Dataset Information

The safety and efficacy of steroid treatment for acute spinal cord injury: A Systematic Review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Introduction:The role for steroids in acute spinal cord injury (ASCI) remains unclear; while some studies have demonstrated the risks of steroids outweigh the benefits,a meta-analyses conducted on heterogeneous patient populations have shown significant motor improvement at short-term but not at long-term follow-up. Given the heterogeneity of the patient population in previous meta-analyses and the publication of a recent trial not included in these meta-analyses, we sought to re-assess and update the safety and short-term and long-term efficacy of steroid treatment following ASCI in a more homogeneous patient population. Materials and methods:A literature search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library through June 2019 for studies evaluating the utility of steroids within the first 8 h following ASCI. Neurological and safety outcomes were extracted for patients treated and not treated with steroids. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using the random-effects model. Results:Twelve studies, including five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven observational studies (OBSs), were meta-analyzed. Overall, methylprednisolone was not associated with significant short-term or long-term improvements in motor or neurological scores based on RCTs or OBSs. An increased risk of hyperglycemia was shown in both RCTs (RR: 13.7; 95% CI: 1.93, 97.4; 1 study) and OBSs (RR: 2.9; 95% CI: 1.55, 5.41; 1 study). Risk for pneumonia was increased with steroids; while this increase was not statistically significant in the RCTs (pooled RR: 1.16; 95% C.I: 0.59, 2.29; 3 studies), it reached statistical significance in the OBSs (pooled RR: 2.00; 95% C.I: 1.32, 3.02; 6 studies). There was no statistically significant increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, decubitus ulcers, surgical site infections, sepsis, atelectasis, venous thromboembolism, urinary tract infections, or mortality among steroid-treated ASCI patients compared to untreated controls in either RCTs or OBSs. Conclusions:Methylprednisolone therapy within the first 8 h following ASCI failed to show a statistically significant short-term or long-term improvement in patients' overall motor or neurological scores compared to controls who were not administered steroids. For the same comparison, there was an increased risk of pneumonia and hyperglycemia compared to controls. Routine use of methylprednisone following ASCI should be carefully considered in the context of these results.

SUBMITTER: Sultan I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7033344 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The safety and efficacy of steroid treatment for acute spinal cord injury: A Systematic Review and meta-analysis.

Sultan Ihtisham I Lamba Nayan N Liew Aaron A Doung Phoung P Tewarie Ishaan I Amamoo James J JJ Gannu Laxmi L Chawla Shreya S Doucette Joanne J Cerecedo-Lopez Christian D CD Papatheodorou Stefania S Tafel Ian I Aglio Linda S LS Smith Timothy R TR Zaidi Hasan H Mekary Rania A RA

Heliyon 20200219 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>The role for steroids in acute spinal cord injury (ASCI) remains unclear; while some studies have demonstrated the risks of steroids outweigh the benefits,a meta-analyses conducted on heterogeneous patient populations have shown significant motor improvement at short-term but not at long-term follow-up. Given the heterogeneity of the patient population in previous meta-analyses and the publication of a recent trial not included in these meta-analyses, we sought to re-assess ...[more]

PMID: 32095652

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThis network meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of 9 nonoperative regimens (placebo, pregabalin, GM-1 ganglioside, venlafaxine extended-release [venlafaxine XR], fampridine, conventional over-ground training [OT], body-weight-supported treadmill training [BWSTT], robotic-assisted gait training [RAGT] + OT and body-weight-supported over-ground training [BWSOT]) in treating spinal cord injury (SCI).MethodsClinical controlled trials of 9 nonoperative regimens for SCI were retrieved in the electronic database. Traditional pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed to compare the efficacy and safety of 9 nonoperative regimens for the treatment of SCI. Weighted mean difference (WMD), odds ratios (OR), and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) were calculated using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo engine Open BUGS (V.3.4.0) and R (V.3.2.1) package gemtc (V.0.6).ResultsA total of 9 clinical controlled trials meeting the inclusion criteria were selected in this meta-analysis. On the aspect of efficacy, the results of pairwise meta-analysis indicated that the RAGT + OT and BWSOT might have the best efficacy in SCI patients in terms of a lower extremity motor score (LEMS) compared with conventional OT; the efficacy of RAGT + OT on SCI patients was relatively better than that of conventional OT in terms of walking index for spinal cord injury (WISCI). With the aspect of safety, the constipation rate of placebo on SCI patients was relatively higher than that of venlafaxine XR; however, with respect to headache and urinary tract infection, there was no significant difference in the safety of placebo, pregabalin, GM-1 ganglioside, venlafaxine XR, and fampridine on SCI patients. The results of SUCRA values suggested that BWSOT had the highest SUCRA value (75.25%) of LEMS; RAGT + OT had the highest SUCRA value (88.50%) of WISCI; venlafaxine XR had the highest SUCRA value (94.00%) of constipation; venlafaxine XR had the highest SUCRA value (80.00%) of headache; GM-1 ganglioside had the highest SUCRA value (87.75%) of urinary tract infection.ConclusionOur results provide evidence that the RAGT + OT and BWSOT might have the best efficacy in the treatment of SCI, and the venlafaxine XR and GM-1 ganglioside showed adequate safety for SCI.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the safety and effectiveness of transplanted cells from different sources for spinal cord injury (SCI).DesignA systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.Study selectionWe included randomized controlled trials, case-control studies, and case series related to cell transplantation for SCI patients, that included at least 1 of the following outcome measures: American Spinal Cord Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale (AIS grade), ASIA motor score, ASIA sensory score, the Functional Independence Measure score (FIM), International Association of Neurorestoratology Spinal Cord Injury Functional Rating Scale (IANR-SCIFRS), or adverse events. Follow-up data were analyzed at 6 and 12 months.ResultsForty-four eligible trials, involving 1,266 patients, investigated 6 treatments: olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs), neural stem cells/ neural progenitor cells (NSCs), mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), Schwann cells, macrophages, and combinations of cells (MSCs plus Schwann cells). Macrophages improved the AIS grade at 12 months (mean 0.42, 95% credible interval: 0-0.91, low certainty) and FIM score at 12 months (42.83, 36.33-49.18, very low certainty). MSCs improved the AIS grade at 6 months (0.42, 0.15-0.73, moderate certainty), the motor score at 6 months (4.43, 0.91-7.78, moderate certainty), light touch at 6 (10.01, 5.81-13.88, moderate certainty) and 12 months (11.48, 6.31-16.64, moderate certainty), pinprick score at 6 (14.54, 9.76-19.46, moderate certainty) and 12 months (12.48, 7.09-18.12, moderate certainty), and the IANR-SCIFRS at 6 (3.96, 0.62-6.97, moderate certainty) and 12 months (5.54, 2.45-8.42, moderate certainty). OECs improved the FIM score at 6 months (9.35, 1.71-17.00, moderate certainty). No intervention improved the motor score significantly at 12 months. The certainty of other interventions was low or very low. Overall, the number of adverse events associated with transplanted cells was low.ConclusionsPatients with SCI who receive transplantation of macrophages, MSCs, NSCs, or OECs may have improved disease prognosis. MSCs are the primary recommendations. Further exploration of the mechanism of cell transplantation in the treatment of SCI, transplantation time window, transplantation methods, and monitoring of the number of transplanted cells and cell survival is needed.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD 42021282043.

Project description:Background Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) is an attractive candidate in regenerative research and clinical trials have assessed their therapeutic potential in different neurological conditions with disparate etiologies. In this systematic review, we aimed to assess safety and clinical effect of MSC treatment in traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI), multiple sclerosis (MS) and ischemic stroke (IS). Methods A systematic search was performed 2021-12-10 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane where clinical studies assessing MSC treatment in TSCI, MS or IS were included. Studies without control group were excluded for efficacy analysis, but included in the safety analysis. For efficacy, AIS score, EDSS score and mRS were used as clinical endpoints and assessed in a meta-analysis using the random effects model. Findings Of 5,548 identified records, 54 studies were included. Twenty-six studies assessed MSC treatment in TSCI, 14 in MS and nine in IS, of which seven, seven and five studies were controlled, respectively. There were seven serious adverse events (SAEs), of which four were related to the surgical procedure and included one death due to complications following the implantation of MSCs. Three SAEs were considered directly related to the MSC treatment and all these had a transient course. In TSCI, a meta-analysis showed no difference in conversion from AIS A to C and a trend toward more patients treated with MSCs improving from AIS A to B as compared to controls (p = 0.05). A subgroup analysis performed per protocol, showed more MSC treated patients improving from AIS A to C in studies including patients within 8 weeks after injury (p = 0.04). In MS and IS, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between MSC treated patients and controls as measured by EDSS and mRS, respectively. Interpretation MSC-treatment is safe in patients with TSCI, MS and IS, although surgical implantation of MSC led to one fatal outcome in TSCI. There was no clear clinical benefit of MSC treatment, but this is not necessarily a proof of inefficacy due to the low number of controlled studies. Future studies assessing efficacy of MSC treatment should aim to do this in randomized, controlled studies.

Project description:BackgroundRecent pieces of evidence about the efficacy of gait rehabilitation for incomplete spinal cord injury remain unclear. We aimed to estimate the treatment effect and find the best gait rehabilitation to regain velocity, distance, and Walking Index Spinal Cord Injury (WISCI) among incomplete spinal cord injury patients.MethodPubMed and Scopus databases were searched from inception to October 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in comparison with any of the following: conventional physical therapy, treadmill, functional electrical stimulation and robotic-assisted gait training, and reported at least one outcome. Two reviewers independently selected the studies and extracted the data. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects or fixed-effect model according to the heterogeneity. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was indirectly compared with all interventions and reported as pooled unstandardized mean difference (USMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated to identify the best intervention.ResultsWe included 17 RCTs (709 participants) with the mean age of 43.9 years. Acute-phase robotic-assisted gait training significantly improved the velocity (USMD 0.1 m/s, 95% CI 0.05, 0.14), distance (USMD 64.75 m, 95% CI 27.24, 102.27), and WISCI (USMD 3.28, 95% CI 0.12, 6.45) compared to conventional physical therapy. In NMA, functional electrical stimulation had the highest probability of being the best intervention for velocity (66.6%, SUCRA 82.1) and distance (39.7%, SUCRA 67.4), followed by treadmill, functional electrical stimulation plus treadmill, robotic-assisted gait training, and conventional physical therapy, respectively.ConclusionFunctional electrical stimulation seems to be the best treatment to improve walking velocity and distance for incomplete spinal cord injury patients. However, a large-scale RCT is required to study the adverse events of these interventions.Trial registrationPROSPERO number CRD42019145797.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with acute traumatic cervical or high thoracic level spinal cord injury (SCI) typically require mechanical ventilation (MV) during their acute admission. Placement of a tracheostomy is preferred when prolonged weaning from MV is anticipated. However, the optimal timing of tracheostomy placement in patients with acute traumatic SCI remains uncertain. We systematically reviewed the literature to determine the effects of early versus late tracheostomy or prolonged intubation in patients with acute traumatic SCI on important clinical outcomes.MethodsSix databases were searched from their inception to January 2020. Conference abstracts from relevant proceedings and the gray literature were searched to identify additional studies. Data were obtained by two independent reviewers to ensure accuracy and completeness. The quality of observational studies was evaluated using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale.ResultsSeventeen studies (2,804 patients) met selection criteria, 14 of which were published after 2009. Meta-analysis showed that early tracheostomy was not associated with decreased short-term mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-1.79; p = 0.65; n = 2,072), but was associated with a reduction in MV duration (mean difference [MD], 13.1 days; 95% CI, -6.70 to -21.11; p = 0.0002; n = 855), intensive care unit length of stay (MD, -10.20 days; 95% CI, -4.66 to -15.74; p = 0.0003; n = 855), and hospital length of stay (MD, -7.39 days; 95% CI, -3.74 to -11.03; p < 0.0001; n = 423). Early tracheostomy was also associated with a decreased incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia and tracheostomy-related complications (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.98; p = 0.02; n = 2,043 and RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.84; p = 0.001; n = 812 respectively). The majority of studies ranked as good methodologic quality on the Newcastle Ottawa Scale.ConclusionEarly tracheostomy in patients with acute traumatic SCI may reduce duration of mechanical entilation, length of intensive care unit stay, and length of hospital stay. Current studies highlight the lack of high-level evidence to guide the optimal timing of tracheostomy in acute traumatic SCI. Future research should seek to understand whether early tracheostomy improves patient comfort, decreases duration of sedation, and improves long-term outcomes.Level of evidenceSystematic Review, level III.

Dataset Information

The safety and efficacy of steroid treatment for acute spinal cord injury: A Systematic Review and meta-analysis.

Publications

The safety and efficacy of steroid treatment for acute spinal cord injury: A Systematic Review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets