Dataset Information

Assessment of the risk of musculoskeletal adverse events associated with fluoroquinolone use in children: A meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics has been restricted in children because of their potential to cause adverse musculoskeletal events. This study was performed to systematically evaluate whether there is a difference between fluoroquinolone and non-fluoroquinolone antibiotics in terms of their associated risk of adverse musculoskeletal events in children. METHODS:Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed databases were used to retrieve studies related to fluoroquinolone and non-fluoroquinolone-induced musculoskeletal adverse events in children. A meta-analysis was performed using Stata 11. RESULTS:A total of 10 studies were included in the analysis. The combined results showed that there was no statistical difference between fluoroquinolone and non-fluoroquinolone groups in terms of musculoskeletal adverse events in children (risk ratio?=?1.145, 95% confidence interval?=?0.974?-?1.345, P?=?.101). Subgroup analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Here, the effects on the trovafloxacin and levofloxacin groups were significantly different from that of the control group. However, musculoskeletal adverse events due to either drug was not reported after long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:The results showed that fluoroquinolone and non-fluoroquinolone antibiotics were not different in terms of their ability to cause musculoskeletal adverse events in children. For this reason, fluoroquinolone antibiotics can be used in children as appropriate. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42019133900.

SUBMITTER: Wang JG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7447478 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessment of the risk of musculoskeletal adverse events associated with fluoroquinolone use in children: A meta-analysis.

Wang Ji-Gan JG Cui Hai-Rong HR Hu Yi-Sen YS Tang Hua-Bo HB

Medicine 20200801 34

<h4>Background</h4>The use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics has been restricted in children because of their potential to cause adverse musculoskeletal events. This study was performed to systematically evaluate whether there is a difference between fluoroquinolone and non-fluoroquinolone antibiotics in terms of their associated risk of adverse musculoskeletal events in children.<h4>Methods</h4>Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed databases were used to retrieve studies related to fluoroquinolone ...[more]

PMID: 32846837

Similar Datasets

Project description:To examine the risk of treatment emergent, cardiovascular serious adverse events associated with varenicline use for tobacco cessation.Meta-analysis comparing study effects using four summary estimates.Medline, Cochrane Library, online clinical trials registries, and reference lists of identified articles.We included randomised controlled trials of current tobacco users of adult age comparing use of varenicline with an inactive control and reporting adverse events. We defined treatment emergent, cardiovascular serious adverse events as occurring during drug treatment or within 30 days of discontinuation, and included any ischaemic or arrhythmic adverse cardiovascular event (myocardial infarction, unstable angina, coronary revascularisation, coronary artery disease, arrhythmias, transient ischaemic attacks, stroke, sudden death or cardiovascular related death, or congestive heart failure).We identified 22 trials; all were double blinded and placebo controlled; two included participants with active cardiovascular disease and 11 enrolled participants with a history of cardiovascular disease. Rates of treatment emergent, cardiovascular serious adverse events were 0.63% (34/5431) in the varenicline groups and 0.47% (18/3801) in the placebo groups. The summary estimate for the risk difference, 0.27% (95% confidence interval -0.10 to 0.63; P = 0.15), based on all 22 trials, was neither clinically nor statistically significant. For comparison, the relative risk (1.40, 0.82 to 2.39; P = 0.22), Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (1.41, 0.82 to 2.42; P = 0.22), and Peto odds ratio (1.58, 0.90 to 2.76; P = 0.11), all based on 14 trials with at least one event, also indicated a non-significant difference between varenicline and placebo groups.This meta--analysis--which included all trials published to date, focused on events occurring during drug exposure, and analysed findings using four summary estimates-found no significant increase in cardiovascular serious adverse events associated with varenicline use. For rare outcomes, summary estimates based on absolute effects are recommended and estimates based on the Peto odds ratio should be avoided.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events associated with use of varenicline compared with placebo in randomised controlled trials.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis comparing study effects using two summary estimates in fixed effects models, risk differences, and Peto odds ratios.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and clinicaltrials.gov.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised controlled trials with a placebo comparison group that reported on neuropsychiatric adverse events (depression, suicidal ideation, suicide attempt, suicide, insomnia, sleep disorders, abnormal dreams, somnolence, fatigue, anxiety) and death. Studies that did not involve human participants, did not use the maximum recommended dose of varenicline (1 mg twice daily), and were cross over trials were excluded.ResultsIn the 39 randomised controlled trials (10,761 participants), there was no evidence of an increased risk of suicide or attempted suicide (odds ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval 0.33 to 8.57), suicidal ideation (0.58, 0.28 to 1.20), depression (0.96, 0.75 to 1.22), irritability (0.98, 0.81 to 1.17), aggression (0.91, 0.52 to 1.59), or death (1.05, 0.47 to 2.38) in the varenicline users compared with placebo users. Varenicline was associated with an increased risk of sleep disorders (1.63, 1.29 to 2.07), insomnia (1.56, 1.36 to 1.78), abnormal dreams (2.38, 2.05 to 2.77), and fatigue (1.28, 1.06 to 1.55) but a reduced risk of anxiety (0.75, 0.61 to 0.93). Similar findings were observed when risk differences were reported. There was no evidence for a variation in depression and suicidal ideation by age group, sex, ethnicity, smoking status, presence or absence of psychiatric illness, and type of study sponsor (that is, pharmaceutical industry or other).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis found no evidence of an increased risk of suicide or attempted suicide, suicidal ideation, depression, or death with varenicline. These findings provide some reassurance for users and prescribers regarding the neuropsychiatric safety of varenicline. There was evidence that varenicline was associated with a higher risk of sleep problems such as insomnia and abnormal dreams. These side effects, however, are already well recognised.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO 2014:CRD42014009224.

Project description:BackgroundMetamizole is used to treat pain in many parts of the world. Information on the safety profile of metamizole is scarce; no conclusive summary of the literature exists.ObjectiveTo determine whether metamizole is clinically safe compared to placebo and other analgesics.MethodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and several clinical trial registries. We screened the reference lists of included trials and previous systematic reviews. We included randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of metamizole, administered to adults in any form and for any indication, to other analgesics or to placebo. Two authors extracted data regarding trial design and size, indications for pain medication, patient characteristics, treatment regimens, and methodological characteristics. Adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and dropouts were assessed. We conducted separate meta-analyses for each metamizole comparator, using standard inverse-variance random effects meta-analysis to pool the estimates across trials, reported as risk ratios (RRs). We calculated the DerSimonian and Laird variance estimate T2 to measure heterogeneity between trials. The pre-specified primary end point was any AE during the trial period.ResultsOf the 696 potentially eligible trials, 79 trials including almost 4000 patients with short-term metamizole use of less than two weeks met our inclusion criteria. Fewer AEs were reported for metamizole compared to opioids, RR = 0.79 (confidence interval 0.79 to 0.96). We found no differences between metamizole and placebo, paracetamol and NSAIDs. Only a few SAEs were reported, with no difference between metamizole and other analgesics. No agranulocytosis or deaths were reported. Our results were limited by the mediocre overall quality of the reports.ConclusionFor short-term use in the hospital setting, metamizole seems to be a safe choice when compared to other widely used analgesics. High-quality, adequately sized trials assessing the intermediate- and long-term safety of metamizole are needed.

Dataset Information

Assessment of the risk of musculoskeletal adverse events associated with fluoroquinolone use in children: A meta-analysis.

Publications

Assessment of the risk of musculoskeletal adverse events associated with fluoroquinolone use in children: A meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets