Efficacy and safety of pulmonary vasodilators in the patients with Eisenmenger syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hou Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8191088 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Pulmonary veno-occlusive disease (PVOD) or pulmonary capillary hemangiomatosis (PCH) is a rare subtype of pulmonary hypertension with dismal prognosis. Limited data are available on the efficacy and safety of orally administered pulmonary vasodilators for PVOD/PCH. Whether and how systemic sclerosis (SSc) affects the clinical outcomes of PVOD/PCH is also unknown. This study aimed to determine the clinical and hemodynamic efficacy and safety of oral pulmonary vasodilators for PVOD/PCH and clarify the possible effects of SSc on the clinical presentation of PVOD/PCH. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 15 patients with PVOD/PCH treated with oral pulmonary vasodilators in our department since 2001. Six of them had SSc. Oral pulmonary vasodilators were administered either as single agents (n = 10) or in combination (n = 5). Treatment improved the functional class of five patients, and pulmonary arterial pressure and pulmonary vascular resistance decreased by 10 ± 12 mmHg and 36 ± 19%, respectively (p < 0.05 for both, n = 13), whereas pulmonary edema developed in three patients. The mean survival was 3.9 years, and the 1- and 3-year survival rates were 93% and 65%, respectively. The clinical presentation, including survival, was similar between patients with and without SSc. In our PVOD/PCH cohort, oral pulmonary vasodilators caused pulmonary edema in 20% of patients, but more than 80% of patients experienced significant pulmonary vasodilatory effects, and the overall prognosis was better than that previously reported. SSc does not adversely affect the clinical outcomes of PVOD/PCH.
| S-EPMC9745862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pulmonary vasodilators in pediatric pulmonary hypertension (PH) patients. Methods: We searched electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to May 2020, and conducted a subgroup analysis for pulmonary vasodilators or underlying disease. Results: Fifteen studies with 719 pediatric PH patients were included in the meta-analysis. Adverse events did not differ (p = 0.11, I 2 = 15%) between the pulmonary vasodilators group and the control group, neither in the subgroups. In total, compared with the control group treatment, pulmonary vasodilators significantly decreased the mortality (p = 0.002), mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP, p = 0.02), and mechanical ventilation duration (p = 0.03), also improved the oxygenation index (OI, p = 0.01). In the persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN) subgroup, phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5i) significantly reduced mortality (p = 0.03), OI (p = 0.007) and mechanical ventilation duration (p = 0.004). Administration of endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs) improved OI (p = 0.04) and mechanical ventilation duration (p < 0.00001) in PPHN. We also found that in the pediatric pulmonary arterial hypertension (PPAH) subgroup, mPAP was pronouncedly declined with ERAs (p = 0.006). Systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP, p < 0.0001) and pulmonary arterial/aortic pressure (PA/AO, p < 0.00001) were significantly relieved with PDE5i, partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2) was improved with prostacyclin in postoperative PH (POPH) subgroup (p = 0.001). Compared with the control group, pulmonary vasodilators could significantly decrease PA/AO pressure (p < 0.00001) and OI (p < 0.00001) in the short-term (duration <7 days) follow-up subgroup, improve mPAP (p = 0.03) and PaO2 (p = 0.01) in the mid-term (7-30 days) follow-up subgroup, also decrease mortality, mPAP (p = 0.0001), PA/AO pressure (p = 0.0007), duration of mechanical ventilation (p = 0.004), and ICU stay (p < 0.00001) in the long-term follow subgroup (>30 days). Conclusion: Pulmonary vasodilators decrease the mortality in pediatric PH patients, improve the respiratory and hemodynamic parameters, reduce the mechanical ventilation duration.
| S-EPMC8103162 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We conducted meta-analyses of findings from randomized, placebo-controlled, short-term trials for acute mania in manic or mixed states of DSM (III-IV) bipolar I disorder in 56 drug-placebo comparisons of 17 agents from 38 studies involving 10,800 patients. Of drugs tested, 13 (76%) were more effective than placebo: aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperdone, quetiapine, risperidone, tamoxifen, valproate, and ziprasidone. Their pooled effect size for mania improvement (Hedges' g in 48 trials) was 0.42 (confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.48); pooled responder risk ratio (46 trials) was 1.52 (CI: 1.42-1.62); responder rate difference (RD) was 17% (drug: 48%, placebo: 31%), yielding an estimated number-needed-to-treat of 6 (all p<0.0001). In several direct comparisons, responses to various antipsychotics were somewhat greater or more rapid than lithium, valproate, or carbamazepine; lithium did not differ from valproate, nor did second generation antipsychotics differ from haloperidol. Meta-regression associated higher study site counts, as well as subject number with greater placebo (not drug) response; and higher baseline mania score with greater drug (not placebo) response. Most effective agents had moderate effect-sizes (Hedges' g=0.26-0.46); limited data indicated large effect sizes (Hedges' g=0.51-2.32) for: carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, risperidone, and tamoxifen. The findings support the efficacy of most clinically used antimanic treatments, but encourage more head-to-head studies and development of agents with even greater efficacy.
| S-EPMC3055677 | biostudies-other
Project description:Whether anastrozole has superior effects to tamoxifen for breast cancer remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy and safety of anastrozole versus tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy in breast cancer. A systematic literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane library were performed to evaluate the survival benefits and toxicity profiles of patients with breast cancer who were treated with anastrozole or tamoxifen. The main outcome measures included disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and adverse events. Hazard ratios (HRs) or risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a fixed-effects model or random-effects model. Nine RCTs with a total of 15,300 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled estimates suggested that, anastrozole was associated with a significantly improvement in DFS (HR=0.72, 95%CI: 0.55-0.94; P=0.016), and ORR (RR=1.21, 95% CI: 1.05-1.39; P=0.009) than tamoxifen. But it did not prolong OS (HR=0.96, 95%CI: 0.77-1.21; P=0.751). Compared with tamoxifen, anastrozole induced a higher incidence of arthralgia (RR=1.55, 95%CI: 1.20-1.99; P=0.001) and bone pain (RR=1.31, 95%CI: 1.05-1.62; P=0.015), as well as a lower incidence of vaginal bleeding (RR=0.51, 95%CI: 0.28-0.93; P=0.029), vaginal discharge (RR=0.31, 95%CI: 0.12-0.82; P=0.017), and thromboembolic events (RR=0.39, 95%CI: 0.28-0.55; P<0.001). Based on the current evidence, patients with breast cancer would benefit from the anastrozole treatment.
| S-EPMC5564654 | biostudies-other
Project description:Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is part of standard supportive care. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of LMWH in septic patients. We searched Pubmed, Embase, CKNI and Wanfang database prior to July 2015 for randomized controlled trials investigating treatment with LMWH in septic patients. We identified 11 trials involving 594 septic patients. Meta-analysis showed that LMWH significantly reduced prothrombin time (mean differences [MD] -0.88; 95% CI -1.47 to -0.29), APACHE II score (MD -2.50; 95% CI -3.55 to -1.46), and 28-day mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.72; 95% CI 0.57-0.91) as well as increased the platelet counts (MD 18.33; 95% CI 0.73-35.93) than the usual treatment. However, LMWH did not reduce D-dimer (MD -0.34; 95% CI -0.85 to 0.18). LMWH also significantly increased the bleeding events (RR 3.82; 95% CI 1.81-8.08). LMWH appears to reduce 28-day mortality and APACHE II score among septic patients. Bleeding complications should be monitored during the LMWH treatment. As for limited data about LMWH and sepsis in the English literature, only trials published in the Chinese were included in the meta-analysis.
| S-EPMC4867648 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeOur meta-analysis was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nebivolol compared with other second-generation β blockers for hypertensive patients.MethodsWe searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Clinical Trials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The efficacy endpoints included systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), reduction of SBP and DBP, heart rate (HR), and adverse events (AEs).FindingsEight RCTs with 1514 patients met the inclusion criteria. HR was significantly lower in patients receiving other second-generation β blockers compared with patients receiving nebivolol. There was no difference the reduction of blood pressure (SBP and DBP) or the reduction of SBP or DBP between the groups. The incidence of AEs was lower in patients taking nebivolol compared with patients taking other second-generation β blockers.ConclusionsNo significant difference was demonstrated between nebivolol and other second-generation β blockers in the reduction of blood pressure, SBP, and DBP. The tolerability of nebivolol was significantly better compared with other second-generation β blockers, and nebivolol was also associated with a stable HR and a lower risk of AEs compared with other second-generation β blockers.
| S-EPMC7588777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are characterized with high risk of heart failure. Although mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists have beneficial effect on relieving cardiac fibrosis and, thus, reduce the incidence of cardiovascular disease and cardiac death, the therapeutic benefits and adverse effects are still controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to measure the safety and efficacy of spironolactone in patients undergoing dialysis.MethodsA systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Primary outcomes included changes in all-cause mortality (ACM), serum potassium concentration, incidence of hyperkalemia and gynecomastia (GYN). Secondary outcomes included changes in blood pressure (BP), left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were further conducted. This research was registered with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; No. CRD42021287493).ResultsFifteen RCTs with 1,258 patients were enrolled in this pooled-analysis. Spironolactone treatment significantly decreased ACM (RR = 0.42, P < 0.0001), CCV (RR = 0.54, P = 0.008) and LVMI (MD = -6.28, P = 0.002), also increased occurrence of GYN (RR = 4.36, P = 0.0005). However, LVEF (MD = 2.63, P = 0.05), systolic BP (MD = -4.61, P = 0.14) and diastolic BP (MD = -0.12, P = 0.94) did not change between two groups after treatment. Although serum potassium concentration was increased (MD = 0.22, P < 0.0001) after spironolactone supplement, the risk of hyperkalemia remained unchanged (RR = 1.21, P = 0.31). Further subgroup analysis found more obvious advantageous as well as disadvantageous effects in Asian subjects than European or American ones. Also, with more than 9 months of treatment duration, patients achieved more favorable influence than shorter duration.ConclusionsThese results highlight the therapeutic effects of spironolactone on cardiovascular indexes, including ACM, CCV, and LVMI. However, the unignorable increase of GYN incidence and serum potassium level indicate that close monitor in dialysis-dependent patients, especially Asian patients, is essential.
| S-EPMC8970057 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is currently being examined for COVID-19. No previous meta-analysis has evaluated its side effects versus placebo. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the safety of HCQ versus placebo. METHODS:Two authors independently searched PubMed and EMBASE databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adults comparing the adverse events (AEs) of HCQ versus placebo for any indication. Peto odds ratios (Peto ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated based on random-effects models. The heterogeneity (I2) was assessed using Cochran's Q test. RESULTS:Nine RCTs (eight were double-blind) with a total of 916 patients were included. HCQ caused significantly more skin pigmentation than placebo (Peto OR, 4.64; 95% CI, 1.13 to 19.00; P-value?=?0.033; I2?=?0%). The increase in other AEs did not reach statistical significance: rash (Peto OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.3 to 3.77; P-value?=?0.03; I2?=?0%); gastrointestinal AEs (Peto OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.55 to 3.72; P-value?=?0.46; I2?=?15.17%); headache (Peto OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 0.65 to 5.78; P-value?=?0.23; I2?=?9.99%); dizziness (Peto OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.49 to 3.52; P-value?=?0.58; I2?=?0%); fatigue (Peto OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 0.76 to 5.98; P-value?=?0.15; I2?=?0%); and visual AEs (Peto OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 0.76 to 3.41; P-value?=?0.22; I2?=?0%). Cardiac toxicity was not reported. CONCLUSIONS:This meta-analysis of RCTs found a significantly higher risk of skin pigmentation in HCQ users versus placebo. More data are needed to evaluate HCQ in the context of COVID-19 treatment.
| S-EPMC7342171 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Long-term antithrombotic strategies for patients with chronic coronary syndrome with high-risk factors represent an important treatment dilemma in clinical practice. Our aim was to conduct a network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long-term antithrombotic strategies in patients with chronic coronary syndrome. Methods and Results Four randomized studies were included (n=75167; THEMIS [Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in Diabetes Mellitus Patients Intervention Study], COMPASS [Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies], PEGASUS-TIMI 54 [Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 54], and DAPT [Dual Anti-platelet Therapy]). The odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs) were calculated as the measure of effect size. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that, compared with aspirin monotherapy, the ORs for trial-defined major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events were 0.86; (95% CI, 0.80-0.93) for ticagrelor plus aspirin, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78-1.02) for rivaroxaban monotherapy, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.64-0.85) for rivaroxaban plus aspirin, and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.60,-0.86) for thienopyridine plus aspirin. Compared with aspirin monotherapy, the ORs for trial-defined major bleeding were 2.15 (95% CI, 1.78-2.59]) for ticagrelor plus aspirin, 1.51 (95% CI, 1.23-1.85) for rivaroxaban monotherapy, and 1.68 (95% CI, 1.37-2.05) for rivaroxaban plus aspirin. For death from any cause, the improvement effect of rivaroxaban plus aspirin was detected versus aspirin monotherapy (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65-0.90), ticagrelor plus aspirin (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.95), rivaroxaban monotherapy (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.97), and thienopyridine plus aspirin (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41-0.82) regimens. Conclusions All antithrombotic strategies combined with aspirin significantly reduced the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events and increased the risk of major bleeding compared with aspirin monotherapy. Considering the outcomes of all ischemic and bleeding events and all-cause mortality, rivaroxaban plus aspirin appears to be the preferred long-term antithrombotic regimen for patients with chronic coronary syndrome and high-risk factors.
| S-EPMC8174196 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oncolytic virotherapy is a promising antitumor therapeutic strategy. It is based on the ability of viruses to selectively kill cancer cells and induce host antitumor immune responses. However, the clinical outcomes of oncolytic viruses (OVs) vary widely. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to illustrate the efficacy and safety of oncolytic viruses. The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to January 31, 2020. The data for objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs) were independently extracted by two investigators from 11 studies that met the inclusion criteria. In subgroup analyses, the objective response rate benefit was observed in patients treated with oncolytic DNA viruses (odds ratio (OR) = 4.05; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.96-8.33; p = 0.0002), but not in those treated with oncolytic RNA viruses (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.66-1.52, p = 0.99). Moreover, the intratumoral injection arm yielded a statistically significant improvement (OR = 4.05, 95% CI: 1.96-8.33, p = 0.0002), but no such improvement was observed for the intravenous injection arm (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.66-1.52, p = 0.99). Among the five OVs investigated in RCTs, only talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) effectively prolonged the OS of patients (hazard ratio (HR), 0.79; 95% CI: 0.63-0.99; p = 0.04). None of the oncolytic virotherapies improved the PFS (HR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.85-1.19, p = 0.96). Notably, the pooled rate of severe AEs (grade ?3) was higher for the oncolytic virotherapy group (39%) compared with the control group (27%) (risk difference (RD), 12%; risk ratio (RR), 1.44; 95% CI: 1.17-1.78; p = 0.0006). This review offers a reference for fundamental research and clinical treatment of oncolytic viruses. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to verify these results.
| S-EPMC7352817 | biostudies-literature