A Porcine Study of the Area of Heated Tissue During Hot‐Balloon Ablation: Implications for the Clinical Efficacy and Safety

Author(s):  
Shiro Nakahara ◽  
Yuji Wakamatsu ◽  
Hirotsugu Sato ◽  
Naoto Otsuka ◽  
Reiko Fukuda ◽  
...  
2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong Ryeol Cheong ◽  
Hyun Young Woo ◽  
Jeong Heo ◽  
Ki Tae Yoon ◽  
Dong Uk Kim ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 427-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheng Cui ◽  
Siqi Tu ◽  
Valerie Sia Jie En ◽  
Xiaobei Li ◽  
Xueting Yao ◽  
...  

Background: As the number of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) infected people is greatly increasing worldwide, the international medical situation becomes very serious. Potential therapeutic drugs, vaccine and stem cell replacement methods are emerging, so it is urgent to find specific therapeutic drugs and the best treatment regimens. After the publications on hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with anti- SARS-COV-2 activity in vitro, a small, non-randomized, open-label clinical trial showed that HCQ treatment was significantly associated with reduced viral load in patients with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Meanwhile, a large prophylaxis study of HCQ sulfate for COVID-19 has been initiated in the United States. HCQ offered a promising efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19, but the optimal administration is still being explored. Methods: We used the keyword "hydroxychloroquine" to conduct a literature search in PubMed to collect relevant literature on the mechanism of action of HCQ, its clinical efficacy and safety, pharmacokinetic characteristics, precautions for clinical use and drug interactions to extract and organize information. Results: This paper reviews the mechanism, clinical efficacy and safety, pharmacokinetic characteristics, exposureresponse relationship and precautions and drug interactions of HCQ, and summarizes dosage recommendations for HCQ sulfate. Conclusion: It has been proved that HCQ, which has an established safety profile, is effective against SARS-CoV-2 with sufficient pre-clinical rationale and evidence. Data from high-quality clinical trials are urgently needed worldwide.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindsay M Frerichs ◽  
Deborah I Friedman

Migraine is a common and disabling disorder affecting approximately 1.02 billion people worldwide. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has been identified as playing an important role in the pathophysiology of migraine and several migraine-specific therapies targeting the CGRP ligand or its receptor have been approved since 2018 for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine. This review focuses on the pharmacology, clinical efficacy and safety/tolerability of galcanezumab, an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody approved for the prevention of migraine.


2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (7) ◽  
pp. 030006052110327
Author(s):  
Weihua Liu ◽  
Wenli Yu ◽  
Hongli Yu ◽  
Mingwei Sheng

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and propofol in patients who underwent gastrointestinal endoscopy. Methods Relevant studies comparing dexmedetomidine and propofol among patients who underwent gastrointestinal endoscopy were retrieved from databases such as PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Results Seven relevant studies (dexmedetomidine group, n = 238; propofol group, n = 239) met the inclusion criteria. There were no significant differences in the induction time (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 3.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.95–7.88, I2 = 99%) and recovery time (WMD = 2.74, 95% CI = −2.72–8.19, I2 = 98%). Subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences in the risks of hypotension (risk ratio [RR] = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.25–1.22) and nausea and vomiting (RR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.46–2.22) between the drugs, whereas dexmedetomidine carried a lower risk of hypoxia (RR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.11–0.63) and higher risk of bradycardia (RR = 3.01, 95% CI = 1.38–6.54). Conclusions Dexmedetomidine had similar efficacy and safety profiles as propofol in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.


2020 ◽  
Vol 91 (4) ◽  
pp. 205-210
Author(s):  
Gian Maria Busetto ◽  
Francesco Del Giudice ◽  
Daniele D'Agostino ◽  
Daniele Romagnoli ◽  
Andrea Minervini ◽  
...  

Background: Combination therapy with 5 alpha-reductase inhibitor (5-ARI) and alpha-blocker can be considered as a gold standard intervention for medical management of lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). On the other hand, 5-ARI monotherapy and in particular Finasteride alone is currently getting focus of attention especially due to lack of systematic reviews investigating efficacy outcomes and/or adverse events associated. Objectives: Aim of the present critical review was to analyze current knowledge of clinical efficacy and incidence of adverse events associated with 5-ARI treatment for LUTS/BPH. Materials and methods: A systematic review of clinical trials of the literature of the past 20 years was performed using database from PubMed, Cochrane Collaboration and Embase. A total of 8821 patients were included in this study and inclusion criteria for studies selection were: data from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) focusing their attention on the clinical role of Finasteride monotherapy for symptomatic BPH. Parameters of research included prostate specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume (PV), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPPS), postvoid residual urine (PVR), voiding symptoms of IPSS (voiding IPSS), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), and adverse events (AEs). Results: Overall 12 original articles were included and critically evaluated. Sample sizes of patient actively treated with finasteride varied from 13 to 1524 cases analyzed in a single study. Follow-up after treatments ranged from 3 to 54 months. The effect of finasteride in reducing prostate volume (PV) was moderate (standardized mean difference (SMD) effect between 0.5 to 0.8 for all trials evaluable) while the effect on IPSS score and Qmax was considered significant (SMD in the 0.2 to 0.5 variation range). No severe AEs and/or psychiatric disorders were retrieved among the studies. Sexual health dysfunctions were significantly influenced by finasteride therapy when compared with placebo treated patients. Conclusions: Although significant clinical benefits of finasteride monotherapy were demonstrated, the effective size of the available reports included in the analysis is limited. Additional head-to-head studies would be needed to re-evaluate clinical efficacy and safety of 5-ARI in combination or not with alpha blockers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document