Dataset Information

Vasoactive Agents for Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Mixed Treatment Comparison Network Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

ABSTRACT: Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a common complication among patients with cirrhosis, primarily attributable to vasodilation of renal vessels. Vasoactive agents are commonly used to treat HRS. The present network meta-analysis compares the vasoactive agents used in HRS.We searched electronic databases for appropriate randomized controlled clinical trials in patients with HRS, comparing active interventions with either placebo or standard of care. The primary outcome was complete HRS reversal; secondary outcomes included partial HRS reversal, mortality, adverse events, and cardiovascular adverse events. The data were pooled using a random effects model. We also carried out direct comparisons for the primary outcome with trial sequential analysis.A total of 16 studies were included in the systematic review. Rates of complete HRS reversal were significantly higher with terlipressin and noradrenaline combined with albumin than with placebo (OR 6.65, 95% CI: 2.08-21.31 and 6.81, 95% CI: 1.87-24.83, respectively). No significant differences were observed in terms of mortality, partial HRS reversal, or adverse events for any of the interventions. However, cardiovascular adverse events were significantly higher with continuous-infusion terlipressin/albumin (OR 7.07, 95% CI: 1.23-40.62), bolus terlipressin/albumin (OR 7.39, 95% CI: 1.89, 28.94), octreotide/midodrine/albumin (OR 9.85, 95% CI: 1.1, 88.1), and noradrenaline/albumin (OR 15.24, 95% CI: 2.1, 112.6) than with albumin alone. Trial sequential analyses revealed adequate evidence to conclude that terlipressin combined with albumin was effective in achieving complete HRS reversal.Terlipressin combined with albumin shows strong evidence of improving short-term survival in patients with type 1 but not type 2 HRS. Through indirect comparison, noradrenaline with albumin was also associated with significant benefits in terms of HRS reversal.

SUBMITTER: Sridharan K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5756164 | biostudies-other | 2018 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Vasoactive Agents for Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Mixed Treatment Comparison Network Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Sridharan Kannan K Sivaramakrishnan Gowri G

Journal of general internal medicine 20170918 1

<h4>Background</h4>Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a common complication among patients with cirrhosis, primarily attributable to vasodilation of renal vessels. Vasoactive agents are commonly used to treat HRS. The present network meta-analysis compares the vasoactive agents used in HRS.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched electronic databases for appropriate randomized controlled clinical trials in patients with HRS, comparing active interventions with either placebo or standard of care. The primary outco ...[more]

PMID: 28924736

Similar Datasets

Project description:AIMS:Several antihypertensive drugs are used in the treatment of severe hypertension in pregnancy. The present study is a network meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of these drugs. METHODS:Electronic databases were searched for randomized clinical trials comparing drugs used in the treatment of severe hypertension in pregnancy. The number of women achieving the target blood pressure (BP) was the primary outcome. Doses required and time taken for achieving the target BP, failure rate, and incidences of maternal tachycardia, palpitation, hypotension, headache, and neonatal death and stillbirth were the secondary outcomes. Mixed treatment comparison pooled estimates were generated using a random-effects model. Odds ratios for the categorical and mean difference for the numerical outcomes were the effect estimates. RESULTS:Fifty-one studies were included in the systematic review and 46 in the meta-analysis. No significant differences in the number of patients achieving target BP was observed between any of the drugs. Diazoxide [-15 (-20.6, -9.4)], nicardipine [-11.8 (-22.3, -1.2)], nifedipine/celastrol [-19.3 (-27.4, -11.1)], nifedipine/vitamin D [-17.1 (-25.7, -9.7)], nifedipine/resveratrol [-13.9 (-22.6, -5.2)] and glyceryl trinitrate [-33.8 (-36.7, -31)] were observed to achieve the target BP (in minutes) more rapidly than hydralazine. Nifedipine required fewer doses than hydralazine for achieving the target BP. Glyceryl trinitrate and labetalol were associated with fewer incidences of tachycardia and palpitation respectively than hydralazine. Trial sequential analysis concluded adequate evidence for hydralazine and nifedipine compared with labetalol. Moderate quality of evidence was observed for direct comparison estimate between labetalol and hydralazine but was either low or very low for other comparisons. CONCLUSION:The present evidence suggests similar efficacy between nifedipine, hydralazine and labetalol in the treatment of severe hypertension in pregnancy. Subtle differences may exist in their safety profile. The evidence is inadequate for other drugs.

Project description:BackgroundCatecholamines, especially norepinephrine, are the most frequently used vasopressors for treating patients with septic shock. During the recent decades, terlipressin, vasopressin V1A agonist, and even Ca2+ sensitizer were increasingly used by physicians. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of such different kinds of vasoactive medications on mortality among patients with septic shock.MethodsRelevant randomized controlled trials were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials updated to February 22, 2018. A network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of different types of vasoactive medications. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Intensive care unit (ICU) mortality, hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS), and adverse events were also assessed.ResultsA total of 43 trials with 5767 patients assessing 17 treatment modalities were included. Treatments ranking based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve values from largest to smallest were NE/DB 85.9%, TP 75.1%, NE/EP 74.6%, PI 74.1%, EP 72.5%, VP 66.1%, NE 59.8%, PE 53.0%, DA 42.1%, DX 38.2%, SP 27.0%, PA 24.3%, EX 22.8%, LE 21.5%, and DB 13.3% for 28-day mortality. Treatments ranking for ICU mortality were TP/NE 86.4%, TP 80.3%, TP/DB/NE 65.7%, VP/NE 62.8%, NE 57.4%, VP 56.5%, PE 48.4%, DA 33.0%, PA 27.5%, LE 22.1%, and DB 9.9%. The incidence of myocardial infarction was reported with NE/EP 3.33% (n = 1 of 30), followed by EP 3.11% (n = 5 of 161), and then VP 3.10% (n = 19 of 613), NE 3.03% (n = 43 of 1417), DA 2.21% (n = 19 of 858), NE/DB 2.01% (n = 4 of 199), LE 1.16% (n = 3 of 258), and PA 0.39% (n = 1 of 257). The incidence of arrhythmia was reported with DA 26.01% (n = 258 of 992), followed by EP 22.98% (n = 37 of 161), and then NE/DB 20.60% (n = 41 of 199), NE/EP 20.0% (n = 6 of 30), NE 8.33% (n = 127 of 1525), LE 5.81% (n = 15 of 258), PA 2.33% (n = 6 of 257), and VP 1.67% (n = 10 of 600).ConclusionsThe use of norepinephrine plus dobutamine was associated with lower 28-day mortality for septic shock, especially among patients with lower cardiac output.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 is rapidly spreading causing extensive burdens across the world. Effective vaccines to prevent COVID-19 are urgently needed.Methods and findingsOur objective was to assess the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines through analyses of all currently available randomized clinical trials. We searched the databases CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and other sources from inception to June 17, 2021 for randomized clinical trials assessing vaccines for COVID-19. At least two independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We conducted meta-analyses, network meta-analyses, and Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA). Our primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, vaccine efficacy, and serious adverse events. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE. We identified 46 trials; 35 trials randomizing 219 864 participants could be included in our analyses. Our meta-analyses showed that mRNA vaccines (efficacy, 95% [95% confidence interval (CI), 92% to 97%]; 71 514 participants; 3 trials; moderate certainty); inactivated vaccines (efficacy, 61% [95% CI, 52% to 68%]; 48 029 participants; 3 trials; moderate certainty); protein subunit vaccines (efficacy, 77% [95% CI, -5% to 95%]; 17 737 participants; 2 trials; low certainty); and viral vector vaccines (efficacy 68% [95% CI, 61% to 74%]; 71 401 participants; 5 trials; low certainty) prevented COVID-19. Viral vector vaccines decreased mortality (risk ratio, 0.25 [95% CI 0.09 to 0.67]; 67 563 participants; 3 trials, low certainty), but comparable data on inactivated, mRNA, and protein subunit vaccines were imprecise. None of the vaccines showed evidence of a difference on serious adverse events, but observational evidence suggested rare serious adverse events. All the vaccines increased the risk of non-serious adverse events.ConclusionsThe evidence suggests that all the included vaccines are effective in preventing COVID-19. The mRNA vaccines seem most effective in preventing COVID-19, but viral vector vaccines seem most effective in reducing mortality. Further trials and longer follow-up are necessary to provide better insight into the safety profile of these vaccines.

Project description:Dexmedetomidine (DEX) has been used extensively for patients during surgery. Some studies found that DEX could reduce the incidence of postoperative side effects in laparoscopic surgical patients. However, no firm conclusions were made about it.The authors searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials testing DEX administrated in laparoscopic surgical patients and reporting on postoperative nausea, vomiting, shivering, heart rate, mean arterial pressure (MAP), or extubation time after surgery or within 1 hour in postoperative care unit. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used for RCTs comparing DEX with placebo or no treatment in laparoscopic surgery patients. A protocol for this meta-analysis has been registered on PROSPERO (http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero) and the registration number is CRD42015020226.Fifteen studies (899 patients) were included. DEX could significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative nausea (risk ratio [RR] and 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 [0.28, 0.66], P?<?0.0001), vomiting (RR and 95% CI, 0.36 [0.18, 0.72], P?=?0.004), shivering (RR and 95% CI, 0.19 [0.11, 0.35], P?<?0.00001), rescue antiemetic (RR and 95% CI, 0.18 [0.07, 0.47], P?=?0.0006), and increase the incidence of dry mouth (RR and 95% CI, 7.40 [2.07, 26.48], P?=?0.002) comparing with the control group. In addition, firm conclusions can be made on the results of postoperative nausea according to the TSA. Meta-analysis showed that DEX group had a significantly lower heart rate (mean difference [MD] and 95% CI, -14.21 [-18.85, -9.57], P?<?0.00001) and MAP (MD and 95% CI, -12.35 [-15.28, -9.42], P?<?0.00001) than the control group, and firm conclusions can be made according to the TSA. No significance was observed on extubation time between 2 groups (MD and 95% CI, 0.70 [-0.89, 2.28], P?=?0.39).The results from this meta-analysis indicated that perioperative DEX decreased postoperative nausea and shivering in laparoscopic surgical patients. However, common adverse effects were lower heart rate and MAP. Firm conclusions cannot be made on postoperative shivering, rescue antiemetic, and dry mouth until more RCTs were included.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The comparative efficacy and safety of small molecule and biological agents in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) remain unknown. OBJECTIVES:To compare the efficacy and safety of 14 small molecule and biological agents by network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS:Relevant randomized controlled trials involving biological treatments for PsA were identified by searching PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Clinicaltrials.gov and by manual retrieval, up to June 2018. NMA was conducted with Stata 14.0 based on the frequentist method. Effect measures were odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Intervention efficacy and safety were ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS:A total of 30 studies involving 10,191 adult subjects were included. According to NMA, ? 20% improvement in modifed American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20) response, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI75) response, and serious adverse events rate (SAEs) were observed. In direct comparisons, most of the biologics performed better than placebo in terms of ACR20 response rate and PASI75 response rate. Additionally, all medicines were comparable to placebo in terms of SAEs except secukinumab. In terms of mixed comparisons, with regard to the ACR20 response, etanercept (ETN) and infliximab (IFX) were more effective than golimumab (GOL), with ORs of 3.33 (95% CI: 1.17-9.48) and 1.24 (95% CI: 0.61-2.52), respectively. For PASI75 response, IFX was superior to certolizumab pegol (OR?=?10.08, 95% CI: 1.54-75.48). In addition, these medicines were comparable to each other in terms of SAEs. ETN and IFX were shown to have the most favorable SUCRA for achieving improved ACR20 and PASI75 responses, respectively, while ABT-122 exhibited the best safety according to the SUCRA for SAEs. Considering both the efficacy (ACR20, PASI75) and safety (SAEs), GOL, ETN, and IFX are the top 3 treatments. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS:Direct and indirect comparisons and integrated results suggested that the 3 anti- tumor necrosis factor -? biologics (GOL, ETN, and IFX) can be considered the best treatments for PsA after comprehensive consideration of efficacy and safety.

Dataset Information

Vasoactive Agents for Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Mixed Treatment Comparison Network Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Publications

Vasoactive Agents for Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Mixed Treatment Comparison Network Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets