The Effectiveness of Acupuncture for Depression – a Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 70-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshito Mukaino ◽  
Jongbae Park ◽  
Adrian White ◽  
Edzard Ernst
Keyword(s):  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Antidepressant Drugs ◽  
Antidepressant Medication ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Control Procedure ◽  
Manual Acupuncture ◽  
Weighted Mean ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Comparative Trials

Objective To summarise the existing evidence on acupuncture as a therapy for depression. Methods RCTs were included, in which either manual acupuncture or electroacupuncture was compared with any control procedure in subjects with depression. Data were extracted independently by two authors. The methodological quality was assessed. Pre and post means and SDs for depression specific measures were extracted, when available, for meta-analysis. Results Seven randomised comparative trials involving 509 patients were included. The evidence is inconsistent on whether manual acupuncture is superior to sham, and suggests that acupuncture was not superior to waiting list. Evidence suggests that the effect of electroacupuncture may not be significantly different from antidepressant medication, weighted mean difference −0.43(95% CI −5.61 to 4.76). There is inconclusive evidence on whether acupuncture has an additive effect when given as an adjunct to antidepressant drugs. Conclusion The evidence from controlled trials is insufficient to conclude whether acupuncture is an effective treatment for depression, but justifies further trials of electroacupuncture.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of dual SGLT 1/2 inhibitor sotagliflozin in type 1 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l1328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Musso ◽  
Roberto Gambino ◽  
Maurizio Cassader ◽  
Elena Paschetta
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Insulin Dose ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean ◽  
Randomised Controlled

AbstractObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of dual sodium glucose cotransporter (SGLT) 1/2 inhibitor sotagliflozin in type 1 diabetes mellitus.DesignMeta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sourcesMedline; Cochrane Library; Embase; international meeting abstracts; international and national clinical trial registries; and websites of US, European, and Japanese regulatory authorities, up to 10 January 2019.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of sotagliflozin versus active comparators or placebo on glycaemic and non-glycaemic outcomes and on adverse events in type 1 diabetes in participants older than 18. Three reviewers extracted data for study characteristics, outcomes of interest, and risk of bias and summarised strength of evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation approach. Main outcomes were pooled using random effects models.ResultsOf 739 records identified, six randomised placebo controlled trials (n=3238, duration 4-52 weeks) were included. Sotagliflozin reduced levels of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c; weighted mean difference −0.34% (95% confidence interval −0.41% to −0.27%), P<0.001); fasting plasma glucose (−16.98 mg/dL, −22.1 to −11.9; 1 mg/dL=0.0555 mmol/L) and two hour-postprandial plasma glucose (−39.2 mg/dL, −50.4 to −28.1); and daily total, basal, and bolus insulin dose (−8.99%, −10.93% to −7.05%; −8.03%, −10.14% to −5.93%; −9.14%, −12.17% to −6.12%; respectively). Sotagliflozin improved time in range (weighted mean difference 9.73%, 6.66% to 12.81%) and other continuous glucose monitoring parameters, and reduced body weight (−3.54%, −3.98% to −3.09%), systolic blood pressure (−3.85 mm Hg, −4.76 to −2.93), and albuminuria (albumin:creatinine ratio −14.57 mg/g, −26.87 to −2.28). Sotagliflozin reduced hypoglycaemia (weighted mean difference −9.09 events per patient year, −13.82 to −4.36) and severe hypoglycaemia (relative risk 0.69, 0.49 to 0.98). However, the drug increased the risk of ketoacidosis (relative risk 3.93, 1.94 to 7.96), genital tract infections (3.12, 2.14 to 4.54), diarrhoea (1.50, 1.08 to 2.10), and volume depletion events (2.19, 1.10 to 4.36). Initial HbA1c and basal insulin dose adjustment were associated with the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis. A sotagliflozin dose of 400 mg/day was associated with a greater improvement in most glycaemic and non-glycaemic outcomes than the 200 mg/day dose, without increasing the risk of adverse events. The quality of evidence was high to moderate for most outcomes, but low for major adverse cardiovascular events and all cause death. The relatively short duration of trials prevented assessment of long term outcomes.ConclusionsIn type 1 diabetes, sotagliflozin improves glycaemic and non-glycaemic outcomes and reduces hypoglycaemia rate and severe hypoglycaemia. The risk of diabetic ketoacidosis could be minimised by appropriate patient selection and down-titration of the basal insulin dose.

scholarly journals Clinical trials of antidepressant medications are producing meaningless results

2003 ◽  
Vol 183 (2) ◽  
pp. 102-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon Parker ◽  
Ian M. Anderson ◽  
Peter Haddad
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Antidepressant Treatment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Antidepressant Medication ◽  
Unipolar Depression ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Antidepressant Medications ◽  
Treatment Of Depression ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Uk

A recent alert from the UK Committee on Safety of Medicines stated that the dangers of treatment of depression with paroxetine outweigh the benefits in those under 18. Such a warning should focus our minds on the evidence on which clinical practice is based. Antidepressant treatment of depression in the under-18s has been thought to be justified because clinical trials show that it works so well in over-18s. But is that a reasonable assessment of the evidence? Kirsch et al (2002) use the analogy of ‘The Emperor's New Clothes' to describe the findings from their meta-analysis of randomised placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants. They conclude that antidepressant medication appears to have only a small effect on outcome over and above placebo. In this analogy psychiatry is the emperor, drug trials are the fraudsters and the deception is being revealed by a growing body of critical opinion proposing that, once methodological problems with clinical trials are taken into account, antidepressants either do not work at all or have an effect that is so small as to be clinically unimportant (Andrews, 2001; Moncrieff, 2002). A large number of randomised placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants have been carried out over the past decades, mostly funded by the pharmaceutical industry, and it is now recognised that about 50% of negative trials go unpublished (Thase, 1999). Meanwhile, unipolar depression has jumped into the top five of the world's total burden of disease, and there is an imperative need for effective and safe treatments. Do we need more randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of antidepressant medications, or has that research paradigm outlived its usefulness? In this month's debate, Professor Gordon Parker, University of New South Wales and Black Dog Institute, Australia, and Drs Ian Anderson and Peter Haddad from the University of Manchester discuss whether clinical trials for antidepressant medication produce meaningless results.

scholarly journals The effect of l-arginine supplementation on lipid profile: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 122 (9) ◽  
pp. 1021-1032
Author(s):  
Amir Hadi ◽  
Arman Arab ◽  
Sajjad Moradi ◽  
Ana Pantovic ◽  
Cain C. T. Clark ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lipid Profile ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Inconsistency Index ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Arginine Supplementation

AbstractA number of clinical trials have examined the effect of l-arginine on lipid profile in recent years; however, the results remain equivocal. Therefore, the present study aims to summarise and quantitatively examine the available evidence on the effectiveness l-arginine supplementation on lipid parameters using a systematic review and meta-analytic approach. Online databases including PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched up to April 2019 for randomised controlled trials that examined the effect of l-arginine supplementation on lipid profile in adults. Treatment effects were expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and the corresponding standard error in concentrations of serum lipids. To estimate the overall effect of l-arginine supplementation, we used the random-effects model. In total, twelve studies were included in the systematic review. The meta-analysis revealed that l-arginine supplementation did not significantly change the concentrations of total cholesterol (WMD: –5·03 mg/dl; 95 % CI –10·78, 0·73; P = 0·08; inconsistency index (I2) = 39·0 %), LDL (WMD: –0·47 mg/dl; 95 % CI –3·61, 2·66; P = 0·76; I2 = 0·0 %), or HDL (WMD: 0·57 mg/dl; 95 % CI –1·28, 2·43; P = 0·54; I2 = 68·4 %). A significant reduction was observed only in serum TAG levels (WMD: –7·04 mg/dl; 95 % CI –11·42, –2·67; P < 0·001; I2 = 0·0 %). This meta-analysis concludes that l-arginine supplementation can significantly reduce blood TAG levels; however, there is insufficient evidence to support its hypocholesterolaemic effects. To draw straightforward conclusions regarding generalised recommendations for l-arginine supplementation for improving lipid profile, there is a need for more well-controlled trials targeting exclusively patients with dyslipidaemia.

scholarly journals Effects of tea intake on blood pressure: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2014 ◽  
Vol 112 (7) ◽  
pp. 1043-1054 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gang Liu ◽  
Xue-Nan Mi ◽  
Xin-Xin Zheng ◽  
Yan-Lu Xu ◽  
Jie Lu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Green Tea ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Randomised Controlled

The effect of tea intake on blood pressure (BP) is controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to determine the changes in systolic and diastolic BP due to the intake of black and green tea. A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to May 2014. The weighted mean difference was calculated for net changes in systolic and diastolic BP using fixed-effects or random-effects models. Previously defined subgroup analyses were performed to explore the influence of study characteristics. A total of twenty-five eligible studies with 1476 subjects were selected. The acute intake of tea had no effects on systolic and diastolic BP. However, after long-term tea intake, the pooled mean systolic and diastolic BP were lower by − 1·8 (95 % CI − 2·4, − 1·1) and − 1·4 (95 % CI − 2·2, − 0·6) mmHg, respectively. When stratified by type of tea, green tea significantly reduced systolic BP by 2·1 (95 % CI − 2·9, − 1·2) mmHg and decreased diastolic BP by 1·7 (95 % CI − 2·9, − 0·5) mmHg, and black tea showed a reduction in systolic BP of 1·4 (95 % CI − 2·4, − 0·4) mmHg and a decrease in diastolic BP of 1·1 (95 % CI − 1·9, − 0·2) mmHg. The subgroup analyses showed that the BP-lowering effect was apparent in subjects who consumed tea more than 12 weeks (systolic BP − 2·6 (95 % CI − 3·5, − 1·7) mmHg and diastolic BP − 2·2 (95 % CI − 3·0, − 1·3) mmHg, both P< 0·001). The present findings suggest that long-term ( ≥ 12 weeks) ingestion of tea could result in a significant reduction in systolic and diastolic BP.

scholarly journals Very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet v. low-fat diet for long-term weight loss: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2013 ◽  
Vol 110 (7) ◽  
pp. 1178-1187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nassib Bezerra Bueno ◽  
Ingrid Sofia Vieira de Melo ◽  
Suzana Lima de Oliveira ◽  
Terezinha da Rocha Ataide
Keyword(s):  
Body Weight ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Weighted Mean ◽  
Low Fat Diet ◽  
Low Carbohydrate ◽  
Randomised Controlled

The role of very-low-carbohydrate ketogenic diets (VLCKD) in the long-term management of obesity is not well established. The present meta-analysis aimed to investigate whether individuals assigned to a VLCKD (i.e. a diet with no more than 50 g carbohydrates/d) achieve better long-term body weight and cardiovascular risk factor management when compared with individuals assigned to a conventional low-fat diet (LFD; i.e. a restricted-energy diet with less than 30 % of energy from fat). Through August 2012, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ScienceDirect, Scopus, LILACS, SciELO, ClinicalTrials.gov and grey literature databases were searched, using no date or language restrictions, for randomised controlled trials that assigned adults to a VLCKD or a LFD, with 12 months or more of follow-up. The primary outcome was body weight. The secondary outcomes were TAG, HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C), LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C), systolic and diastolic blood pressure, glucose, insulin, HbA1c and C-reactive protein levels. A total of thirteen studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. In the overall analysis, five outcomes revealed significant results. Individuals assigned to a VLCKD showed decreased body weight (weighted mean difference − 0·91 (95 % CI − 1·65, − 0·17) kg, 1415 patients), TAG (weighted mean difference − 0·18 (95 % CI − 0·27, − 0·08) mmol/l, 1258 patients) and diastolic blood pressure (weighted mean difference − 1·43 (95 % CI − 2·49, − 0·37) mmHg, 1298 patients) while increased HDL-C (weighted mean difference 0·09 (95 % CI 0·06, 0·12) mmol/l, 1257 patients) and LDL-C (weighted mean difference 0·12 (95 % CI 0·04, 0·2) mmol/l, 1255 patients). Individuals assigned to a VLCKD achieve a greater weight loss than those assigned to a LFD in the long term; hence, a VLCKD may be an alternative tool against obesity.

Multimodal manual therapy vs. pharmacological care for management of tension type headache: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

Cephalalgia ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (14) ◽  
pp. 1323-1332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan A Mesa-Jiménez ◽  
Cristina Lozano-López ◽  
Santiago Angulo-Díaz-Parreño ◽  
Ángel L Rodríguez-Fernández ◽  
Jose L De-la-Hoz-Aizpurua ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Manual Therapy ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Tension Type Headache ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Type Headache

Background Manual therapies are generally requested by patients with tension type headache. Objective To compare the efficacy of multimodal manual therapy vs. pharmacological care for the management of tension type headache pain by conducting a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Methods PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, EBSCO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Collaboration Trials Register, PEDro and SCOPUS were searched from their inception until June 2014. All randomized controlled trials comparing any manual therapy vs. medication care for treating tension type headache adults were included. Data were extracted and methodological quality assessed independently by two reviewers. We pooled headache frequency as the main outcome and also intensity and duration. The weighted mean difference between manual therapy and pharmacological care was used to determine effect sizes. Results Five randomized controlled trials met our inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled analyses found that manual therapies were more effective than pharmacological care in reducing frequency (weighted mean difference –0.8036, 95% confidence interval –1.66 to –0.44; three trials), intensity (weighted mean difference –0.5974, 95% confidence interval –0.8875 to –0.3073; five trials) and duration (weighted mean difference –0.5558, 95% confidence interval –0.9124 to –0.1992; three trials) of the headache immediately after treatment. No differences were found at longer follow-up for headache intensity (weighted mean difference –0.3498, 95% confidence interval –1.106 to 0.407; three trials). Conclusion Manual therapies were associated with moderate effectiveness at short term, but similar effectiveness at longer follow-up for reducing headache frequency, intensity and duration in tension type headache than pharmacological medical drug care. However, due to the heterogeneity of the interventions, these results should be considered with caution at this stage.

scholarly journals Evidence of efficacy of acupuncture in the management of low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo- or sham-controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-24
Author(s):  
Yan Xiang ◽  
Jin-yuan He ◽  
Huan-huan Tian ◽  
Bing-yan Cao ◽  
Rui Li
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pain Reduction ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Objectives: To assess the evidence for the efficacy of acupuncture for non-specific low back pain (NSLBP), compared with sham or placebo therapies. Methods: We searched Cochrane CENTRAL to December 2016, and conducted searches from 1980 to December 2016 in PubMed, MEDLINE and Embase. There were no regional restrictions applied. We included only randomised controlled trials of adults with NSLBP. Placebo/sham procedures were required of the control interventions. The trials were combined using meta-analysis when the data reported allowed for statistical pooling. Results: 14 trials (2110 participants) were included in the review, and 9 were included in the meta-analysis. Immediately after the acupuncture treatment we found statistically significant differences in pain reduction between acupuncture and sham or placebo therapy (standardised mean difference (SMD) −0.40, 95% CI −0.54 to −0.25; I2 7%; 753 participants; 9 studies), but there were no differences in function (weighted mean difference (WMD) −1.05, 95% CI −3.61 to 1.52; I2 79%; 462 participants; 4 studies). At follow-up, there were significant differences in pain reduction (SMD −0.46, 95% CI −0.82 to −0.09; I2 67%), but not in function (WMD −0.98, 95%CI −3.36 to 1.40; I2 87%). We conducted subgroup analyses both immediately after treatment and at follow-up. Conclusion: There is moderate evidence of efficacy for acupuncture in terms of pain reduction immediately after treatment for NSLBP ((sub)acute and chronic) when compared to sham or placebo acupuncture. Registration: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42017059438.

scholarly journals Impact of iron-fortified foods on Hb concentration in children (<10 years): a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 579-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramesh Athe ◽  
M Vishnu Vardhana Rao ◽  
K Madhavan Nair
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean ◽  
Fortified Foods ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Hb Concentration

AbstractObjectiveTo combine evidence from randomized controlled trials to assess the effect of Fe-fortified foods on mean Hb concentration in children (<10 years).DesignWe conducted a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled, Fe-fortified feeding trials that evaluated Hb concentration. The weighted mean difference was calculated for net changes in Hb by using random-effects models. Meta-regression and covariate analyses were performed to explore the influence of confounders on the net pooled effect.SettingTrials were identified through a systematic search of PubMed, the Cochrane Library and secondary references.SubjectsEighteen studies covering 5142 participants were identified. The duration of feeding of fortified foods ranged from 6 to 12 months in these studies.ResultsEighteen studies were included and evaluated in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled estimate of Hb concentration showed a significant increase in the fortification group compared with the control group (weighted mean difference = 5·09 g/l; 95 % CI 3·23, 6·95 g/l; I2 = 90 %, τ2 = 18·37, P < 0·0001). Meta-regression analysis indicated that duration of feeding was positively related to the effect size (regression coefficient = 0·368; 95 % CI 0·005, 0·731; P < 0·05). The net pooled effect size after removing the confounders was 4·74 (95 % CI 3·08, 6·40) g/l.ConclusionsWe observed an association between intake of Fe-fortified foods and Hb concentration in children aged <10 years. Fe-fortified foods could be an effective strategy for reducing Fe-deficiency anaemia in children.

scholarly journals The effect of systemic lidocaine on post-operative opioid consumption in ambulatory surgical patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle Lovett-Carter ◽  
Mark C. Kendall ◽  
James Park ◽  
Anas Ibrahim-Hamdan ◽  
Susannah Crepet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ambulatory Surgery ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Anesthesia Care ◽  
Post Anesthesia Care Unit ◽  
Weighted Mean ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Opioid Sparing ◽  
Sparing Effect

Abstract Background Ambulatory surgical procedures continue to grow in relevance to perioperative medicine. Clinical studies have examined the use of systemic lidocaine as a component of multimodal analgesia in various surgeries with mixed results. A quantitative review of the opioid-sparing effects of systemic lidocaine in ambulatory surgery has not been investigated. The primary objective of this study was to systematically review the effectiveness of systemic lidocaine on postoperative analgesic outcomes in patients undergoing ambulatory surgery. Methods We performed a quantitative systematic review of randomized controlled trials in electronic databases (Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Google Scholar) from their inception through February 2019. Included trials investigated the effects of intraoperative systemic lidocaine on postoperative analgesic outcomes, time to hospital discharge, and adverse events. Methodological quality was evaluated using Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and the level of evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria. Data was combined in a meta-analysis using random-effects models. Results Five trials evaluating 297 patients were included in the analysis. The pooled effect of systemic lidocaine on postoperative opioid consumption at post-anesthesia care unit revealed a significant effect, weighted mean difference (95% CI) of − 4.23 (− 7.3 to 1.2, P = 0.007), and, at 24 h, weighted mean difference (95% CI) of − 1.91 (− 3.80 to − 0.03, P = 0.04) mg intravenous morphine equivalents. Postoperative pain control during both time intervals, postoperative nausea and vomiting reported at post anesthesia care unit, and time to hospital discharge were not different between groups. The incidence rate of self-limiting adverse events of the included studies is 0.007 (2/297). Conclusion Our results suggest that intraoperative systemic lidocaine as treatment for postoperative pain has a moderate opioid-sparing effect in post anesthesia care unit with limited effect at 24 h after ambulatory surgery. Moreover, the opioid-sparing effect did not impact the analgesia or the presence of nausea and vomiting immediately or 24 h after surgery. Clinical trials with larger sample sizes are necessary to further confirm the short-term analgesic benefit of systemic lidocaine following ambulatory surgery. Trial registration PROSPERO (CRD42019142229)

scholarly journals Effects and safety of separate low-dose hydrocortisone use in patients with septic shock: A meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-50
Author(s):  
Jing Wu ◽  
Man Huang ◽  
QianWen Wang ◽  
Yuefeng Ma ◽  
Libing Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Septic Shock ◽  
Relative Risk ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Weighted Mean

Objective: The aim of this study was to explore the effects and safety of low-dose hydrocortisone in patients with septic shock. Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from database inception until 1 August 2018. Two reviewers performed literature selection, data extraction, and quality evaluation independently. Results: Twelve randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. The combined results showed that low-dose hydrocortisone use had no survival benefit in patients with septic shock (relative risk = 1.09; 95% confidence interval = 0.88–1.05; P = 0.37). But low-dose hydrocortisone use was useful for shock reverse (relative risk = 1.09; 95% confidence interval = 1.00–1.19; P = 0.04) and in shortening the time of vasopressor support (weighted mean difference = −1.79, 95% confidence interval = −2.05 to −1.52; P < 0.00001). In addition, use of low-dose hydrocortisone was associated with a higher risk of hyperglycemia (relative risk = 1.21; 95% confidence interval = 1.04–1.40; P = 0.01) and hypernatremia (relative risk = 6.34; 95% confidence interval = 1.19–33.81; P = 0.03). There was no significant improvement of intensive care unit mortality (relative risk = 1.11; 95% confidence interval = 0.93–1.33; P = 0.23) or hospital mortality (relative risk = 1.08; 95% confidence interval = 0.94–1.24; P = 0.29), length of intensive care unit (weighted mean difference = −1.84; 95% confidence interval = −5.80 to 2.11; P = 0.36) or length of hospital (weighted mean difference = 0.11; 95% confidence interval = −2.06 to 2.29; P = 0.98), and time of mechanical support (weighted mean difference = −0.69; 95% confidence interval = −1.76 to −0.38; P = 0.20) with the use of low-dose hydrocortisone. There was no significant difference in secondary infection (relative risk = 1.04; 95% confidence interval = 0.91–1.18; P = 0.57), recurrence of shock (relative risk = 1.47; 95% confidence interval = 0.64–3.39; P = 0.36), and gastrointestinal bleeding (relative risk = 1.41; 95% confidence interval = 0.89–2.22; P = 0.14) with the use of low-dose hydrocortisone. Conclusion: Although there was no effect of low-dose hydrocortisone on survival of patients with septic shock, it is associated with a higher rate of shock reversal and shortening duration of vasopressor support; thus, low-dose hydrocortisone may be an alternative drug in septic shock patients who are refractory to fluid resuscitation and vasopressors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document