1 to the IV methylprednisolone sodium succinate (1000-mg) or oral prednisone (1250-mg) group. Main Outcomes and Measures:Primary outcome was recovery of the latency of the P100 component of the visual evoked potential at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were the P100 latency at 1 month and BCVA as assessed with Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letter scores on the alphabet chart and scores on low-contrast letters at 1 and 6 months. Results:Of 55 randomized participants, the final analyzed cohort comprised 23 participants in the IV and 22 in the oral treatment groups. The mean (SD) age of the cohort was 34.6 (9.5) years, and there were 28 women (62.2%). At 6 months' recovery, P100 latency in the IV group improved by 62.9 milliseconds (from a mean [SD] of 181.9 [53.6] to 119.0 [16.5] milliseconds), and the oral group improved by 66.7 milliseconds (from a mean [SD] of 200.5 [67.2] to 133.8 [31.5] milliseconds), with no significant difference between groups (P?=?.07). Similarly, no significant group difference was found in the mean P100 latency recovery at 1 month. For BCVA, recovery between the groups did not reach statistical significance at 1 month or 6 months. In addition, improvements in low-contrast (1.25% and 2.5%) BCVA were not significantly different between treatment groups at 1 or 6 months' recovery. Conclusions and Relevance:This study finds that bioequivalent doses of oral corticosteroids may be used as an alternative to IV corticosteroids to treat acute optic neuritis. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01524250.

Project description:Conventional systematic reviews have indicated that corticosteroids might result in a slight reduction in mortality in sepsis. However, the efficacy, safety, and optimal regimen of different corticosteroids partly remain unknown. In this study, we conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis for a head-to-head comparison of the therapeutic efficacy and safety of currently used corticosteroids in sepsis. Design:A Bayesian network meta-analysis for a head-to-head comparison of the therapeutic efficacy and safety of currently used corticosteroids in sepsis. Setting:A total of 35 eligible randomized controlled trials of corticosteroid use in sepsis. Patients:The present Bayesian network meta-analysis included 8,859 patients with sepsis. Interventions:Randomized controlled trials were screened from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to December 28, 2019. A head-to-head comparison of the therapeutic efficacy and safety between the different categories of corticosteroids from the trials was conducted by Bayesian network meta-analysis. An empirical Bayesian meta-regression and a post hoc Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed to explore the appropriate dose and therapeutic duration of steroids for sepsis. Measurements and Main Results:A total of 35 randomized controlled trials including 8,859 patients with sepsis were enrolled in the final analysis. Bayesian network meta-analysis revealed that methylprednisolone and dexamethasone might be more effective in reducing short-term mortality in sepsis than placebo: methylprednisolone versus placebo (relative risk, 0.65, 95% credible interval 0.40-0.93), dexamethasone versus placebo (relative risk, 0.42, 95% credible interval, 0.24-0.84). Hydrocortisone and hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone were superior to placebo in days to shock resolution (e-Table 5, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/CCX/A150): hydrocortisone versus placebo (mean difference, -1.70, 95% credible interval, -2.83 to -0.92), hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone versus placebo (mean difference, -2.54, 95% credible interval, -4.19 to -0.84). Hydrocortisone was superior to placebo in reducing the length of stay in the ICU (mean difference, -1.43, 95% credible interval, -3.36 to -0.15). Methylprednisolone was superior to placebo in improving ventilation-free days (mean difference, 7.71, 95% credible interval, 1.15-14.42). In addition, further analysis indicated that the optimal therapeutic dosage was 200-400?mg per day of hydrocortisones or equivalents (relative risk, 0.83, 95% credible interval, 0.64-0.98), and the appropriate therapeutic duration was 4-7 days (relative risk, 0.78; 95% credible interval, 0.57-0.96). Conclusions:This study provided moderate evidence that the dosage of 200-400?mg per day of hydrocortisone or equivalent for 4-7 days was most likely to benefit septic patients.

Dataset Information

Corticosteroids for treating sepsis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets