ABSTRACT
AIM: Ibuprofen and indomethacin are the preferred drug treatment for patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in preterm neonates. The comparative safety and efficacy of paracetamol as an alternative has not yet been well established. The aim of our study was to define the comparative efficacy and safety of paracetamol versus ibuprofen and indomethacin for PDA. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases on randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and/or the safety of paracetamol versus ibuprofen and/or indomethacin and meta-analysed the available data. RESULTS: There were 1718 neonates from 20 eligible studies. Paracetamol did not differ from ibuprofen or indomethacin regarding the primary (odds ratio [OR]: 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-1.26, P-value: 0.650, when compared to ibuprofen, and OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.20-3.02, P-value: 0.716, when compared to indomethacin) and overall (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.82-1.66, P-value: 0.394, when compared to ibuprofen, and OR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.58-2.15, P-value: 0.733, when compared to indomethacin) PDA closure rates. Paracetamol resulted in significantly reduced risk of oliguria and a tendency towards less gastrointestinal bleeding. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference between paracetamol and ibuprofen or indomethacin in the PDA closure rates. However, paracetamol caused fewer adverse effects.
Subject(s)
Ductus Arteriosus, Patent , Acetaminophen/adverse effects , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/adverse effects , Ductus Arteriosus, Patent/chemically induced , Ductus Arteriosus, Patent/drug therapy , Humans , Ibuprofen/adverse effects , Indomethacin/adverse effects , Infant, Low Birth Weight , Infant, Newborn , Infant, Premature , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
The serpent is the most popular representative symbol of medicine. The two main figures commonly used are the rod of Asclepius and the caduceus. Much controversy exists in the literature on whether the caduceus is a false symbol for medicine or not. The history of how these depictions came to be ambassadors of the medical science is elusive to many physicians. Scholars suggest that the origin of this false belief dates back to 1902, when the US Army Medical Corps first incorporated the caduceus as its symbol. This current essay is an attempt to discover and interpret how the snake came to be part of the rod of Asclepius and the caduceus, and constitute the symbol of medicine in our days. It is widely accepted that a doctor's obligation is not only in healing the ill, but the task that is bestowed upon him is more complex. Therefore, one should be considered more of a physician rather than simply a doctor.
