Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 30
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 14(5): e078053, 2024 May 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38816049

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review with meta-analyses of randomised trials evaluated the preventive effects of vitamin A supplements versus placebo or no intervention on clinically important outcomes, in people of any age. METHODS: We searched different electronic databases and other resources for randomised clinical trials that had compared vitamin A supplements versus placebo or no intervention (last search 16 April 2024). We used Cochrane methodology. We used the random-effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs), with 95% CIs. We analysed individually and cluster randomised trials separately. Our primary outcomes were mortality, adverse events and quality of life. We assessed risks of bias in the trials and used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We included 120 randomised trials (1 671 672 participants); 105 trials allocated individuals and 15 allocated clusters. 92 trials included children (78 individually; 14 cluster randomised) and 28 adults (27 individually; 1 cluster randomised). 14/105 individually randomised trials (13%) and none of the cluster randomised trials were at overall low risk of bias. Vitamin A did not reduce mortality in individually randomised trials (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; I²=32%; p=0.19; 105 trials; moderate certainty), and this effect was not affected by the risk of bias. In individually randomised trials, vitamin A had no effect on mortality in children (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.04; I²=24%; p=0.28; 78 trials, 178 094 participants) nor in adults (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.13; I²=24%; p=0.27; 27 trials, 61 880 participants). Vitamin A reduced mortality in the cluster randomised trials (0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93; I²=66%; p=0.0008; 15 trials, 14 in children and 1 in adults; 364 343 participants; very low certainty). No trial reported serious adverse events or quality of life. Vitamin A slightly increased bulging fontanelle of neonates and infants. We are uncertain whether vitamin A influences blindness under the conditions examined. CONCLUSIONS: Based on moderate certainty of evidence, vitamin A had no effect on mortality in the individually randomised trials. Very low certainty evidence obtained from cluster randomised trials suggested a beneficial effect of vitamin A on mortality. If preventive vitamin A programmes are to be continued, supporting evidence should come from randomised trials allocating individuals and assessing patient-meaningful outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018104347.


Subject(s)
Dietary Supplements , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Vitamin A , Humans , Vitamin A/administration & dosage , Vitamin A/therapeutic use , Primary Prevention/methods , Secondary Prevention/methods , Quality of Life , Vitamins/therapeutic use , Vitamins/administration & dosage
2.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 3: CD014944, 2024 03 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38517086

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The sphincter of Oddi comprises a muscular complex encircling the distal part of the common bile duct and the pancreatic duct regulating the outflow from these ducts. Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction refers to the abnormal opening and closing of the muscular valve, which impairs the circulation of bile and pancreatic juices. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of any type of endoscopic sphincterotomy compared with a placebo drug, sham operation, or any pharmaceutical treatment, administered orally or endoscopically, alone or in combination, or a different type of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. SEARCH METHODS: We used extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 16 May 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials assessing any type of endoscopic sphincterotomy versus placebo drug, sham operation, or any pharmaceutical treatment, alone or in combination, or a different type of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults diagnosed with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, irrespective of year, language of publication, format, or outcomes reported. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods and Review Manager to prepare the review. Our primary outcomes were: proportion of participants without successful treatment; proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events; and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were: all-cause mortality; proportion of participants with one or more non-serious adverse events; length of hospital stay; and proportion of participants without improvement in liver function tests. We used the outcome data at the longest follow-up and the random-effects model for our primary analyses. We assessed the risk of bias of the included trials using RoB 2 and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We planned to present the results of time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HR). We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomised clinical trials, including 433 participants. Trials were published between 1989 and 2015. The trial participants had sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Two trials were conducted in the USA, one in Australia, and one in Japan. One was a multicentre trial conducted in seven US centres, and the remaining three were single-centre trials. One trial used a two-stage randomisation, resulting in two comparisons. The number of participants in the four trials ranged from 47 to 214 (median 86), with a median age of 45 years, and the mean proportion of males was 49%. The follow-up duration ranged from one year to four years after the end of treatment. All trials assessed one or more outcomes of interest to our review. The trials provided data for the comparisons and outcomes below, in conformity with our review protocol. The certainty of evidence for all the outcomes was very low. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham may have little to no effect on treatment success (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.66; 3 trials, 340 participants; follow-up range 1 to 4 years); serious adverse events (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.46; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), health-related quality of life (Physical scale) (MD -1.00, 95% CI -3.84 to 1.84; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), health-related quality of life (Mental scale) (MD -1.00, 95% CI -4.16 to 2.16; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), and no improvement in liver function test (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.26; 1 trial, 47 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilation Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilationmay have little to no effect on serious adverse events (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.15; 1 trial, 91 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy may have little to no effect on treatment success (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.31; 1 trial, 99 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Funding One trial did not provide any information on sponsorship; one trial was funded by a foundation (the National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, NIDDK), and two trials seemed to be funded by the local health institutes or universities where the investigators worked. We did not identify any ongoing randomised clinical trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low-certainty evidence from the trials included in this review, we do not know if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham or versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy increases, reduces, or makes no difference to the number of people with treatment success; if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham or versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilation increases, reduces, or makes no difference to serious adverse events; or if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham improves, worsens, or makes no difference to health-related quality of life and liver function tests in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Evidence on the effect of endoscopic sphincterotomy compared with sham, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation,or dual endoscopic sphincterotomyon all-cause mortality, non-serious adverse events, and length of hospital stay is lacking. We found no trials comparing endoscopic sphincterotomy versus a placebo drug or versus any other pharmaceutical treatment, alone or in combination. All four trials were underpowered and lacked trial data on clinically important outcomes. We lack randomised clinical trials assessing clinically and patient-relevant outcomes to demonstrate the effects of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.


Subject(s)
Sphincter of Oddi Dysfunction , Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Quality of Life , Sphincter of Oddi Dysfunction/surgery , Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
3.
Int J Mol Sci ; 24(19)2023 Sep 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37833946

ABSTRACT

Along with the known risk factors of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) constituting metabolic syndrome (MS), the gut microbiome and some of its metabolites, in particular trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO), are actively discussed. A prolonged stay under natural hypoxic conditions significantly and multi-directionally changes the ratio of gut microbiome strains and their metabolites in feces and blood, which is the basis for using hypoxia preconditioning for targeted effects on potential risk factors of CVD. A prospective randomized study included 65 patients (32 females) with MS and optimal medical therapy. Thirty-three patients underwent a course of 15 intermittent hypoxic-hyperoxic exposures (IHHE group). The other 32 patients underwent sham procedures (placebo group). Before and after the IHHE course, patients underwent liver elastometry, biochemical blood tests, and blood and fecal sampling for TMAO analysis (tandem mass spectrometry). No significant dynamics of TMAO were detected in both the IHHE and sham groups. In the subgroup of IHHE patients with baseline TMAO values above the reference (TMAO ≥ 5 µmol/l), there was a significant reduction in TMAO plasma levels. But the degree of reduction in total cholesterol (TCh), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and regression of liver steatosis index was more pronounced in patients with initially normal TMAO values. Despite significant interindividual variations, in the subgroup of IHHE patients with MS and high baseline TMAO values, there were more significant reductions in cardiometabolic and hepatic indicators of MS than in controls. More research is needed to objectify the prognostic role of TMAO and the possibilities of its correction using hypoxia adaptation techniques.


Subject(s)
Hyperoxia , Metabolic Syndrome , Female , Humans , Cardiometabolic Risk Factors , Prospective Studies , Methylamines/metabolism , Risk Factors , Hypoxia
4.
Bratisl Lek Listy ; 124(8): 622-629, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37218496

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis (IE) is most often caused by bacteria. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this work is the research of the dynamics of the clinical laboratory and instrumental methods of the diagnostics during the period of two decades. METHODS: The data of 241 patients with infective endocarditis (IE) who were treated at the State Clinical Hospital named after Botkin S.P. was included in the research. 121 patients were observed from 2011 till 2020 (the first group) and 120 patients - from 1997 to 2004 (the second test group). These data included age and social structure of pathology, peculiarities of clinical picture, laboratory, and instrumental methods of research, as well as the outcome of the disease. We studied the concentrations of procalcitonin and presepsin in patients hospitalized after 2011. We observed pathomorphism of the modern IE. RESULTS: To discover the bacteriological origin of the disease, we found the diagnostic evaluation of inflammation, procalcitonin, and presepsin activities, using C-reactive protein, important. We observed decrease in the number of general and hospital deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The knowledge of the IE peculiarities during the IE progression is essential for timely diagnosis and more accurate pathology prediction (Fig. 5, Ref. 38). Text in PDF www.elis.sk Keywords: infectious endocarditis, valve apparatus disease, thromboembolic complications, immunocomplex complications, procalcitonin, presepsin.


Subject(s)
Endocarditis, Bacterial , Endocarditis , Humans , Procalcitonin , Endocarditis, Bacterial/diagnosis , Endocarditis, Bacterial/complications , Endocarditis/diagnosis , Endocarditis/complications , Endocarditis/therapy , C-Reactive Protein/analysis , Retrospective Studies , Peptide Fragments , Lipopolysaccharide Receptors
5.
Biomedicines ; 10(3)2022 Feb 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35327372

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and applicability of the "intermittent hypoxic-hyperoxic exposures at rest" (IHHE) protocol as an adjuvant method for metabolic syndrome (MS) cardiometabolic components. A prospective, single-center, randomized controlled clinical study was conducted on 65 patients with MS subject to optimal pharmacotherapy, who were randomly allocated to IHHE or control (CON) groups. The IHHE group completed a 3-week, 5 days/week program of IHHE, each treatment session lasting for 45 min. The CON group followed the same protocol, but was breathing room air through a facial mask instead. The data were collected 2 days before, and at day 2 after the 3-week intervention. As the primary endpoints, systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure at rest, as well as arterial stiffness and hepatic tissue elasticity parameters, were selected. After the trial, the IHHE group had a significant decrease in SBP and DBP (Cohen's d = 1.15 and 0.7, p < 0.001), which became significantly lower (p < 0.001) than in CON. We have failed to detect any pre-post IHHE changes in the arterial stiffness parameters (judging by the Cohen's d), but after the intervention, cardio-ankle vascular indexes (RCAVI and LCAVI) were significantly lowered in the IHHE group as compared with the CON. The IHHE group demonstrated a medium effect (0.68; 0.69 and 0.71 Cohen's d) in pre-post decrease of Total Cholesterol (p = 0.04), LDL (p = 0.03), and Liver Steatosis (p = 0.025). In addition, the IHHE group patients demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in pre-post differences (deltas) of RCAVI, LCAVI, all antropometric indices, NTproBNP, Liver Fibrosis, and Steatosis indices, TC, LDL, ALT, and AST in comparison with CON (p = 0.001). The pre-post shifts in SBP, DBP, and HR were significantly correlated with the reduction degree in arterial stiffness (ΔRCAVI, ΔLCAVI), liver fibrosis and steatosis severity (ΔLFibr, ΔLS), anthropometric parameters, liver enzymes, and lipid metabolism in the IHHE group only. Our results suggested that IHHE is a safe, well-tolerated intervention which could be an effective adjuvant therapy in treatment and secondary prevention of atherosclerosis, obesity, and other components of MS that improve the arterial stiffness lipid profile and liver functional state in MS patients.

6.
PLoS One ; 17(1): e0261641, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35100279

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Peripheral venous cannulation is one of the most common procedures in medicine. It is associated with noticeable pain and apprehension, although in most cases it is performed without any anesthesia due to lack of a painless, cost-effective option, which would provide rapid local anesthesia with subsequent significant reduction in the experienced pain. We conducted an open-label placebo-controlled clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a 2% lidocaine injection using the commercially available microneedle device MinronJet600 (NanoPass Technologies Ltd, Israel) to achieve rapid local anesthesia prior to peripheral venous cannulation. METHODS: One hundred and two subjects were randomly allocated into two groups. In the first group, 100µL of lidocaine hydrochloride (2%) was injected intradermally to subjects using the MicronJet600 device in the left arm (MJ-Lido) and 100µL of saline was injected intradermally using the device in the right arm (MJ-Saline). In the second group, 100µL of lidocaine hydrochloride (2%) was injected using the MicronJet600 device into the left arm (MJ-Lido), with no injection into the right arm of subjects (No pretreatment). In both groups the intradermal injection was performed at the cannulation site prior to insertion of a 18G cannula into a median cubital vein in both arms. As a primary variable, a score of cannulation-induced pain was indicated by subjects using a 100-point visual analog scale immediately after cannulation. As a secondary variable, subjects in Group 2 also indicated their preference to receive the anaesthetic injection with MicronJet600 in the future by using the 5-point Likert scale. Also, as a secondary variable, the duration of skin numbness after lidocaine injection was indicated by performing a superficial pin-prick with a 27G needle at 15, 30 and 45 minutes, at distances of 1, 2 and 3 centimeters from the injection site. RESULTS: A significant pain reduction (11.0-fold) was achieved due to the lidocaine injection compared to the cannulation without any pretreatment (p< 0.005). After the lidocaine injection the anesthesia was effective up to 2 centimeters from the injection site and remained for up to 30 minutes. Eighty percent of subjects from the second group preferred cannulation after the lidocaine injection over cannulation without any pretreatment. No significant side effects were identified. CONCLUSION: Intradermal injection of anaesthetic with Micronjet600 was found to be a safe and effective option for providing rapid local anesthesia for peripheral intravenous cannulation. TRIAL REGIATRATION: The clinical trial was registered, before the patient enrollment began, in the Research Registry publicly accessible database (registration identifier: researchregistry4662). Also, the trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (registration identifier: NCT05108714) after its completion.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Local/instrumentation , Anesthetics, Local/administration & dosage , Lidocaine/administration & dosage , Adolescent , Adult , Anesthesia, Local/methods , Female , Humans , Injections, Intradermal , Male , Middle Aged , Pain Measurement/methods , Placebo Effect , Young Adult
7.
Turk J Gastroenterol ; 32(9): 750-757, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34609304

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Essential phospholipids (EPL) are used as adjuvant treatment in people with fatty liver disease and other chronic liver diseases. A new formulation of EPL paste was developed to improve patient compliance. The study was aimed to assess the safety, patient-reported outcomes, and impact on compliance of the new EPL paste formulation in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) or viral hepatitis. METHODS: The study enrolled 147 patients (48.3% male; mean ± standard deviation (SD) age 44.8 ± 10.5 years) in the intention-to-treat population; 72.8% had NAFLD and 27.9% had viral hepatitis B (HBV) or hepatitis C (HCV). Patients received EPL paste (one 600 mg sachet 3 times daily) for 12 weeks, with 4-, 8-, and 12-week scheduled visits and a 13-week follow-up visit. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated at 4, 8, and 12 weeks compared with baseline using dedicated Likert scales. Compliance was assessed by comparing actual versus prescribed dosing of the EPL. RESULTS: After 12-week treatment with EPL paste, statistically significant improvements were observed in mean ± SD Global Overall Symptom scores (from 4.21 ± 1.09 to 1.87 ± 0.91; P < .01) and overall Gastrointestinal Symptom scores (from 19.91 ± 5.74 to 11.17 ± 3.57; P < .01), compared to baseline scores. Compliance with prescribed essential phospholipid treatment was 99% throughout the 12-week treatment period. CONCLUSION: Essential phospholipids paste had a favorable safety profile associated with improved gastrointestinal symptoms and with high levels of compliance in patients with NAFLD and viral hepatitis.


Subject(s)
Hepatitis B , Hepatitis C , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease , Phosphatidylcholines , Adult , Female , Hepatitis B/drug therapy , Hepatitis C/drug therapy , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease/drug therapy , Phosphatidylcholines/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
8.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 7: CD013157, 2021 07 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34280304

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of non-alcohol-related fatty liver disease (NAFLD) varies between 19% and 33% in different populations. NAFLD decreases life expectancy and increases risks of liver cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and the requirement for liver transplantation. Uncertainty surrounds relative benefits and harms of various nutritional supplements in NAFLD. Currently no nutritional supplement is recommended for people with NAFLD. OBJECTIVES: • To assess the benefits and harms of different nutritional supplements for treatment of NAFLD through a network meta-analysis • To generate rankings of different nutritional supplements according to their safety and efficacy SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until February 2021 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with NAFLD. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) for people with NAFLD, irrespective of method of diagnosis, age and diabetic status of participants, or presence of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods whenever possible and calculated differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HRs), odds ratios (ORs), and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. MAIN RESULTS: We included in the review a total of 202 randomised clinical trials (14,200 participants). Nineteen trials were at low risk of bias. A total of 32 different interventions were compared in these trials. A total of 115 trials (7732 participants) were included in one or more comparisons. The remaining trials did not report any of the outcomes of interest for this review. Follow-up ranged from 1 month to 28 months. The follow-up period in trials that reported clinical outcomes was 2 months to 28 months. During this follow-up period, clinical events related to NAFLD such as mortality, liver cirrhosis, liver decompensation, liver transplantation, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver-related mortality were sparse. We did not calculate effect estimates for mortality because of sparse data (zero events for at least one of the groups in the trial). None of the trials reported that they measured overall health-related quality of life using a validated scale. The evidence is very uncertain about effects of interventions on serious adverse events (number of people or number of events). We are very uncertain about effects on adverse events of most of the supplements that we investigated, as the evidence is of very low certainty. However, people taking PUFA (polyunsaturated fatty acid) may be more likely to experience an adverse event than those not receiving an active intervention (network meta-analysis results: OR 4.44, 95% CrI 2.40 to 8.48; low-certainty evidence; 4 trials, 203 participants; direct evidence: OR 4.43, 95% CrI 2.43 to 8.42). People who take other supplements (a category that includes nutritional supplements other than vitamins, fatty acids, phospholipids, and antioxidants) had higher numbers of adverse events than those not receiving an active intervention (network meta-analysis: rate ratio 1.73, 95% CrI 1.26 to 2.41; 6 trials, 291 participants; direct evidence: rate ratio 1.72, 95% CrI 1.25 to 2.40; low-certainty evidence). Data were sparse (zero events in all groups in the trial) for liver transplantation, liver decompensation, and hepatocellular carcinoma. So, we did not perform formal analysis for these outcomes. The evidence is very uncertain about effects of other antioxidants (antioxidants other than vitamins) compared to no active intervention on liver cirrhosis (HR 1.68, 95% CrI 0.23 to 15.10; 1 trial, 99 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about effects of interventions in any of the remaining comparisons, or data were sparse (with zero events in at least one of the groups), precluding formal calculations of effect estimates. Data were probably because of the very short follow-up period (2 months to 28 months). It takes follow-up of 8 to 28 years to detect differences in mortality between people with NAFLD and the general population. Therefore, it is unlikely that differences in clinical outcomes are noted in trials providing less than 5 to 10 years of follow-up. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about effects of nutritional supplementation compared to no additional intervention on all clinical outcomes for people with non-alcohol-related fatty liver disease. Accordingly, high-quality randomised comparative clinical trials with adequate follow-up are needed. We propose registry-based randomised clinical trials or cohort multiple randomised clinical trials (study design in which multiple interventions are trialed within large longitudinal cohorts of patients to gain efficiencies and align trials more closely to standard clinical practice) comparing interventions such as vitamin E, prebiotics/probiotics/synbiotics, PUFAs, and no nutritional supplementation. The reason for the choice of interventions is the impact of these interventions on indirect outcomes, which may translate to clinical benefit. Outcomes in such trials should be mortality, health-related quality of life, decompensated liver cirrhosis, liver transplantation, and resource utilisation measures including costs of intervention and decreased healthcare utilisation after minimum follow-up of 8 years (to find meaningful differences in clinically important outcomes).


Subject(s)
Dietary Supplements , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease/therapy , Bayes Theorem , Bias , Dietary Supplements/adverse effects , Humans , Network Meta-Analysis , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease/complications , Odds Ratio , Proportional Hazards Models , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
9.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 6: CD013156, 2021 06 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34114650

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of nonalcohol-related fatty liver disease (NAFLD) varies between 19% and 33% in different populations. NAFLD decreases life expectancy and increases the risks of liver cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and requirement for liver transplantation. There is uncertainty surrounding the relative benefits and harms of various lifestyle interventions for people with NAFLD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different lifestyle interventions in the treatment of NAFLD through a network meta-analysis, and to generate rankings of the different lifestyle interventions according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until February 2021 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with NAFLD. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in people with NAFLD, whatever the method of diagnosis, age, and diabetic status of participants, or presence of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We planned to perform a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and to calculate the differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HRs), odds ratios (ORs), and rate ratios (RaRs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) based on an available-participant analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. However, the data were too sparse for the clinical outcomes. We therefore performed only direct comparisons (head-to-head comparisons) with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 59 randomised clinical trials (3631 participants) in the review. All but two trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 33 different interventions, ranging from advice to supervised exercise and special diets, or a combination of these and no additional intervention were compared in these trials. The reference treatment was no active intervention. Twenty-eight trials (1942 participants) were included in one or more comparisons. The follow-up ranged from 1 month to 24 months. The remaining trials did not report any of the outcomes of interest for this review. The follow-up period in the trials that reported clinical outcomes was 2 months to 24 months. During this short follow-up period, clinical events related to NAFLD such as mortality, liver cirrhosis, liver decompensation, liver transplantation, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver-related mortality were sparse. This is probably because of the very short follow-up periods. It takes a follow-up of 8 years to 28 years to detect differences in mortality between people with NAFLD and the general population. It is therefore unlikely that differences by clinical outcomes will be noted in trials with less than 5 years to 10 years of follow-up. In one trial, one participant developed an adverse event. There were no adverse events in any of the remaining participants in this trial, or in any of the remaining trials, which seemed to be directly related to the intervention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effects of the lifestyle interventions compared with no additional intervention (to general public health advice) on any of the clinical outcomes after a short follow-up period of 2 months to 24 months in people with nonalcohol-related fatty liver disease. Accordingly, high-quality randomised clinical trials with adequate follow-up are needed. We propose registry-based randomised clinical trials or cohort multiple randomised clinical trials (a study design in which multiple interventions are trialed within large longitudinal cohorts of participants to gain efficiencies and align trials more closely to standard clinical practice), comparing aerobic exercise and dietary advice versus standard of care (exercise and dietary advice received as part of national health promotion). The reason for the choice of aerobic exercise and dietary advice is the impact of these interventions on indirect outcomes which may translate to clinical benefit. The outcomes in such trials should be mortality, health-related quality of life, decompensated liver cirrhosis, liver transplantation, and resource use measures including costs of intervention and decreased healthcare use after a minimum follow-up of eight years, to find meaningful differences in the clinically important outcomes.


Subject(s)
Life Style , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease/therapy , Bayes Theorem , Bias , Caloric Restriction , Diet, Carbohydrate-Restricted , Diet, Mediterranean , Exercise , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Network Meta-Analysis , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease/complications , Odds Ratio , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Resistance Training , Time Factors
10.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 4: CD013121, 2021 04 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33822357

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% to 95% of people with cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed in about one to three years. There are several different treatments to prevent bleeding, including: beta-blockers, endoscopic sclerotherapy, and variceal band ligation. However, there is uncertainty surrounding their individual and relative benefits and harms. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different treatments for prevention of first variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices in adults with liver cirrhosis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different treatments for prevention of first variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers to December 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis and oesophageal varices with no history of bleeding. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and oesophageal varices with no history of bleeding. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previous bleeding from oesophageal varices and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation or previously received prophylactic treatment for oesophageal varices. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR), and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. We performed the direct comparisons from randomised clinical trials using the same codes and the same technical details. MAIN RESULTS: We included 66 randomised clinical trials (6653 participants) in the review. Sixty trials (6212 participants) provided data for one or more comparisons in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies and those at high risk of bleeding from oesophageal varices. The follow-up in the trials that reported outcomes ranged from 6 months to 60 months. All but one of the trials were at high risk of bias. The interventions compared included beta-blockers, no active intervention, variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy, beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus nitrates, nitrates, beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy, and portocaval shunt. Overall, 21.2% of participants who received non-selective beta-blockers ('beta-blockers') - the reference treatment (chosen because this was the most common treatment compared in the trials) - died during 8-month to 60-month follow-up. Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers, variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy, and beta-blockers plus nitrates all had lower mortality versus no active intervention (beta-blockers: HR 0.49, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.67; direct comparison HR: 0.59, 95% CrI 0.42 to 0.83; 10 trials, 1200 participants; variceal band ligation: HR 0.51, 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.74; direct comparison HR 0.49, 95% CrI 0.12 to 2.14; 3 trials, 355 participants; sclerotherapy: HR 0.66, 95% CrI 0.51 to 0.85; direct comparison HR 0.61, 95% CrI 0.41 to 0.90; 18 trials, 1666 participants; beta-blockers plus nitrates: HR 0.41, 95% CrI 0.20 to 0.85; no direct comparison). No trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, variceal band ligation had a higher number of serious adverse events (number of events) than beta-blockers (rate ratio 10.49, 95% CrI 2.83 to 60.64; 1 trial, 168 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers plus nitrates had a higher number of 'any adverse events (number of participants)' than beta-blockers alone (OR 3.41, 95% CrI 1.11 to 11.28; 1 trial, 57 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, adverse events (number of events) were higher in sclerotherapy than in beta-blockers (rate ratio 2.49, 95% CrI 1.53 to 4.22; direct comparison rate ratio 2.47, 95% CrI 1.27 to 5.06; 2 trials, 90 participants), and in beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation than in beta-blockers (direct comparison rate ratio 1.72, 95% CrI 1.08 to 2.76; 1 trial, 140 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, any variceal bleed was lower in beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation than in beta-blockers (direct comparison HR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.04 to 0.71; 1 trial, 173 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, any variceal bleed was higher in nitrates than beta-blockers (direct comparison HR 6.40, 95% CrI 1.58 to 47.42; 1 trial, 52 participants). The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers, variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy, and beta-blockers plus nitrates may decrease mortality compared to no intervention in people with high-risk oesophageal varices in people with cirrhosis and no previous history of bleeding. Based on low-certainty evidence, variceal band ligation may result in a higher number of serious adverse events than beta-blockers. The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of beta-blockers versus variceal band ligation on variceal bleeding. The evidence also indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in most of the remaining comparisons.


Subject(s)
Esophageal and Gastric Varices/complications , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Liver Cirrhosis/complications , Primary Prevention , Adrenergic beta-Antagonists/adverse effects , Adrenergic beta-Antagonists/therapeutic use , Bias , Combined Modality Therapy/methods , Drug Therapy, Combination , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Humans , Ligation , Network Meta-Analysis , Nitrates/therapeutic use , Portacaval Shunt, Surgical , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Sclerotherapy
11.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 4: CD013155, 2021 04 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33837526

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% to 95% of people with liver cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed within about one to three years after diagnosis. Several different treatments are available, including, among others, endoscopic sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, and balloon tamponade. However, there is uncertainty surrounding the individual and relative benefits and harms of these treatments. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different initial treatments for variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices in adults with decompensated liver cirrhosis, through a network meta-analysis; and to generate rankings of the different treatments for acute bleeding oesophageal varices, according to their benefits and harms. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until 17 December 2019, to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in people with cirrhosis and acute bleeding from oesophageal varices. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only RCTs (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and acutely bleeding oesophageal varices. We excluded RCTs in which participants had bleeding only from gastric varices, those who failed previous treatment (refractory bleeding), those in whom initial haemostasis was achieved before inclusion into the trial, and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS software, using Bayesian methods, and calculated the differences in treatments using odds ratios (OR) and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. We performed also the direct comparisons from RCTs using the same codes and the same technical details. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 52 RCTs (4580 participants) in the review. Forty-eight trials (4042 participants) were included in one or more comparisons in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies and those with and without a previous history of bleeding. We included outcomes assessed up to six weeks. All trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 19 interventions were compared in the trials (sclerotherapy, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues, variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade, somatostatin analogues plus variceal band ligation, nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, no active intervention, sclerotherapy plus variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy, balloon tamponade plus somatostatin analogues, balloon tamponade plus vasopressin analogues, variceal band ligation plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus variceal band ligation, portocaval shunt, sclerotherapy plus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and sclerotherapy plus vasopressin analogues). We have reported the effect estimates for the primary and secondary outcomes when there was evidence of differences between the interventions against the reference treatment of sclerotherapy, but reported the other results of the primary and secondary outcomes versus the reference treatment of sclerotherapy without the effect estimates when there was no evidence of differences in order to provide a concise summary of the results. Overall, 15.8% of the trial participants who received the reference treatment of sclerotherapy (chosen because this was the commonest treatment compared in the trials) died during the follow-up periods, which ranged from three days to six weeks. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.57, 95% CrI 1.04 to 2.41; network estimate; direct comparison: 4 trials; 353 participants) and vasopressin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.70, 95% CrI 1.13 to 2.62; network estimate; direct comparison: 2 trials; 438 participants). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, a higher proportion of people receiving balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy had more serious adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 4.23, 95% CrI 1.22 to 17.80; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 60 participants). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, people receiving vasopressin analogues alone and those receiving variceal band ligation had fewer adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (rate ratio 0.59, 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.96; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 219 participants; and rate ratio 0.40, 95% CrI 0.21 to 0.74; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 77 participants; respectively). Based on low-certainty evidence, the proportion of people who developed symptomatic rebleed was smaller in people who received sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.94; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 105 participants). The evidence suggests considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons where sclerotherapy was the control intervention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone and vasopressin analogues alone (with supportive therapy) probably result in increased mortality, compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, vasopressin analogues alone and band ligation alone probably result in fewer adverse events compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy may result in large increases in serious adverse events compared to sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues may result in large decreases in symptomatic rebleed compared to sclerotherapy. In the remaining comparisons, the evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effects of the interventions, compared to sclerotherapy.


Subject(s)
Esophageal and Gastric Varices/complications , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Liver Cirrhosis/complications , Adult , Bayes Theorem , Bias , Combined Modality Therapy/methods , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/mortality , Humans , Ligation/adverse effects , Network Meta-Analysis , Nitrates/therapeutic use , Odds Ratio , Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Sclerotherapy/adverse effects , Sclerotherapy/methods , Sclerotherapy/mortality , Somatostatin/analogs & derivatives , Vasopressins/therapeutic use
12.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 3: CD013122, 2021 03 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33784794

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% to 95% of people with cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed in about one to three years of diagnosis. Several different treatments are available, which include endoscopic sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, beta-blockers, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and surgical portocaval shunts, among others. However, there is uncertainty surrounding their individual and relative benefits and harms. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different initial treatments for secondary prevention of variceal bleeding in adults with previous oesophageal variceal bleeding due to decompensated liver cirrhosis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different treatments for secondary prevention according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until December 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis and a previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had no previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices, previous history of bleeding only from gastric varices, those who failed previous treatment (refractory bleeding), those who had acute bleeding at the time of treatment, and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR) and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 48 randomised clinical trials (3526 participants) in the review. Forty-six trials (3442 participants) were included in one or more comparisons. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies. The follow-up ranged from two months to 61 months. All the trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 12 interventions were compared in these trials (sclerotherapy, beta-blockers, variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy, no active intervention, TIPS (transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt), beta-blockers plus nitrates, portocaval shunt, sclerotherapy plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus nitrates plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy plus nitrates). Overall, 22.5% of the trial participants who received the reference treatment (chosen because this was the commonest treatment compared in the trials) of sclerotherapy died during the follow-up period ranging from two months to 61 months. There was considerable uncertainty in the effects of interventions on mortality. Accordingly, none of the interventions showed superiority over another. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, variceal band ligation may result in fewer serious adverse events (number of people) than sclerotherapy (OR 0.19; 95% CrI 0.06 to 0.54; 1 trial; 100 participants). Based on low or very low-certainty evidence, the adverse events (number of participants) and adverse events (number of events) may be different across many comparisons; however, these differences are due to very small trials at high risk of bias showing large differences in some comparisons leading to many differences despite absence of direct evidence. Based on low-certainty evidence, TIPS may result in large decrease in symptomatic rebleed than variceal band ligation (HR 0.12; 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.41; 1 trial; 58 participants). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, any variceal rebleed was probably lower in sclerotherapy than in no active intervention (HR 0.62; 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.99, direct comparison HR 0.66; 95% CrI 0.11 to 3.13; 3 trials; 296 participants), beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy than sclerotherapy alone (HR 0.60; 95% CrI 0.37 to 0.95; direct comparison HR 0.50; 95% CrI 0.07 to 2.96; 4 trials; 231 participants); TIPS than sclerotherapy (HR 0.18; 95% CrI 0.08 to 0.38; direct comparison HR 0.22; 95% CrI 0.01 to 7.51; 2 trials; 109 participants), and in portocaval shunt than sclerotherapy (HR 0.21; 95% CrI 0.05 to 0.77; no direct comparison) groups. Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers alone and TIPS might result in more, other compensation, events than sclerotherapy (rate ratio 2.37; 95% CrI 1.35 to 4.67; 1 trial; 65 participants and rate ratio 2.30; 95% CrI 1.20 to 4.65; 2 trials; 109 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions including those related to beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation in the remaining comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions on mortality. Variceal band ligation might result in fewer serious adverse events than sclerotherapy. TIPS might result in a large decrease in symptomatic rebleed than variceal band ligation. Sclerotherapy probably results in fewer 'any' variceal rebleeding than no active intervention. Beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy and TIPS probably result in fewer 'any' variceal rebleeding than sclerotherapy. Beta-blockers alone and TIPS might result in more other compensation events than sclerotherapy. The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons. Accordingly, high-quality randomised comparative clinical trials are needed.


Subject(s)
Esophageal and Gastric Varices/complications , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Liver Cirrhosis/complications , Network Meta-Analysis , Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic , Secondary Prevention/methods , Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Adult , Bias , Esophageal and Gastric Varices/mortality , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/mortality , Humans , Ligation/adverse effects , Ligation/methods , Liver Transplantation/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Nitrates/therapeutic use , Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic/statistics & numerical data , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Sclerotherapy/adverse effects , Sclerotherapy/mortality
13.
Adv Ther ; 37(11): 4627-4640, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32939691

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The current non-invasive tools for the diagnosis of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) have methodological limitations. We aimed to develop a non-invasive scale to assist in the diagnosis of NAFLD. To achieve our aim, we conducted a secondary analysis of data from a large observational study conducted in Russia. METHODS: This retrospective analysis assessed the frequency of NAFLD in the population of patients in the DIREG_L_06725 study, an epidemiological, observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study performed in 50,145 outpatients from 16 Russian cities. Among the cohort of patients diagnosed with NAFLD, we identified factors associated with the risk of NAFLD. To develop a non-invasive tool for diagnosing NAFLD, we also determined the frequency of steatohepatitis. RESULTS: Our analysis included 48,297 patients; NAFLD was present in 20,281 patients (42.0%). The majority (64.1%) were women (80.3% post-menopause), and 87% had a body mass index (BMI) > 27.0 kg/m2. We developed a fully non-invasive scale (St-index) that showed a specificity of 91.4% for ruling in steatosis, and a sensitivity of 93.8% for ruling out steatosis. Multivariate regression analyses conducted in the subgroups of patients aged ≥ 12 and < 18 years and those with BMI < 25.0 kg/m2 produced area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve values of 0.8243 and 0.7054, respectively. The factors most strongly associated with the development of NAFLD were age > 35 years, presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus, and a waist circumference/height ratio > 0.54. CONCLUSION: Our non-invasive steatosis scale, St-index, can help physicians diagnose NAFLD in high-risk patients in the absence of ultrasound data.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease/diagnosis , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease/epidemiology , Outpatients , Retrospective Studies , Russia/epidemiology , Young Adult
14.
BMJ Open Gastroenterol ; 7(1): e000368, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32337059

ABSTRACT

Objective: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common cause of abnormal results of liver function tests. Earlier research showed that polyenylphosphatidylcholine (PPC) has hepatoprotective effects and thus can be used for the treatment of NAFLD and the prevention of its progression. Accordingly, the aim of this observational study was to evaluate if PPC administered as adjunctive therapy in routine clinical practice can effectively improve liver function tests of NAFLD in Russian patients with associated metabolic comorbidities. Design: A total of 2843 adult patients with newly diagnosed NAFLD, who had a least one of four comorbidities, namely, overweight/obesity, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and hypercholesterolaemia, and who were prescribed 1.8 g/day of PPC as an adjunctive treatment to standard care, were enrolled during 2015-2016. Laboratory data were collected at baseline and 12 and 24 weeks of the study, and included liver function tests (aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT)), fasting plasma glucose, and lipid profile. Results: Overall, 2263 patients (79.6%) had at least two metabolic comorbidities associated with NAFLD, and overweight/obesity was the most common comorbidity reported in 2298 (80.8%) patients. At 24 weeks, there was a significant decrease in liver enzyme levels (all p<0.001 compared with baseline). Across the four comorbidity subgroups, there was a mean drop of ALT levels ranging from 19.7 to 22.0 U/L, AST from 16.9 to 18.4 U/L, and GGT from 17.2 to 18.7 U/L. Similar findings were reported in subgroups with either one, two, three, or four comorbidities, with a significant decrease in liver enzyme levels ranging from 18.4 to 22.4 U/L for ALT, 14.8 to 18.7 U/L for AST, and 15.5 to 19.5 U/L for GGT. Conclusions: Adjuvant treatment with PPC resulted in consistent improvements in liver enzymes in patients with newly diagnosed NAFLD and associated metabolic comorbidities. Trial registration number: NCT00063622.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease , Phosphatidylcholines/therapeutic use , Adult , Comorbidity , Humans , Liver Function Tests , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease/drug therapy , Russia/epidemiology
15.
BMJ Open Gastroenterol ; 7(1): e000341, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32095253

ABSTRACT

Objective: The concept of using naturally occurring compounds such as polyenylphosphatidylcholine (PPC) as an adjunctive therapy to treat non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and alleviate or reverse hepatic steatosis appears a very attractive option for liver protection. We aim to evaluate if PPC adjunctive therapy can effectively improve the ultrasonographic features of NAFLD in routine clinical practice in Russian patients with cardiometabolic comorbidities. Design: This 24-week, observational, prospective study was carried out in 174 medical sites across 6 federal districts of Russia. A total of 2843 adult patients with newly diagnosed NAFLD, who had a least one of four comorbidities, namely overweight/obesity, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypercholesterolaemia, and who received PPC as an adjunctive treatment to standard care, were enrolled. The assessment of liver ultrasonography was qualitative. Results: Overall, 2263 (79.6%) patients had at least two metabolic comorbidities associated with NAFLD, and overweight/obesity was the most common comorbidity reported in 2298 (80.8%) patients. Almost all study participants (2837/2843; 99.8%) were prescribed 1.8 g of PPC administered three times daily. At baseline, the most frequently identified abnormalities on ultrasound were liver hyperechogenicity (84.0% of patients) and heterogeneous liver structure (62.9%). At 24 weeks, a significant (p<0.05) improvement in liver echogenicity and in liver structure was observed in 1932/2827 (68.3%) patients (95% CI 66.6% to 70.1%) and in 1207/2827 (42.7%) patients (95% CI 40.9% to 44.5%), respectively. The analysis of ultrasonographic signs by number of comorbidities revealed similar findings-liver echogenicity improved in 67.2%-69.3% and liver structure in 35.6%-45.3% of patients depending on the number of comorbidities. Conclusion: This study showed that PPC adjunctive therapy may be useful in improving the ultrasonographic features of NAFLD in patients with associated cardiometabolic comorbidities. It also supports evidence regarding the role of PPC in the complex management of NAFLD.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Hypertension , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease , Adult , Comorbidity , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Humans , Hypertension/drug therapy , Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease/diagnostic imaging , Phosphatidylcholines/therapeutic use , Prevalence , Prospective Studies , Workforce
16.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 1: CD013125, 2020 01 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31978256

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Approximately 2.5% of all hospitalisations in people with liver cirrhosis are for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is associated with significant short-term mortality; therefore, it is important to prevent spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in people at high risk of developing it. Antibiotic prophylaxis forms the mainstay preventive method, but this has to be balanced against the development of drug-resistant spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, which is difficult to treat, and other adverse events. Several different prophylactic antibiotic treatments are available; however, there is uncertainty surrounding their relative efficacy and optimal combination. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different prophylactic antibiotic treatments for prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in people with liver cirrhosis using a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different prophylactic antibiotic treatments according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers to November 2018 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis at risk of developing spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis undergoing prophylactic treatment to prevent spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation, or were receiving antibiotics for treatment of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis or other purposes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio, rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. MAIN RESULTS: We included 29 randomised clinical trials (3896 participants; nine antibiotic regimens (ciprofloxacin, neomycin, norfloxacin, norfloxacin plus neomycin, norfloxacin plus rifaximin, rifaximin, rufloxacin, sparfloxacin, sulfamethoxazole plus trimethoprim), and 'no active intervention' in the review. Twenty-three trials (2587 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies, with or without other features of decompensation, having ascites with low protein or previous history of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. The follow-up in the trials ranged from 1 to 12 months. Many of the trials were at high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was low or very low. Overall, approximately 10% of trial participants developed spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and 15% of trial participants died. There was no evidence of differences between any of the antibiotics and no intervention in terms of mortality (very low certainty) or number of serious adverse events (very low certainty). However, because of the wide CrIs, clinically important differences in these outcomes cannot be ruled out. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life or the proportion of people with serious adverse events. There was no evidence of differences between any of the antibiotics and no intervention in terms of proportion of people with 'any adverse events' (very low certainty), liver transplantation (very low certainty), or the proportion of people who developed spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (very low certainty). The number of 'any' adverse events per participant was fewer with norfloxacin (rate ratio 0.74, 95% CrI 0.59 to 0.94; 4 trials, 546 participants; low certainty) and sulfamethoxazole plus trimethoprim (rate ratio 0.19, 95% CrI 0.02 to 0.81; 1 trial, 60 participants; low certainty) versus no active intervention. There was no evidence of differences between the other antibiotics and no intervention in the number of 'any' adverse events per participant (very low certainty). There were fewer other decompensation events with rifaximin versus no active intervention (rate ratio 0.61, 65% CrI 0.46 to 0.80; 3 trials, 575 participants; low certainty) and norfloxacin plus neomycin (rate ratio 0.06, 95% CrI 0.00 to 0.33; 1 trial, 22 participants; low certainty). There was no evidence of differences between the other antibiotics and no intervention in the number of decompensations events per participant (very low certainty). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life or development of symptomatic spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. One would expect some correlation between the above outcomes, with interventions demonstrating effectiveness across several outcomes. This was not the case. The possible reasons for this include sparse data and selective reporting bias, which makes the results unreliable. Therefore, one cannot draw any conclusions from these inconsistent differences based on sparse data. There was no evidence of any differences in the subgroup analyses (performed when possible) based on whether the prophylaxis was primary or secondary. FUNDING: the source of funding for five trials were organisations who would benefit from the results of the study; six trials received no additional funding or were funded by neutral organisations; and the source of funding for the remaining 18 trials was unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low-certainty evidence, there is considerable uncertainty about whether antibiotic prophylaxis is beneficial, and if beneficial, which antibiotic prophylaxis is most beneficial in people with cirrhosis and ascites with low protein or history of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered, employ blinding, avoid postrandomisation dropouts (or perform intention-to-treat analysis), and use clinically important outcomes such as mortality, health-related quality of life, and decompensation events.


Subject(s)
Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Liver Cirrhosis/complications , Peritonitis/etiology , Peritonitis/prevention & control , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Bayes Theorem , Humans , Liver Transplantation , Network Meta-Analysis , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
17.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 1: CD013203, 2020 01 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31978255

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation is considered the definitive treatment for people with liver failure. As part of post-liver transplantation management, immunosuppression (suppressing the host immunity) is given to prevent graft rejections. Immunosuppressive drugs can be classified into those that are used for a short period during the beginning phase of immunosuppression (induction immunosuppression) and those that are used over the entire lifetime of the individual (maintenance immunosuppression), because it is widely believed that graft rejections are more common during the first few months after liver transplantation. Some drugs such as glucocorticosteroids may be used for both induction and maintenance immunosuppression because of their multiple modalities of action. There is considerable uncertainty as to whether induction immunosuppression is necessary and if so, the relative efficacy of different immunosuppressive agents. OBJECTIVES: To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different induction immunosuppressive regimens in adults undergoing liver transplantation through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different induction immunosuppressive regimens according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until July 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in adults undergoing liver transplantation. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults undergoing liver transplantation. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had multivisceral transplantation and those who already had graft rejections. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio (OR), rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) based on an available case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 25 trials (3271 participants; 8 treatments) in the review. Twenty-three trials (3017 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The trials that provided the information included people undergoing primary liver transplantation for various indications and excluded those with HIV and those with renal impairment. The follow-up in the trials ranged from three to 76 months, with a median follow-up of 12 months among trials. All except one trial were at high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was very low. Overall, approximately 7.4% of people who received the standard regimen of glucocorticosteroid induction died and 12.2% developed graft failure. All-cause mortality and graft failure was lower with basiliximab compared with glucocorticosteroid induction: all-cause mortality (HR 0.53, 95% CrI 0.31 to 0.93; network estimate, based on 2 direct comparison trials (131 participants; low-certainty evidence)); and graft failure (HR 0.44, 95% CrI 0.28 to 0.70; direct estimate, based on 1 trial (47 participants; low-certainty evidence)). There was no evidence of differences in all-cause mortality and graft failure between other induction immunosuppressants and glucocorticosteroids in either the direct comparison or the network meta-analysis (very low-certainty evidence). There was also no evidence of differences in serious adverse events (proportion), serious adverse events (number), renal failure, any adverse events (proportion), any adverse events (number), liver retransplantation, graft rejections (any), or graft rejections (requiring treatment) between other induction immunosuppressants and glucocorticosteroids in either the direct comparison or the network meta-analysis (very low-certainty evidence). However, because of the wide CrIs, clinically important differences in these outcomes cannot be ruled out. None of the studies reported health-related quality of life. FUNDING: the source of funding for 14 trials was drug companies who would benefit from the results of the study; two trials were funded by neutral organisations who have no vested interests in the results of the study; and the source of funding for the remaining nine trials was unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on low-certainty evidence, basiliximab induction may decrease mortality and graft failure compared to glucocorticosteroids induction in people undergoing liver transplantation. However, there is considerable uncertainty about this finding because this information is based on small trials at high risk of bias. The evidence is uncertain about the effects of different induction immunosuppressants on other clinical outcomes, including graft rejections. Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered, employ blinding, avoid post-randomisation dropouts (or perform intention-to-treat analysis), and use clinically important outcomes such as mortality, graft failure, and health-related quality of life.


Subject(s)
Immunosuppressive Agents/administration & dosage , Liver Transplantation , Transplantation Immunology , Bayes Theorem , Humans , Immunosuppression Therapy/methods , Network Meta-Analysis , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
18.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 1: CD013123, 2020 01 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31978257

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of people with cirrhosis develop ascites. Several different treatments are available; including, among others, paracentesis plus fluid replacement, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, aldosterone antagonists, and loop diuretics. However, there is uncertainty surrounding their relative efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different treatments for ascites in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different treatments for ascites according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until May 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis and ascites. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and ascites. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio, rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 49 randomised clinical trials (3521 participants) in the review. Forty-two trials (2870 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies, without other features of decompensation, having mainly grade 3 (severe), recurrent, or refractory ascites. The follow-up in the trials ranged from 0.1 to 84 months. All the trials were at high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was low or very low. Approximately 36.8% of participants who received paracentesis plus fluid replacement (reference group, the current standard treatment) died within 11 months. There was no evidence of differences in mortality, adverse events, or liver transplantation in people receiving different interventions compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (very low-certainty evidence). Resolution of ascites at maximal follow-up was higher with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (HR 9.44; 95% CrI 1.93 to 62.68) and adding aldosterone antagonists to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (HR 30.63; 95% CrI 5.06 to 692.98) compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (very low-certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists plus loop diuretics had a higher rate of other decompensation events such as hepatic encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome, and variceal bleeding compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (rate ratio 2.04; 95% CrI 1.37 to 3.10) (very low-certainty evidence). None of the trials using paracentesis plus fluid replacement reported health-related quality of life or symptomatic recovery from ascites. FUNDING: the source of funding for four trials were industries which would benefit from the results of the study; 24 trials received no additional funding or were funded by neutral organisations; and the source of funding for the remaining 21 trials was unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low-certainty evidence, there is considerable uncertainty about whether interventions for ascites in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis decrease mortality, adverse events, or liver transplantation compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis and ascites. Based on very low-certainty evidence, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt and adding aldosterone antagonists to paracentesis plus fluid replacement may increase the resolution of ascites compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement. Based on very low-certainty evidence, aldosterone antagonists plus loop diuretics may increase the decompensation rate compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement.


Subject(s)
Ascites/therapy , Liver Cirrhosis/complications , Network Meta-Analysis , Paracentesis/methods , Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic/methods , Ascites/etiology , Bayes Theorem , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
20.
Turk J Gastroenterol ; 30(11): 964-975, 2019 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31767551

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) and hemodynamic changes are common in cirrhosis. We wanted to examine our hypothesis whether SIBO leads to hemodynamic changes in cirrhosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 50 patients with cirrhosis and 15 healthy controls were enrolled in a pilot prospective study. All participants underwent the lactulose hydrogen breath test for SIBO and echocardiography with a simultaneous assessment of blood pressure and heart rate. Cardiac output and systemic vascular resistance were calculated. RESULTS: Study participants with SIBO had a lower systolic blood pressure and systemic vascular resistance compared to those without SIBO and to healthy controls (110.2±12.3 mmHg vs. 126.2±21.0 mmHg and 121.2±9.8 mmHg; p=0.005 and p=0.011, respectively; 1312±352 dyn•s•cm-5 vs. 1704±424 dyn•s•cm-5 and 1648±272 dyn•s•cm-5; p=0.001 and p=0.006, respectively), but a higher cardiac output (5.38±1.41 l/min vs. 4.52±1.03 l/min and 4.40±0.68 l/min; p=0.034 and p=0.041, respectively) and C-reactive protein (10.5[1.2-16.5] mg/l vs. 2.8[0.6-9.1] mg/l; p=0.028; no comparison with healthy controls). There were no significant differences between patients without SIBO and healthy controls with regard to systolic blood pressure (p=0.554), systemic vascular resistance (p=0.874), and cardiac output (p=0.795). SIBO was associated with vasodilation and hyperdynamic circulation in decompensated cirrhosis (p=0.002; p=0.012), but not in compensated cirrhosis (p=1.000; p=0.474). CONCLUSIONS: SIBO is associated with hyperdynamic circulation and other hemodynamic changes in cirrhosis and may be a principal factor causing these through systemic inflammation.


Subject(s)
Blind Loop Syndrome/physiopathology , Hemodynamics , Liver Cirrhosis/microbiology , Liver Cirrhosis/physiopathology , Adult , Blind Loop Syndrome/etiology , Blood Pressure , Breath Tests , Cardiac Output , Case-Control Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , Vascular Resistance
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...