Entity

Time filter

Source Type


Marti-Carvajal A.J.,Equinox University of Technology, Quito
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) | Year: 2012

Osteomyelitis (both acute and chronic) is one of the most common infectious complications in people with sickle cell disease. There is no standardized approach to antibiotic therapy and treatment is likely to vary from country to country. Thus, there is a need to identify the efficacy and safety of different antibiotic treatment approaches for people with sickle cell disease suffering from osteomyelitis. To determine whether an empirical antibiotic treatment approach (monotherapy or combination therapy) is effective and safe as compared to pathogen-directed antibiotic treatment and whether this effectiveness and safety is dependent on different treatment regimens, age or setting. We searched The Group's Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register, which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearching of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched the LILACS database (1982 to 2 November 2012), African Index Medicus (3 November 2012), ISI Web of Knowledge (3 November 2012) and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (3 November 2012).Date of most recent search of the Group's Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register: 29 October 2012. We searched for published or unpublished randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials. Each author intended to independently extract data and assess trial quality by standard Cochrane Collaboration methodologies, but no eligible randomised controlled trials were identified. This update was unable to find any randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials on antibiotic treatment approaches for osteomyelitis in people with sickle cell disease. We were unable to identify any relevant trials on the efficacy and safety of the antibiotic treatment approaches for people with sickle cell disease suffering from osteomyelitis. Randomised controlled trials are needed to establish the optimum antibiotic treatment for this condition. Source


Marti-Carvajal A.J.,Equinox University of Technology, Quito
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) | Year: 2012

As a consequence of their condition, people with sickle cell disease are at high risk of developing an acute infection of the pulmonary parenchyma called community-acquired pneumonia. Many different bacteria can cause this infection and antibiotic treatment is generally needed to resolve it. There is no standardized approach to antibiotic therapy and treatment is likely to vary from country to country. Thus, there is a need to identify the efficacy and safety of different antibiotic treatment approaches for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia. To determine the efficacy and safety of the antibiotic treatment approaches (monotherapy or combined) for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia. We searched The Group's Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register (25 May 2012), which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearching of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched LILACS (1982 to 27 April 2012), African Index Medicus (1982 to 27 April 2012) and WHO ICT Registry (27 April 2012). We searched for published or unpublished randomized controlled trials. We intended to summarise data by standard Cochrane Collaboration methodologies, but no eligible randomized controlled trials were identified. We were unable to find any randomized controlled trials on antibiotic treatment approaches for community-acquired pneumonia in people with sickle cell disease. The updated review was unable to identify randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of the antibiotic treatment approaches for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia. Randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the optimum antibiotic treatment for this condition. The trials regarding this issue should be structured and reported according to the CONSORT statement for improving the quality of reporting of efficacy and improved reports of harms in clinical research. Triallists should consider including the following outcomes in new trials: number of days to become afebrile; mortality; onset of pain crisis or complications of SCD following CAP; diagnosis; hospitalisation (admission rate and length of hospital stay); respiratory failure rate; and number of participants receiving a blood transfusion.There are no trials included in the review and we have not identified any relevant trials up to May 2012. We therefore do not plan to update this review until new trials are published. Source


Marti-Carvajal A.J.,Equinox University of Technology, Quito
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) | Year: 2012

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the most frequent causes of morbidity and mortality in the course of liver cirrhosis. Several treatments are used for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with liver diseases. One of them is vitamin K administration, but it is not known whether it benefits or harms patients with acute or chronic liver disease and upper gastrointestinal bleeding. To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of vitamin K for patients with acute or chronic liver disease and upper gastrointestinal bleeding. We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register (12 June 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (Issue 5 of 12, 2012), MEDLINE (Ovid SP) (1946 to 12 June 2012), EMBASE (Ovid SP) (1974 to 12 June 2012), Science Citation Index EXPANDED (1900 to 12 June 2012), and LILACS (1982 to 19 June 2012). Additional randomised trials were sought from two registries of clinical trials: the Clinical Trials Search Portal of the WHO, and the Metaregister of Controlled Trials. We looked through the reference lists of the retrieved publications and review articles. Randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status for assessment of benefits and harms. Observational studies were considered for assessment of harms only. Data from randomised clinical trials were to be summarised by standard Cochrane Collaboration methodologies. We could not find any randomised trials on vitamin K for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with liver diseases in which we could assess benefits and harms. We could not identify quasi-randomised studies, historically controlled or observational studies in which we could assess harms. This updated review found no randomised clinical trials on the benefits and harms of vitamin K for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with liver diseases. The effects of vitamin K need to be tested in randomised clinical trials. Until randomised clinical trials are conducted to assess the trade off between benefits and harms, we cannot recommend nor refute vitamin K for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with liver diseases. Source


Marti-Carvajal A.J.,Equinox University of Technology, Quito
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) | Year: 2012

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the most frequent causes of morbidity and mortality in the course of liver cirrhosis. Patients with liver disease frequently have haemostatic abnormalities like hyperfibrinolysis. Therefore, antifibrinolytic amino acids have been proposed to be used as supplementary interventions alongside any of the primary treatments for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with liver diseases. To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of antifibrinolytic amino acids for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with acute or chronic liver disease. We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register (11 June 2012), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (2012, Issue 5 of 12), MEDLINE (Ovid SP) (1946 to June 2012), EMBASE (Ovid SP) (1974 to June 2012), Science Citation Index EXPANDED (1900 to June 2012), LILACS (1982 to June 2012), Clinical Trials Search Portal of the WHO (accessed June 18, 2012), and the Metaregister of Controlled Trials (accessed June 18, 2012). We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications. Randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status for assessment of benefits and harms. Observational studies for assessment of harms. Data from randomised clinical trials were to be summarised by standard Cochrane Collaboration methodologies. We could not find any randomised clinical trials assessing antifibrinolytic amino acids for treating upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with acute or chronic liver disease. We could not identify quasi-randomised, historically controlled, or observational studies in which we could assess harms. No randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits and harms of antifibrinolytic amino acids for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with acute or chronic liver disease were identified. The benefits and harms of antifibrinolytic amino acids need to be tested in randomised clinical trials. Unless randomised clinical trials are conducted to assess the trade off between benefits and harms, we cannot recommend nor refute antifibrinolytic amino acids for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with acute or chronic liver diseases. Source


Simancas-Racines D.,Equinox University of Technology, Quito
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews | Year: 2013

The common cold is a spontaneously remitting infection of the upper respiratory tract, characterised by a runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing, cough, malaise, sore throat and fever (usually < 37.8 ° C). The widespread morbidity it causes worldwide is related to its ubiquitousness rather than its severity. The development of vaccines for the common cold has been difficult because of antigenic variability of the common cold virus and the indistinguishable multiple other viruses and even bacteria acting as infective agents. There is uncertainty regarding the efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing the common cold in healthy people. To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people. We searched CENTRAL (2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1948 to January week 1, 2013), EMBASE (1974 to January 2013), CINAHL (1981 to January 2013) and LILACS (1982 to January 2013). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any virus vaccines to prevent the common cold in healthy people. Two review authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted trial data. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or by consulting a third review author. This review included one RCT with 2307 healthy participants; all of them were analysed. This trial compared the effect of an adenovirus vaccine against a placebo. No statistically significant difference in common cold incidence was found: there were 13 events in 1139 participants in the vaccines group and 14 events in 1168 participants in the placebo group; risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 2.02, P = 0.90). No adverse events related to the live vaccine were reported. This Cochrane review has found a lack of evidence on the effects of vaccines for the common cold in healthy people. Only one RCT was found and this did not show differences between comparison groups; it also had a high risk of bias. There are no conclusive data to support the use of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people. We identified the need for well-designed, adequately powered RCTs to investigate vaccines for the common cold in healthy people. Unless RCTs provide evidence of a treatment effect and the trade-off between potential benefits and harms is established, policy-makers, clinicians and academics should not recommend the use of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people. Any future trials on medical treatments for preventing the common cold should assess a variety of virus vaccines for this condition. Outcome measures should include common cold incidence, vaccine safety and mortality related to the vaccine. Source

Discover hidden collaborations