OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the effects of HP eradication on PD symptoms.
METHODS: In this parallel-group, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled, single-center trial, patients with PD with positive HP urea breath test and serology were block randomized (1:1) to receive standard eradication triple therapy or identically appearing placebo capsules for 1 week. Prespecified motor (International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Unified PD Rating Scale [MDS-UPDRS], timed tests, and home-based wearable sensor measurements), nonmotor (Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire and Montreal Cognitive Assessment), and quality-of-life (Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39) outcome measures were assessed at weeks 6, 12, 24, and 52. The primary outcome was the baseline-to-week 12 change in ON medication MDS-UPDRS motor scores. Lactulose-hydrogen breath testing for concomitant small intestinal bacterial overgrowth was performed at baseline and repeated at week 24, together with the urea breath test.
RESULTS: A total of 310 patients were screened for eligibility and 80 were randomly assigned, of whom 67 were included in the full-analysis set (32 treatment group patients, 35 placebo patients). HP eradication did not improve MDS-UPDRS motor scores at week 12 (mean difference 2.6 points in favor of placebo, 95% confidence interval: -0.4 to 5.6, P = 0.089). There was no significant improvement in any motor, nonmotor, or quality-of-life outcome at weeks 12 and 52. Both the full-analysis and per-protocol analyses (based on eradication status) supported these conclusions. Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth status did not influence treatment results.
CONCLUSIONS: HP eradication does not improve clinical outcomes in PD, suggesting that there is no justification for routine HP screening or eradication with the goal of improving PD symptoms. © 2020 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
METHODS AND RESULTS: After the randomized treatment period (5.6 years), participants were invited to participate in 3.1 further years of observation (total 8.7 years). The first co-primary outcome for the entire length of follow-up was the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or CV death [major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE)-1], and the second was MACE-1 plus resuscitated cardiac arrest, heart failure, or coronary revascularization (MACE-2). In total, 9326 (78%) of 11 994 surviving Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE)-3 subjects consented to participate in extended follow-up. During 3.1 years of post-trial observation (total follow-up of 8.7 years), participants originally randomized to rosuvastatin compared with placebo had a 20% additional reduction in MACE-1 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-0.99] and a 17% additional reduction in MACE-2 (95% CI 0.68-1.01). Therefore, over the 8.7 years of follow-up, there was a 21% reduction in MACE-1 (95% CI 0.69-0.90, P = 0.005) and 21% reduction in MACE-2 (95% CI 0.69-0.89, P = 0.002). There was no benefit of BP lowering in the overall study either during the active or post-trial observation period, however, a 24% reduction in MACE-1 was observed over 8.7 years.
CONCLUSION: The CV benefits of rosuvastatin, and BP lowering in those with elevated systolic BP, compared with placebo continue to accrue for at least 3 years after cessation of randomized treatment in individuals without cardiovascular disease indicating a legacy effect.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00468923.
METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, controlled study of 66 eligible neonates with PICCs inserted for the administration of TPN. Infants were randomized to receive TPN containing either 1 IU ml(-1) of heparin (n = 35) or no heparin (n = 31).
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the incidence of blocked catheters between the two groups of infants (heparin: 14.3%; no-heparin: 22.6%, p = 0.4). Although a higher percentage (62.9%) of infants in the heparin group received a complete course of TPN successfully via PICC than those in the no-heparin group (48.4%), the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.3). There were no significant differences in the incidence of catheter-related sepsis, hypertriglyceridaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia, coagulopathy or intraventricular haemorrhage between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: Addition of heparin to TPN fluid was not associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of blocked PICCs. However, the sample size of this study was too small to exclude even rather marked differences between the groups.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty patients for laparoscopic surgery with at least one of the determined risks (nonsmoker, female, previous PONV/motion sickness, or postoperative opioid use) were randomized into either an active or sham group. At the end of surgery, Reletex electrical acustimulation was placed at the P6 acupoint. The active group had grade 3 strength and the sham group had inactivated electrodes covered by silicone. It was worn for 24 h following surgery. PONV scores were recorded.
RESULTS: The active group had significantly shorter durations of surgery and lower PONV incidence over 24 h (35.1% versus 64.9%, P = 0.024) and this was attributed to the lower incidence of nausea (31.4% versus 68.6%, P = 0.006). The overall incidence of vomiting was not significantly different between the groups, but it was higher in the sham group of patients with PONV risk score 3 (23.9%, P = 0.049).
CONCLUSION: In patients at high risk for PONV, P6 acupoint electrical stimulation lowers the PONV incidence by reducing the nausea component. However, this reduction in nausea is not related to increasing PONV risk scores.
METHODS: Studies were identified from 4 electronic databases up to June 2019. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the anesthetic success rate of GG, VA, and MI NBs with IANBs in mandibular premolars and molars with irreversible pulpitis were included. The quality of selected RCTs was appraised using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool. Random-effects meta-analyses of risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and random errors were evaluated by TSA. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS: Five RCTs were included; 2 of them were classified as low risk of bias. No significant difference was observed in the anesthesia success rate compared between GG and IA NBs (RR = 1.10; 95% CI, 0.82-1.48; I2 = 0%). Similarly, no difference was evident between MINB and IANB (RR = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.97-1.36; I2 = 0%). Overall, the cumulative success rates for the 3 anesthetic techniques were low. TSA showed a lack of firm evidence for the results of the meta-analysis between GG NB and IANB. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach evaluation showed that the evidence was of moderate quality for GG NB and IANB compared with low quality for MI and IA NBs. Because only 1 study was available comparing VA NB and IANB, a meta-analysis was not performed. The adverse effect associated with MI NB was swelling, whereas it was prolonged numbness for IANB.
CONCLUSIONS: GG NB and IANB showed similar anesthetic efficacy compared with IANB in mandibular teeth with irreversible pulpitis. However, the success rates for each technique indicate the need for supplemental anesthesia. Further well-designed RCTs evaluating different anesthetic techniques with and without supplemental injection are required to provide stronger evidence.
Methods: Two hundred and ninety-two surgical patients requiring intubation were recruited into this prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled study. Group A patients had their ETTc initially inflated, checked by a cuff pressure gauge, recorded and then set to 25 cmH2O. Group B patients had their ETTc inflated using the pilot balloon palpation method. Patients were then followed up for post-operative sore throat, hoarseness and cough.
Results: The overall incidence of post-operative sore throat was 39.0% versus 75.3% (P < 0.001), hoarseness 6.2% versus 15.1% (P < 0.05) and cough 7.5% versus 21.9% (P < 0.05) in Group A and B, respectively. Group A patients experienced a significant reduction in the incidence and severity of sore throat up to 24 h post-operatively (P < 0.001), hoarseness at the first hour (P = 0.004) and cough at first and 12 h post-operatively (P = 0.002).
Conclusion: Adjusting the ETTc pressure to 25 cmH2O reduces post-operative sore throat, hoarseness and cough compared to pilot balloon palpation method.
METHODS: A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was carried out at two tertiary hospitals. 32 patients diagnosed with chronic rhinosinusitis and had underwent endoscopic sinus surgery were enrolled. The study group received 2 mL of Tualang honey nasal dressing and the control group received nasal dressing with 2 mL of triamcinolone 20 mg/mL as positive control. A 2 cm nasal dressing was placed longitudinally into the middle meatuses of both nasal cavities. Postoperative healing assessments of edema, crusting, secretions, scarring and symptoms were performed at postoperative day 7, 14, 28 and at 3 months using Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 questionnaire and modified Lund-Kennedy scoring system.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences noted in the scores of Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 and modified Lund-Kennedy at Day 7, 14 and 28 (p>0.05) for both groups. At 3rd month, patients in the triamcinolone group had lesser symptoms and better endoscopic findings (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Tualang honey is not as effective as steroid in achieving good wound healing and surgical outcomes in post endoscopic sinus surgery patients. Thus, it is not suitable as a substitute for steroid to reduce symptoms and prevent recurrence of disease.
METHODS: Data were pooled from 2 multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 14-week treatment studies of mirogabalin conducted at ∼350 study sites (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand). Eligible patients in both studies were randomized in a 2:1:1:1 ratio, stratified according to a baseline average daily pain score (ADPS) of <6 or ≥6, to placebo, mirogabalin 15-mg once daily (QD), mirogabalin 10-mg twice daily (BID), or mirogabalin 15-mg BID treatment groups. Safety was assessed based on treatment-emergent adverse events identified from the adverse events collected throughout both studies. The primary efficacy end point of both studies was the change from baseline in ADPS at week 14.
FINDINGS: In total, 1587 patients (824 with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain; 763 with post-herpetic neuralgia) who received at least 1 dose of study drug were analyzed (633 received placebo, 954 treated with mirogabalin). Treatment-emergent adverse events included somnolence (3.8%, 10.8%, 14.5%, and 19.1%) and dizziness (2.7%, 5.7%, 9.1%, and 13.1%) in patients receiving placebo, mirogabalin 15 mg QD, mirogabalin 10 mg BID, and mirogabalin 15 mg BID, respectively. In patients treated with mirogabalin 15 mg QD, 2 (0.6%) of 316 patients discontinued due to somnolence. In the mirogabalin 10-mg BID group, somnolence, edema, and peripheral edema each resulted in 3 (0.9%) of 318 patient discontinuations. In the mirogabalin 15-mg BID group, 6 (1.9%) of 320 patients discontinued due to dizziness and 3 (0.9%) due to somnolence. At week 14, mirogabalin 10 mg BID and 15 mg BID statistically significantly improved ADPS versus placebo, with least squares mean changes (95% CI) of -0.31 (-0.55, -0.08) and -0.63 (-0.86, -0.40). Post hoc analysis showed a statistically significant difference 2 days after administration in the mirogabalin 10-mg and 15-mg BID groups compared with placebo. Female sex, age ≥65 years, and baseline weight <60 kg may influence the safety of mirogabalin, particularly regarding the incidence of somnolence and dizziness, but had no notable impact on efficacy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02318706 and NCT02318719.
IMPLICATIONS: This pooled analysis showed that mirogabalin was efficacious and well-tolerated by Asian patients with peripheral neuropathic pain.
METHODS: Women at their first hospitalization for hyperemesis gravidarum were enrolled on admission to the ward and randomly assigned to receive either 5% dextrose-0.9% saline or 0.9% saline by intravenous infusion at a rate 125 mL/h over 24 hours in a double-blind trial. All participants also received thiamine and an antiemetic intravenously. Oral intake was allowed as tolerated. Primary outcomes were resolution of ketonuria and well-being (by 10-point visual numerical rating scale) at 24 hours. Nausea visual numerical rating scale scores were obtained every 8 hours for 24 hours.
RESULTS: Persistent ketonuria rates after the 24-hour study period were 10 of 101 (9.9%) compared with 11 of 101 (10.9%) (P>.99; relative risk 0.9, 95% confidence interval 0.4-2.2) and median (interquartile range) well-being scores at 24 hours were 9 (8-10) compared with 9 (8-9.5) (P=.73) in the 5% dextrose-0.9% saline and 0.9% saline arms, respectively. Repeated measures analysis of variance of the nausea visual numerical rating scale score as assessed every 8 hours during the 24-hour study period showed a significant difference in favor of the 5% dextrose-0.9% saline arm (P=.046) with the superiority apparent at 8 and 16 hours, but the advantage had dissipated by 24 hours. Secondary outcomes of vomiting, resolution of hyponatremia, hypochloremia and hypokalemia, length of hospitalization, duration of intravenous antiemetic, and rehydration were not different.
CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous rehydration with 5% dextrose-0.9% saline or 0.9% saline solution in women hospitalized for hyperemesis gravidarum produced similar outcomes.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Register, www.controlled-trials.com/isrctn, ISRCTN65014409.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.