Dataset Information

Effect of adjuvant bisphosphonates on treatment of periodontitis: Systematic review with meta-analyses.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Previous systematic reviews showed additional benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonates (BP) in the treatment of periodontitis. In contrast, it is unclear the effect of BP in patients with diabetes and smokers, its pooled effect when administered locally or systemically is also unknown.

Objectives

This study aimed to systematically review the literature about the use of BP as adjuvant to nonsurgical scaling and root planning (SRP).

Methodology

This study followed the PRISMA guideline. This study included randomized clinical trials that administered locally or systemically BPs as adjuvant for periodontal treatment. Five databases were used. Meta-analyses were performed, using the pooled mean differences (MD) for clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing pocket depth (PPD). Standard mean difference (SMD) was used for radiographic assessment (RADIO). Subgroup analyses were performed for locally delivered meta-analyses, considering diabetes and smoking exposure.

Results

Thirteen studies were included. It was showed MD of 1.52 ?mm (95%CI: 0.97-2.07) and 1.44 ?mm (95%CI: 1.08-1.79) for PPD reduction and CAL gain, respectively, for locally delivered BP. BP was not able to provide significant improvements in smokers (subgroup analysis) when considering CAL (MD: 1.37; 95%CI: -0.17-2.91) and PPD (MD: 1.35; 95%CI: -0.13-2.83). Locally delivered BP also improved significantly the RADIO assessments (SMD: 4.34; 95%CI: 2.94-5.74). MD for systemically administered BP was 0.40 ?mm (95%CI: 0.21-0.60), 0.51 ?mm (95%CI: 0.19-0.83) and 1.05 (95%CI: 0.80-1.31) for PPD, CAL and RADIO, respectively.

Conclusion

The administration of BP in adjunct to SRP may result in additional clinical effects.

SUBMITTER: Muniz FWMG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7841362 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr-Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of adjuvant bisphosphonates on treatment of periodontitis: Systematic review with meta-analyses.

Muniz Francisco Wilker Mustafa Gomes FWMG Silva Bernardo Franco da BFD Goulart Conrado Richel CR Silveira Taciane Menezes da TMD Martins Thiago Marchi TM

Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research 20210121 2

<h4>Background</h4>Previous systematic reviews showed additional benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonates (BP) in the treatment of periodontitis. In contrast, it is unclear the effect of BP in patients with diabetes and smokers, its pooled effect when administered locally or systemically is also unknown.<h4>Objectives</h4>This study aimed to systematically review the literature about the use of BP as adjuvant to nonsurgical scaling and root planning (SRP).<h4>Methodology</h4>This study followed the P ...[more]

PMID: 33537188

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis worldwide. Pain and reduced function are the main symptoms in this prevalent disease. There are currently no treatments for OA that modify disease progression; therefore analgesic drugs and joint replacement for larger joints are the standard of care. In light of several recent studies reporting the use of bisphosphonates for OA treatment, our work aimed to evaluate published literature to assess the effectiveness of bisphosphonates in OA treatment. METHODS: Literature databases were searched from inception to the 30th June 2012 for clinical trials of bisphosphonates to treat OA pain. Data was appraised and levels of evidence determined qualitatively using best evidence synthesis from the Cochrane Collaboration. The two largest studies were conducted with risedronate in the treatment of knee OA, for which meta-analyses were performed for pain and functional outcomes. RESULTS: Our searches found 13/297 eligible studies, which included a total of 3832 participants. The trials recruited participants with OA of the hand (n=1), knee (n=8), knee and spine (n=3), or hip (n=1). Our meta-analysis of the two largest knee studies using risedronate 15 mg showed odds ratios favouring placebo interventions for the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain (1.73), WOMAC function (2.03), and WOMAC stiffness (1.82). However, 8 trials (61.5%) reported that bisphosphonates improve pain assessed by VAS scores and 2 (38.5%) reported significant improvement in WOMAC pain scores compared to control groups. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence that bisphosphonates are effective in the treatment of OA pain. Limitations of the studies we analysed included the differences in duration of bisphosphonate use, the dose and route of administration and the lack of long-term data on OA joint structure modification post-bisphosphonate therapy. Future more targeted studies are required to appreciate the value of bisphosphonates in treating osteoarthritis pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Register CRD42012002541.

Project description:IntroductionOsteoporosis is an under-recognized problem threatening men. Bisphosphonates are the main treatment but their comparative efficacy is unclear for men with osteoporosis. Therefore, we performed this systematic review with network meta-analyses to summarize the evidence of comparative efficacy of bisphosphonates in men with osteoporosis.MethodsWe completed network meta-analyses with a frequentist model to compare the efficacy of different bisphosphonates. Randomized controlled trials investigating bisphosphonates used in men with osteoporosis were included. The primary outcome was the rate of patients with a new vertebral fracture. The secondary outcome was the rate of patients with a non-vertebral fracture, which was defined as any fractures reported other than vertebral fractures. Pairwise meta-analyses were performed to compare bisphosphonates with placebo. We included open-label studies in the analyses as a sensitivity analysis.ResultsTen trials were included, using alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and zoledronic acid. No significant difference was found between any pairs of alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, and zoledronic acid for both vertebral and non-vertebral fractures. Zoledronic acid ranked as the most effective in preventing vertebral fracture in primary osteoporosis. Risedronate ranked best in preventing non-vertebral fracture in both primary osteoporosis and corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis. In the sensitivity analyses with the open-label studies, the ranking order did not change.ConclusionThe current evidence for bisphosphonates used in men with osteoporosis is inadequate. On the basis of the current evidence, zoledronic acid is most effective at preventing vertebral fractures, while risedronate has the highest possibility to rank the first in preventing non-vertebral fracture in men with primary osteoporosis and corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis. More well-designed studies are needed to test our findings and to better know the comparative efficacy of bisphosphonate to prevent vertebral fracture in men with osteoporosis.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the effect of antihypertensive treatment on mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in people with diabetes mellitus, at different blood pressure levels. DESIGN:Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES:CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, and BIOSIS were searched using highly sensitive search strategies. When data required according to the protocol were missing but trials were potentially eligible, we contacted researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and authorities. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:Randomised controlled trials including 100 or more people with diabetes mellitus, treated for 12 months or more, comparing any antihypertensive agent against placebo, two agents against one, or different blood pressure targets. RESULTS:49 trials, including 73,738 participants, were included in the meta-analyses. Most of the participants had type 2 diabetes. If baseline systolic blood pressure was greater than 150 mm Hg, antihypertensive treatment reduced the risk of all cause mortality (relative risk 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.99), cardiovascular mortality (0.75, 0.57 to 0.99), myocardial infarction (0.74, 0.63 to 0.87), stroke (0.77, 0.65 to 0.91), and end stage renal disease (0.82, 0.71 to 0.94). If baseline systolic blood pressure was 140-150 mm Hg, additional treatment reduced the risk of all cause mortality (0.87, 0.78 to 0.98), myocardial infarction (0.84, 0.76 to 0.93), and heart failure (0.80, 0.66 to 0.97). If baseline systolic blood pressure was less than 140 mm Hg, however, further treatment increased the risk of cardiovascular mortality (1.15, 1.00 to 1.32), with a tendency towards an increased risk of all cause mortality (1.05, 0.95 to 1.16). Metaregression analyses showed a worse treatment effect with lower baseline systolic blood pressures for cardiovascular mortality (1.15, 1.03 to 1.29 for each 10 mm Hg lower systolic blood pressure) and myocardial infarction (1.12, 1.03 to 1.22 for each 10 mm Hg lower systolic blood pressure). Patterns were similar for attained systolic blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS:Antihypertensive treatment reduces the risk of mortality and cardiovascular morbidity in people with diabetes mellitus and a systolic blood pressure more than 140 mm Hg. If systolic blood pressure is less than 140 mm Hg, however, further treatment is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular death, with no observed benefit.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Metformin use has been associated with a reduced risk of developing cancer and an improvement in overall cancer survival rates in meta-analyses, but, to date, evidence to support the use of metformin as an adjuvant therapy in individual cancer types has not been presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS:We systematically searched research databases, conference abstracts and trial registries for any studies reporting cancer outcomes for individual tumour types in metformin users compared with non-users, and extracted data on patients with early-stage cancer. Studies were assessed for design and quality, and a meta-analysis was conducted to quantify the adjuvant effect of metformin on recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS), to inform future trial design. RESULTS:Of 7670 articles screened, 27 eligible studies were identified comprising 24 178 participants, all enrolled in observational studies. In those with early-stage colorectal cancer, metformin use was associated with a significant benefit in all outcomes [RFS hazard ratio (HR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.85; OS HR 0.69, CI 0.58-0.83; CSS HR 0.58, CI 0.39-0.86]. For men with early-stage prostate cancer, metformin was associated with significant, or borderline significant, benefits in all outcomes (RFS HR 0.83, CI 0.69-1.00; OS HR 0.82, CI 0.73-0.93; CSS HR 0.58, CI 0.37-0.93); however, there was significant heterogeneity between studies. The data suggest that prostate cancer patients treated with radical radiotherapy may benefit more from metformin (RFS HR 0.45, CI 0.29-0.70). In breast and urothelial cancer, no significant benefits were identified. Sufficient data were not available to conduct analyses on the impact of metformin dose and duration. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings suggest that metformin could be a useful adjuvant agent, with the greatest benefits seen in colorectal and prostate cancer, particularly in those receiving radical radiotherapy, and randomised, controlled trials which investigate dose and duration, alongside efficacy, are advocated.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the effect of decreased sodium intake on blood pressure, related cardiovascular diseases, and potential adverse effects such as changes in blood lipids, catecholamine levels, and renal function.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesCochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the Latin American and Caribbean health science literature database, and the reference lists of previous reviews.Study selectionRandomised controlled trials and prospective cohort studies in non-acutely ill adults and children assessing the relations between sodium intake and blood pressure, renal function, blood lipids, and catecholamine levels, and in non-acutely ill adults all cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, stroke, and coronary heart disease.Study appraisal and synthesisPotential studies were screened independently and in duplicate and study characteristics and outcomes extracted. When possible we conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the effect of lower sodium intake using the inverse variance method and a random effects model. We present results as mean differences or risk ratios, with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsWe included 14 cohort studies and five randomised controlled trials reporting all cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, stroke, or coronary heart disease; and 37 randomised controlled trials measuring blood pressure, renal function, blood lipids, and catecholamine levels in adults. Nine controlled trials and one cohort study in children reporting on blood pressure were also included. In adults a reduction in sodium intake significantly reduced resting systolic blood pressure by 3.39 mm Hg (95% confidence interval 2.46 to 4.31) and resting diastolic blood pressure by 1.54 mm Hg (0.98 to 2.11). When sodium intake was <2 g/day versus ? 2 g/day, systolic blood pressure was reduced by 3.47 mm Hg (0.76 to 6.18) and diastolic blood pressure by 1.81 mm Hg (0.54 to 3.08). Decreased sodium intake had no significant adverse effect on blood lipids, catecholamine levels, or renal function in adults (P>0.05). There were insufficient randomised controlled trials to assess the effects of reduced sodium intake on mortality and morbidity. The associations in cohort studies between sodium intake and all cause mortality, incident fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease, and coronary heart disease were non-significant (P>0.05). Increased sodium intake was associated with an increased risk of stroke (risk ratio 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.43), stroke mortality (1.63, 1.27 to 2.10), and coronary heart disease mortality (1.32, 1.13 to 1.53). In children, a reduction in sodium intake significantly reduced systolic blood pressure by 0.84 mm Hg (0.25 to 1.43) and diastolic blood pressure by 0.87 mm Hg (0.14 to 1.60).ConclusionsHigh quality evidence in non-acutely ill adults shows that reduced sodium intake reduces blood pressure and has no adverse effect on blood lipids, catecholamine levels, or renal function, and moderate quality evidence in children shows that a reduction in sodium intake reduces blood pressure. Lower sodium intake is also associated with a reduced risk of stroke and fatal coronary heart disease in adults. The totality of evidence suggests that most people will likely benefit from reducing sodium intake.

Project description:ObjectivesMandibular collum fractures among growing patients can lead to abnormal growth, function, esthetics and ultimately quality of life. Among the proposed treatment alternatives, orthopaedic treatment with functional appliances has been suggested, with encouraging results. Aim of the present systematic review was to critically appraise existing evidence on the outcome of functional appliance treatment among growing patients with mandibular collum fractures.Materials and methodsEight databases were searched up to October 2020 for randomised and non-randomised clinical studies assessing functional appliance treatment outcome for children with mandibular fractures. After duplicate study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment, random effects meta-analyses of mean differences (MD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed, followed by assessment of the quality of evidence with GRADE.ResultsA total of 8 unique studies (one prospective and nine retrospective non-randomised) with 223 children could be identified. Functional appliance treatment was associated with greater anteroposterior condyle dimensions of the injured condyle compared with the contralateral healthy condyle (3 studies; MD = 0.87 mm; 95% CI = 0.30 to 1.45 mm; p = .003). No difference was found in the mesiodistal condyle size between the injured and the contralateral healthy joint (3 studies; MD = -0.05 mm; 95% CI = -1.05 to 0.95 mm; p = .92), but collum length was smaller at the injured side compared with the contralateral one (1 study; MD = -2.89 mm; 95% CI = -5.29 to -0.49 mm; p = .02). Treatment outcome might be influenced by patient age, patient sex and severity/localisation of the fracture, but the quality of evidence for all analyses was very low due to methodological limitations leading to bias.ConclusionsWhile some evidence exists that functional appliances might lead to good clinical rehabilitation of fractured mandibular condyles, including considerable bone remodelling, available studies are small and have methodological weaknesses.

Dataset Information

Effect of adjuvant bisphosphonates on treatment of periodontitis: Systematic review with meta-analyses.

Background

Objectives

Methodology

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Effect of adjuvant bisphosphonates on treatment of periodontitis: Systematic review with meta-analyses.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure