RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are commonly used to treat COVID-19 patients with hypoxemia, and clinicians have adjusted the corticosteroid intensity on the basis of clinical needs. However, neither the optimal dose nor the duration of treatment has been recommended. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether cumulative doses of corticosteroids, measured as dexamethasone-equivalent doses over the first 14 days, impact outcomes in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 pneumonia patients admitted between April 1st, 2020, and September 30th, 2021. The study focused on the type and dose of corticosteroid administered during the initial 14 days, clinical outcomes, and complications. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Among 271 patients, the mean cumulative dexamethasone-equivalent dose was 158 (119.9-197.25) mg in survivors and 185 (131.7-222.0) mg in nonsurvivors. Univariate analysis revealed that the cumulative dexamethasone-equivalent dose was a risk factor for in-hospital mortality. However, this association did not hold true in the multivariate analysis. After the cumulative dexamethasone-equivalent dose was categorized into quartiles, the moderate dosage (126.01-165.00 mg) in the second quartile was found to be associated with the lowest in-hospital mortality (16.2%). Higher cumulative dexamethasone-equivalent doses were associated with longer hospital and ICU stays and fewer ventilator-free days (p < 0.001). Doses exceeding 165 mg were associated with an increased risk of hospital-acquired infections (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative dexamethasone-equivalent dose during the first 14 days is not associated with in-hospital mortality in hypoxemic COVID-19 patients. However, higher cumulative doses exceeding 165 mg are associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and secondary hospital-acquired infections.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: the pandemic of COVID-19 has led to clinical complications such as avascular necrosis of the femoral head (AVNFH) associated with the use of corticosteroids. The aim of the study is to report the functional and radiographic results of 13 patients with post-COVID-19 ANFH after decompression using Forage and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: single-center, prospective, uncontrolled clinical study. From April 2020 to September 2021, 13 patients (21 hips) with post-COVID-19 ANFH were treated. All received corticosteroids during infection (average daily dose: 480 mg). Clinical, radiographic and magnetic resonance imaging evaluations were performed; the Ficat classification was applied for the classification of AVNFH. The surgical technique used was decompression with Forage and ACMO. RESULTS: the mean age was 47 years, with a follow-up of 30.4 months. Symptoms appeared with a mean of 4.2 months after COVID-19 infection. Harris score improved from 41.2 ± 5.2 to 86.6 ± 3.4. Radiographic evaluation showed that 14.3% of the sample experienced femoral head collapse and underwent total hip arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: post-COVID-19 ANFH is a clinical entity with rapid progression and different degrees of severity. Decompression with Forage and ACMO seems a promising initial treatment, however, the variable response and the probability of collapse emphasize the importance of long-term follow-up and identification of patients who may require additional interventions.

INTRODUCCIÓN: la pandemia de COVID-19 ha dado lugar a complicaciones clínicas como la necrosis avascular de la cabeza femoral (NAVCF) asociada con el uso de corticoesteroides. El objetivo del estudio es reportar los resultados funcionales y radiográficos de 13 pacientes con NAVCF post-COVID-19, después de la descompresión utilizando Forage y aspirado de células de medula ósea (ACMO). MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: estudio clínico unicéntrico, prospectivo, no controlado. Desde Abril de 2020 hasta Septiembre de 2021, se trataron 13 pacientes (21 caderas) con NAVCF post-COVID-19. Todos recibieron corticoesteroides durante la infección (dosis promedio diaria: 480 mg). Se realizaron evaluaciones clínicas, radiográficas y por resonancia magnética nuclear; se aplicó la clasificación de Ficat para la clasificación de NAVCF. La técnica quirúrgica empleada fue descompresión con Forage y ACMO. RESULTADOS: la edad promedio fue 47 años, con un seguimiento de 30.4 meses. Los síntomas aparecieron con una media de 4.2 meses después de la infección por COVID-19. La escala de Harris mejoró de 41.2 ± 5.2 a 86.6 ± 3.4. La evaluación radiográfica demostró que 14.3% de la muestra experimentó colapso de la cabeza femoral por lo que se les realizó artroplastía total de cadera. CONCLUSIONES: la NAVCF post-COVID-19 es una entidad clínica con rápida progresión y diferentes grados de severidad. La descompresión con Forage y ACMO parece un tratamiento inicial prometedor; sin embargo, la respuesta variable y la probabilidad de colapso, enfatizan la importancia de seguimiento a largo plazo e identificación de los pacientes que puedan requerir intervenciones adicionales.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

¼ Perioperative corticosteroids are strongly recommended for reducing the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting following elective total hip or total knee arthroplasty.¼ Corticosteroids may reduce postoperative pain and opioid requirements. Similarly, corticosteroids appear to have a neutral-to-positive effect on length of stay, venous thromboembolism, mobility, delirium, acute kidney injury, and bone cement implantation syndrome (i.e., decreased length of stay).¼ Perioperative corticosteroids may induce hyperglycemia among both diabetic and nondiabetic patients; however, there is no strong evidence indicating that these transient corticosteroid-induced glycemic derangements may increase the risk of postoperative infectious complications.¼ The dosage and frequency of perioperative corticosteroid administration play a critical role in optimizing postoperative outcomes, with higher doses showing promise in reducing opioid consumption, postoperative pain, and length of stay.¼ The optimal dosage and frequency of corticosteroids remain unclear; however, the perioperative administration of 8 to 16 mg dexamethasone, or equivalent steroid, appears reasonable and safe in most cases.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Systemic corticosteroids have become the standard of care for severe to critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the real-world efficacy and safety outcomes associated with a higher dose of corticosteroids remain uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide, population-based, matched cohort study of severe to critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 between January 2020 and June 2021 in Korea using the National Health Information Database. Patients using systemic corticosteroids were included and high-dose corticosteroid use was defined as a daily mean prescribed dose of more than 6 mg of dexamethasone. We then employed a proportional hazard regression model to identify prognostic factors for 28-day all-cause mortality and conducted a Fine and Gray regression model to assess risk factors for developing COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA). RESULTS: During the study period, 102,304 patients with COVID-19 were screened, 5,754 met the eligibility criteria, and 2,138 were successfully matched. The mean prescribed daily dose was 4.2 mg and 13.4 mg in the standard- and high-dose groups, respectively, and the mean duration of use was not different between the groups. High-dose corticosteroid use independently increased all-cause mortality at 28 days (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-1.76) and 90 days (aHR, 1.63; CI, 1.44-1.85) after admission. Subgroup analysis revealed a statistically significant elevation in the risk of mortality among patients using low-flow or high-flow nasal cannulas, with aHRs of 1.41 and 1.46, respectively. No significant impact of high-dose steroids was observed, even in patients who underwent mechanical ventilation at 28 days (aHR, 1.17; CI, 0.79-1.72). As a safety outcome, high-dose corticosteroid use showed an association with the development of CAPA (aHR, 2.97; 95% CI, 0.94-9.43). CONCLUSION: Among severe to critically ill patients with COVID-19, high-dose corticosteroid use was associated with increased 28-day all-cause mortality and showed a trend toward the development of CAPA.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Lebrikizumab has previously demonstrated efficacy in Phase 3 trials: ADvocate1 and ADvocate2 (as monotherapy), ADhere, and ADhere-J (in combination with topical corticosteroids). Here, the impact of lebrikizumab combined with low- to mid-potency topical corticosteroids on patient-reported outcomes at 16 weeks in Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis is evaluated. Eligible patients (n = 286) were randomized 2:2:3 to receive placebo+ topical corticosteroids, 250 mg lebrikizumab every 4 weeks (LEBQ4W+topical corticosteroids, 500 mg loading dose at baseline), or 250 mg lebrikizumab every 2 weeks (LEBQ2W+ topical corticosteroids, 500 mg loading dose at baseline and Week 2) by subcutaneous injection. All PRO endpoints for the study were met; patients in the lebrikizumab in combination with topical corticosteroids groups demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements compared with placebo in combination with topical corticosteroids in Skin Pain NRS, DLQI, POEM, WPAI-AD, and SCORAD scales. Lebrikizumab combined with topical corticosteroids compared with placebo+topical corticosteroids improved patient-reported outcomes in Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Although frequently prescribed for frozen shoulder, it is not known if corticosteroid injections improve the course of frozen shoulder. This study aimed to assess the disease-modifying effects of an intra-articular corticosteroid administration at the freezing phase of frozen shoulder. Twenty-four Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into four groups. Their unilateral shoulders were immobilized for the first 3 days in all groups, followed by an intra-articular corticosteroid injection in Group A, an injection and the cessation of immobilization in Group B, no further intervention in Group C, and the cessation of immobilization in Group D. All rats were sacrificed in Week 3 of study, at which point the passive shoulder abduction angles were measured and the axillary recess tissues were retrieved for histological and Western blot analyses. The passive shoulder abduction angles at the time of sacrifice were 138° ± 8° (Group A), 146° ± 5° (Group B), 95° ± 11° (Group C), 132° ± 8° (Group D), and 158° ± 2° (Control). The histological assessments and Western blots showed greater fibrosis and inflammation in the groups that did not receive the corticosteroid injection (Groups C and D) compared to the corticosteroid-injected groups (Groups A and B). These findings demonstrate the anti-inflammatory and disease-modifying effects of corticosteroid injections during the freezing phase of frozen shoulder in an animal model.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma can be treated with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) delivered by low climate impact inhalers (dry powder inhalers) or high climate impact inhalers (pressurized metered-dose inhalers containing potent greenhouse gasses). ICS delivered with greenhouse gasses is prescribed ubiquitously and frequent despite limited evidence of superior effect. Our aim was to examine the beneficial and harmful events of ICS delivered by low and high climate impact inhalers in patients with asthma and COPD. METHODS: Nationwide retrospective cohort study of Danish outpatients with asthma and COPD treated with ICS delivered by low and high climate impact inhalers. Patients were propensity score matched by the following variables; age, gender, tobacco exposure, exacerbations, dyspnoea, body mass index, pulmonary function, ICS dose and entry year. The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalisation with exacerbations and all-cause mortality analysed by Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Of the 10,947 patients with asthma and COPD who collected ICS by low or high climate impact inhalers, 2,535 + 2,535 patients were propensity score matched to form the population for the primary analysis. We found no association between high climate impact inhalers and risk of exacerbations requiring hospitalization and all-cause mortality (HR 1.02, CI 0.92-1.12, p = 0.77), nor on pneumonia, exacerbations requiring hospitalization, all-cause mortality, or all-cause admissions. Delivery with high climate impact inhalers was associated with a slightly increased risk of exacerbations not requiring hospitalization (HR 1.10, CI 1.01-1.21, p = 0.03). Even with low lung function there was no sign of a superior effect of high climate impact inhalers. CONCLUSION: Low climate impact inhalers were not inferior to high climate impact inhalers for any risk analysed in patients with asthma and COPD.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction: It is known that the use of inhaled corticosteroids increases the incidence of pneumonia in patients followed up with the diagnosis of chronic asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study aimed to investigate the contribution of inhaled steroid use to pneumonia severity and mortality in cases with COVID-19 pneumonia. Materials and Methods: The study is a retrospective, observational study. Among the cases admitted to the pandemic clinic, patients diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia were included. The plan was to compare cases who received and did not receive inhaled corticosteroids in terms of pneumonia severity and mortality. In order to define risk factors for mortality, univariate and multivariable negative binomial regression analyses were performed. Result: In our study, it was observed that n= 540 (75%) cases did not receive inhaled corticosteroids (group 1), and 180 (25%) cases used inhaled corti costeroids (group 2). Group 1 and group 2 cases were compared in terms of pneumonia severity with no significant difference between the two groups (p= 0.11). Then, risk factors affecting mortality in all cases were examined with univariate analyses. Increasing age, applying mechanical ventilation, having severe pneumonia, having interstitial lung disease, and applying prone position were found to be statistically significant factors in mortality (p < 0.05). Conclusions: In conclusion, in our study, it was observed that the use of inhaled corticosteroids did not increase the severity of pneumonia and mortality. It was thought that the treatment they received could be continued when the patients treated with inhaled corticosteroids due to asthma and COPD had COVID-19 pneumonia.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study aims to investigate the efficacy of five analgesic strategies combined with conventional physiotherapy program (CPT) in managing chronic shoulder pain. METHODS: Two authors independently screened studies, extracted data using a pre-formatted chart, and assessed bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A network meta-analysis was performed by the Stata 17.0 and R 4.3.2 software. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies with 862 subjects were identified. These analgesic strategies included extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT), suprascapular nerve block (SSNB), corticosteroid injection (CSI), hyaluronic acid injection (HAI), and kinesio taping (KT). ESWT plus CPT was the most efficient intervention in alleviating pain intensity and improving physical function. SSNB plus CPT was the optimal intervention in improving shoulder mobility. Compared to CPT alone, CSI + CPT only significantly improved the SPADI total score, but showed no difference in pain intensity or shoulder mobility. HAI + CPT showed no significant difference in improving pain intensity, physical function, or shoulder mobility compared to CPT alone. Adding KT to CPT did not yield additional benefits in improving shoulder mobility. CONCLUSION: Overall, in managing chronic shoulder pain, ESWT + CPT was the most effective intervention for reducing pain intensity and improving physical function. SSNB + CPT was optimal for enhancing shoulder mobility. Future rigorous clinical trials with larger sample sizes and higher methodological rigor are strongly required to confirm the current results.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Acquired hemophilia A, a rare condition resulting in spontaneous bleeding without prior bleeding disorders, arises due to autoantibody-mediated inhibition of coagulation factor VIII and is typically associated with autoimmune, neoplastic, drug, or obstetric factors. We present the case of a 31-year-old woman with bullous pemphigoid, managed with corticosteroids since 2013, who presented spontaneous hemorrhagic manifestations. Upon admission, laboratory tests revealed hypochromic microcytic anemia, prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time, and a factor VIII level < 1%, indicative of acquired hemophilia A. Further assessments showed elevated Ristocetin cofactor activity, von Willebrand factor antigen, and a factor VIII inhibitor level of 665 BU. This underscores the importance of considering acquired hemophilia A in autoimmune dermatological conditions like bullous pemphigoid, highlighting the association between autoimmune disorders and coagulation abnormalities, particularly in cases of spontaneous hemorrhagic events.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Eczema (atopic dermatitis) is the most burdensome skin condition worldwide and cannot currently be prevented or cured. Topical anti-inflammatory treatments are used to control eczema symptoms, but there is uncertainty about the relative effectiveness and safety of different topical anti-inflammatory treatments. OBJECTIVES: To compare and rank the efficacy and safety of topical anti-inflammatory treatments for people with eczema using a network meta-analysis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and trial registries on 29 June 2023, and checked the reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included within-participant or between-participant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people of any age with eczema of any severity, but excluded trials in clinically infected eczema, seborrhoeic eczema, contact eczema, or hand eczema. We included topical anti-inflammatory treatments used for at least one week, compared with another anti-inflammatory treatment, no treatment, or vehicle/placebo. Vehicle is a 'carrier system' for an active pharmaceutical substance, which may also be used on its own as an emollient for dry skin. We excluded trials of topical antibiotics used alone, complementary therapies, emollients used alone, phototherapy, wet wraps, and systemic treatments. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Primary outcomes were patient-reported eczema symptoms, clinician-reported eczema signs and investigator global assessment. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, long-term control of eczema, withdrawal from treatment/study, and local adverse effects (application-site reactions, pigmentation changes and skin thinning/atrophy were identified as important concerns through patient and public involvement). We used CINeMA to quantify our confidence in the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included 291 studies involving 45,846 participants with the full spectrum of eczema severity, mainly conducted in high-income countries in secondary care settings. Most studies included adults, with only 31 studies limited to children aged < 12 years. Studies usually included male and female participants, multiple ethnic groups but predominantly white populations. Most studies were industry-funded (68%) or did not report their funding sources/details. Treatment duration and trial participation were a median of 21 and 28 days (ranging from 7 days to 5 years), respectively. Interventions used were topical corticosteroids (TCS) (172), topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) (134), phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors (55), janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (30), aryl hydrocarbon receptor activators (10), or other topical agents (21). Comparators included vehicle (170) or other anti-inflammatory treatments. The risk of bias was high in 242 of the 272 (89.0%) trials contributing to data analyses, most commonly due to concerns about selective reporting. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was only possible for short-term outcomes. Patient-reported symptoms NMA of 40 trials (6482 participants) reporting patient-reported symptoms as a binary outcome ranked tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 6.27, 95% CI 1.19 to 32.98), potent TCS (OR 5.99, 95% CI 2.83 to 12.69), and ruxolitinib 1.5% (OR 5.64, 95% CI 1.26 to 25.25) as the most effective, all with low confidence. Mild TCS, roflumilast 0.15%, and crisaborole 2% were the least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and was more effective than mild TCI and PDE-4 inhibitors. NMA of 29 trials (3839 participants) reporting patient-reported symptoms as a continuous outcome ranked very potent TCS (SMD -1.99, 95% CI -3.25 to -0.73; low confidence) and tacrolimus 0.03% (SMD -1.57, 95% CI -2.42 to -0.72; moderate confidence) the highest. Direct information for tacrolimus 0.03% was based on one trial of 60 participants at high risk of bias. Roflumilast 0.15%, delgocitinib 0.25% or 0.5%, and tapinarof 1% were the least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and JAK inhibitors and mild/moderate TCS was less effective than mild TCI. A further 50 trials (9636 participants) reported patient-reported symptoms as a continuous outcome but could not be included in NMA. Clinician-reported signs NMA of 32 trials (4121 participants) reported clinician signs as a binary outcome and ranked potent TCS (OR 8.15, 95% CI 4.99, 13.57), tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 8.06, 95% CI 3.30, 19.67), ruxolitinib 1.5% (OR 7.72, 95% CI 4.92, 12.10), and delgocitinib 0.5% (OR 7.61, 95% CI 3.72, 15.58) as most effective, all with moderate confidence. Mild TCS, roflumilast 0.15%, crisaborole 2%, and tapinarof 1% were the least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS more effective than potent TCI, mild TCI, JAK inhibitors, PDE-4 inhibitors; and mild TCS and PDE-4 inhibitors had similar effectiveness. NMA of 49 trials (5261 participants) reported clinician signs as a continuous outcome and ranked tacrolimus 0.03% (SMD -2.69, 95% CI -3.36, -2.02) and very potent TCS (SMD -1.87, 95% CI -2.69, -1.05) as most effective, both with moderate confidence; roflumilast 0.15%, difamilast 0.3% and tapinarof 1% were ranked as least effective. Direct information for tacrolimus 0.03% was based on one trial in 60 participants with a high risk of bias. For some sensitivity analyses, potent TCS, tacrolimus 0.1%, ruxolitinib 1.5%, delgocitinib 0.5% and delgocitinib 0.25% became some of the most effective treatments. Class-level analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and JAK inhibitors, and moderate/mild TCS was more effective than mild TCI. A further 100 trials (22,814 participants) reported clinician signs as a continuous outcome but could not be included in NMA. Investigator Global Assessment NMA of 140 trials (23,383 participants) reported IGA as a binary outcome and ranked ruxolitinib 1.5% (OR 9.34, 95% CI 4.8, 18.18), delgocitinib 0.5% (OR 10.08, 95% CI 2.65, 38.37), delgocitinib 0.25% (OR 6.87, 95% CI 1.79, 26.33), very potent TCS (OR 8.34, 95% CI 4.73, 14.67), potent TCS (OR 5.00, 95% CI 3.80, 6.58), and tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 5.06, 95% CI 3.59, 7.13) as most effective, all with moderate confidence. Mild TCS, crisaborole 2%, pimecrolimus 1%, roflumilast 0.15%, difamilast 0.3% and 1%, and tacrolimus 0.03% were the least effective. In a sensitivity analysis of low risk of bias information (12 trials, 1639 participants), potent TCS, delgocitinib 0.5% and delgocitinib 0.25% were most effective, and pimecrolimus 1%, roflumilast 0.15%, difamilast 1% and difamilast 0.3% least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and JAK inhibitors and were more effective than PDE-4 inhibitors; mild/moderate TCS were less effective than potent TCI and had similar effectiveness to mild TCI. Longer-term outcomes over 6 to 12 months showed a possible increase in effectiveness for pimecrolimus 1% versus vehicle (4 trials, 2218 participants) in a pairwise meta-analysis, and greater treatment success with mild/moderate TCS than pimecrolimus 1% (based on 1 trial of 2045 participants). Local adverse effects NMA of 83 trials (18,992 participants, 2424 events) reporting application-site reactions ranked tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.53, 3.17; moderate confidence), crisaborole 2% (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.18, 3.81; high confidence), tacrolimus 0.03% (OR 1.51, 95%CI 1.10, 2.09; low confidence), and pimecrolimus 1% (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.01, 2.04; low confidence) as most likely to cause site reactions. Very potent, potent, moderate, and mild TCS were least likely to cause site reactions. NMA of eight trials (1786 participants, 3 events) reporting pigmentation changes found no evidence for increased pigmentation changes with TCS and crisaborole 2%, with low confidence for mild, moderate or potent TCS and moderate confidence for crisaborole 2%. NMA of 25 trials (3691 participants, 36 events) reporting skin thinning found no evidence for increased skin thinning with short-term (median 3 weeks, range 1-16 weeks) use of mild TCS (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.12, 4.31), moderate TCS (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.16, 5.33), potent TCS (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.21, 4.43) or very potent TCS (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.31, 2.49), all with low confidence. Longer-term outcomes over 6 to 60 months showed increased skin thinning with mild to potent TCS versus TCI (3 trials, 4069 participants, 6 events with TCS). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Potent TCS, JAK inhibitors and tacrolimus 0.1% were consistently ranked as amongst the most effective topical anti-inflammatory treatments for eczema and PDE-4 inhibitors as amongst the least effective. Mild TCS and tapinarof 1% were ranked amongst the least effective treatments in three of five efficacy networks. TCI and crisaborole 2% were ranked most likely to cause local application-site reactions and TCS least likely. We found no evidence for increased skin thinning with short-term TCS but an increase with longer-term TCS.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: A combination of self-reported questionnaire and administrative data could potentially enhance ascertainment of outcomes and alleviate the limitations of both in follow up studies. However, it is uncertain how access to only one of these data sources to assess outcomes impact study findings. Therefore, this study aimed to determine whether the study findings would be altered if the outcomes were assessed by different data sources alone or in combination. METHODS: At 50-year follow-up of participants in a randomized trial, we assessed the effect of antenatal betamethasone exposure on the diagnosis of diabetes, pre-diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, mental health disorders, and asthma using a self-reported questionnaire, administrative data, a combination of both, or any data source, with or without adjudication by an expert panel of five clinicians. Differences between relative risks derived from each data source were calculated using the Bland-Altman approach. RESULTS: There were 424 participants (46% of those eligible, aged 49 years, SD 1, 50% male). There were no differences in study outcomes between participants exposed to betamethasone and those exposed to placebo when the outcomes were assessed using different data sources. When compared to the study findings determined using adjudicated outcomes, the mean difference (limits of agreement) in relative risks derived from other data sources were: self-reported questionnaires 0.02 (-0.35 to 0.40), administrative data 0.06 (-0.32 to 0.44), both questionnaire and administrative data 0.01 (-0.41 to 0.43), and any data source, 0.01 (-0.08 to 0.10). CONCLUSION: Utilizing a self-reported questionnaire, administrative data, both questionnaire and administrative data, or any of these sources for assessing study outcomes had no impact on the study findings compared with when study outcomes were assessed using adjudicated outcomes.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Uveitis leads to blindness in 10-15% of all cases in industrialized nations. The prevalence varies depending on the literature, ranging from 9 to 730 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. Local and systemic steroid applications, along with treatment involving immunomodulators, are the primary treatment options. In cases of chronic and refractory uveitis, especially with the manifestation of uveitic macular edema, intravitreal corticosteroids can contribute to reduce or completely replace systemic immunomodulatory therapy with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologics or corticosteroids. OBJECTIVE: This review article presents the currently available intravitreal corticosteroid implants used in the treatment of noninfectious uveitis. The indications, effectiveness, and side effect profiles are discussed within the context of the current literature. A total of 6 randomized controlled studies about FAc and DEX implants with more than 100 patients were included in this review. One subgroup analysis from a multicentric randomized study with 315 patients has been included as well. The outcome is discussed in this article. CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety profile of intravitreal corticosteroids in uveitic macular edema have been evaluated in several studies in recent years. In some studies, they have been compared to systemic treatment options. With long-acting corticosteroid implants the number of relapses can be reduced and the time interval between relapses can be prolonged. Short-acting corticosteroid implants represent a treatment option during acute uveitic activity. The adverse effects of corticosteroids can be well-controlled in most cases. In phakic and/or young patients, however, adverse effects (such as cataract development) should be discussed in depth before treatment initiation as most corticosteroids are applied as long-term treatment.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective longitudinal cohort study aimed to explore the best therapeutic regimen and treatment duration of cough variant asthma (CVA) in children. METHODS: A total of 314 children with CVA were divided into receive inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) combined with long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) group, ICS combined with leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) group, ICS monotherapy group and LTRA monotherapy group. All clinical data were statistically analyzed. Logistic regression model was used to compare the advantages and disadvantages of different treatment schemes at each follow-up time point and the best treatment scheme. The Cox proportional hazard regression model based on inverse probability weighting was used to compare the effects of different medication regimens on adverse outcomes with asthma recurrence or progression as the end point. RESULTS: (1) After comprehensive analysis, ICS + LABA group was the preferred control regimen for CVA within 8 weeks. After 8 weeks of diagnosis, the efficacy of ICS group or LTRA group was comparable to that of ICS + LABA group and ICS + LTRA group. (2) The ICS + LABA group showed a significant improvement in cough at an early stage, particularly at 4 weeks; the symptoms of ICS + LTRA and ICS groups were significantly improved at 36 weeks. The LTRA group alone showed significant improvement at 20 weeks. CONCLUSION: ICS + LABA, ICS + LTRA, ICS alone and LTRA alone can effectively treat CVA. ICS + LABA could improve the symptoms most quickly within 8 weeks after CVA diagnosis, followed by ICS + LATR group. After 8 weeks, it can be reduced to ICS alone to control CVA for at least 36 weeks based on the remission of symptoms in children.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a very common clinical syndrome manifested by signs and symptoms of irritation of the median nerve at the carpal tunnel in the wrist. Direct and indirect costs of CTS are substantial, with estimated costs of two billion US dollars for CTS surgery in the USA alone. Local corticosteroid injection has been used as a non-surgical treatment for CTS for many years, but its effectiveness is still debated. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of corticosteroids injected in or around the carpal tunnel for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) compared to surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP. The latest search was 26 May 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised trials of adults with CTS that included at least one comparison group of local corticosteroid injection (LCI) into the wrist and one group of any surgical intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was 1. improvement in symptoms at up to three months of follow-up. Our secondary outcomes were 2. functional improvement, 3. improvement in symptoms at greater than three months of follow-up, 4. improvement in neurophysiological parameters, 5. improvement in imaging parameters, 6. improvement in quality of life and 7. ADVERSE EVENTS: We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven studies involving 569 'hands' (although two studies had unusable data for quantitative analyses). All studies used a one-time LCI as a comparator, using several different types and doses of corticosteroids. In every study, for both surgery and LCI groups, all our primary and secondary outcomes showed improvement from pre- to post-treatment. However, evidence from the combined analysis was too uncertain for us to draw reliable conclusions for the comparison of surgical treatment versus LCI with respect to our primary outcome of symptom relief at up to three months' follow-up (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.61 to 1.88; I2 = 95%; 5 trials, 305 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Findings with respect to secondary outcome measures of symptom relief at greater than three months' follow-up (SMD 0.94, 95% CI -0.31 to 2.19; I2 = 93%; 4 trials, 235 participants), functional improvement at up to three months' follow-up (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.94 to 0.72; I2 = 84%; 3 trials, 215 participants) and functional improvement at greater than three months' follow-up (SMD 0.19, 95% CI -1.22 to 1.59; I2 = 93%; 3 trials, 185 participants) were also uncertain (very low-certainty evidence) and showed no clear advantage for surgery or LCI. Surgery may improve neurophysiology (median nerve distal motor latency) more than LCI (mean difference (MD) 0.87 ms, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.42; I2 = 72%; 3 trials, 162 participants; low-certainty evidence). Evidence for quality of life and adverse events was also uncertain; quality of life (EuroQol-5D-3L) may be slightly improved after LCI than after surgery (the difference may not be clinically important) (MD 0.07, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.12; 1 trial, 38 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and there may be fewer adverse events with LCI than with surgery (risk ratio (RR) 0.34, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.26; 3 trials, 112 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence comparing LCI to surgery for CTS, either in the short term or up to 12 months' follow-up, is too uncertain for any reliable conclusions to be drawn.

Asunto(s)