triple therapy

三联疗法
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:在慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者中,药物治疗不依从性是一个重要问题。解决这一问题的努力越来越受到重视。通过处方单吸入器三联疗法(SITT)作为多吸入器三联疗法(MITT)或智能吸入器来简化治疗通常被认为是潜在的解决方案。然而,这些创新对依从性和临床结局的实际影响尚不清楚.
    方法:为了解决这一知识差距,我们首先进行了文献综述,重点关注两个研究问题:1)COPD患者SITT和MITT患者的依从性差异,和2)智能吸入器对COPD依从性的影响。在PubMed中进行了单独的搜索,两名作者独立评估了文章。此外,我们提出了一项研究方案,以获取所发现差距的知识.
    结果:为了解决第一个研究问题,选择8项试验作进一步审查。所有试验都是观察性的,即缺乏随机对照试验。这些试验中有7项显示,与接受MITT的患者相比,接受SITT的患者的依从性和/或持久性更高。此外,4项研究显示SITT对各种临床结局有积极作用.对于第二个研究问题,选择11项试验进行审查。虽然大多数研究表明智能吸入器对依从性有积极影响,关于它们对其他临床结局的影响,结果存在相当大的差异.TRICOLON(在慢性阻塞性肺疾病中使用一种或多种吸入器和数字支持的三联疗法)试验旨在提高对SITT和智能吸入器在增强依从性方面的有效性的理解。这个开放标签,随机化,多中心研究将纳入10家参与医院需要三联疗法的COPD患者.总的来说,300名患者将被随机分为三组:1)MITT;2)SITT;3)SITT通过智能吸入器和电子健康平台提供数字支持。后续期为一年,在此期间,将使用三种测量依从性的方法:智能吸入器数据,使用吸入器依从性测试(TAI)问卷的自我报告数据,和头皮头发样本中的药物分析。最后,将比较研究组之间临床结局的差异.
    结论:我们的综述表明,关于SITT的作用,而不是MITT,和智能吸入器坚持。然而,由于缺乏随机对照试验和/或许多研究的随访时间较短,证据质量有限.此外,其对临床结局的影响显示出相当大的差异.TRICOLON试验旨在提供有关这些经常提及的COPD非依从性解决方案的可靠数据。在精心设计的随机对照试验中收集数据是具有挑战性的,但是本试验的设计同时解决了SITT和智能吸入器的实用性,同时确保对参与者日常生活的干扰最小.
    背景:NCT05495698(Clinicaltrials.gov),注册时间为08-08-2022。协议版本:版本5,日期27-02-2023。
    BACKGROUND: Medication non-adherence is a significant problem in patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Efforts to address this issue are receiving increased attention. Simplifying treatment by prescribing single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) as an alternative to multi-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) or with smart inhalers are often considered potential solutions. However, the actual impact of these innovations on adherence and clinical outcomes is unclear.
    METHODS: To address this knowledge gap we first conducted a literature review focusing on two research questions: 1) the difference in adherence between SITT and MITT users in COPD, and 2) the effect of smart inhalers on adherence in COPD. Separate searches were conducted in PubMed and two authors independently assessed the articles. In addition, we present a protocol for a study to acquire knowledge for the gaps identified.
    RESULTS: To address the first research question, 8 trials were selected for further review. All trials were observational, i.e. randomized controlled trials were lacking. Seven of these trials showed higher adherence and/or persistence in patients on SITT compared with patients on MITT. In addition, four studies showed a positive effect of SITT on various clinical outcomes. For the second research question, 11 trials were selected for review. While most of the studies showed a positive effect of smart inhalers on adherence, there was considerable variation in the results regarding their effect on other clinical outcomes. The TRICOLON (TRIple therapy COnvenience by the use of one or multipLe Inhalers and digital support in ChrONic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease) trial aims to improve understanding regarding the effectiveness of SITT and smart inhalers in enhancing adherence. This open-label, randomized, multi-center study will enroll COPD patients requiring triple therapy at ten participating hospitals. In total, 300 patients will be randomized into three groups: 1) MITT; 2) SITT; 3) SITT with digital support through a smart inhaler and an e-health platform. The follow-up period will be one year, during which three methods of measuring adherence will be used: smart inhaler data, self-reported data using the Test of Adherence to Inhalers (TAI) questionnaire, and drug analysis in scalp hair samples. Finally, differences in clinical outcomes between the study groups will be compared.
    CONCLUSIONS: Our review suggests promising results concerning the effect of SITT, as opposed to MITT, and smart inhalers on adherence. However, the quality of evidence is limited due to the absence of randomized controlled trials and/or the short duration of follow-up in many studies. Moreover, its impact on clinical outcomes shows considerable variation. The TRICOLON trial aims to provide solid data on these frequently mentioned solutions to non-adherence in COPD. Collecting data in a well-designed randomized controlled trial is challenging, but the design of this trial addresses both the usefulness of SITT and smart inhalers while ensuring minimal interference in participants\' daily lives.
    BACKGROUND: NCT05495698 (Clinicaltrials.gov), registered at 08-08-2022. Protocol version: version 5, date 27-02-2023.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目前的指南建议对慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)反复加重的患者使用三联疗法维持吸入器;然而,这些维持疗法未得到充分利用。这项研究旨在了解医生如何做出COPD治疗决定,以及如何在现实世界中使用组合维持疗法。
    这个探索性的,产生假设,非干预性研究使用了一项横断面在线调查,该调查对美国的执业医师样本进行了分析.该调查包括五个虚构的插图,详细介绍了COPD患者的常见症状。调查问题包括医生在决策中考虑的因素,以及处方治疗的障碍。进行了重复测量多变量分析,以评估医生转换为三联疗法与不改变患者当前的维持疗法或改变为另一种维持疗法的可能性。
    总共,200名医生完成了调查。据报道,治疗费用和患者获得治疗的机会是医生在处方决策中考虑的最常见障碍。如果考虑到患者的新症状史,医生更有可能将患者的维持吸入器转换为三联疗法,而不更换维持吸入器。保险状况,和临床指南在他们的决定。有更多经验治疗COPD患者的医生,那些每周治疗更多COPD患者的人,与不更换维持吸入器相比,更有可能改用三联疗法。
    这项研究表明,在为COPD患者开处方治疗时,可能影响医生决策的因素的复杂性,包括治疗成本的考虑,患者的访问和依从性,患者合并症,目前的治疗效果,临床指南,以及提供者治疗COPD的经验水平。进一步的研究可能有助于阐明影响医生决策的因素的相对重要性,并告知哪些类型的决策支持工具最有益。
    慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)症状可以通过维持治疗得到有效控制,这是常规治疗,以帮助改善症状。在中度至重度COPD患者中,三种不同疗法的组合(三联疗法维持)已被证明比两种不同疗法的组合(双重疗法维持)更有效。然而,维持疗法,包括三联疗法,没有得到充分利用。这项研究旨在探讨医生如何为COPD患者做出治疗决定,以及如何使用组合维持疗法。要做到这一点,我们对美国的执业医师进行了一项调查.该调查包括五项基于临床的,虚构的个人资料,或者小插曲,COPD患者,描述了常见的症状和患者特征。然后,医生被要求回答关于他们将为每个患者开什么治疗方法的问题,以及他们在决定患者治疗时考虑的任何因素。我们发现,治疗费用和患者获得治疗是医生在选择治疗时考虑的最常见障碍。如果考虑到患者的新症状史,医生也更有可能将患者的维持吸入器转换为三联疗法维持吸入器。患者的保险状况,以及做出决定时的临床指南。我们的研究表明,在决定COPD患者的治疗时,有许多复杂的因素会影响医生的决定。
    UNASSIGNED: Current guidelines recommend triple therapy maintenance inhalers for patients with recurrent exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, these maintenance therapies are underutilized. This study aimed to understand how physicians make COPD treatment decisions, and how combination maintenance therapies are utilized in a real-world setting.
    UNASSIGNED: This exploratory, hypothesis-generating, non-interventional study used a cross-sectional online survey that was administered to a sample of practicing physicians in the United States. The survey included five fictitious vignettes detailing common symptoms experienced by patients with COPD. Survey questions included factors physicians consider in their decisions, and perceived barriers to prescribing treatments. Repeated measures multivariable analyses were conducted to evaluate how likely physicians were to switch to triple therapy versus no change to patient\'s current maintenance therapy or change to another maintenance therapy.
    UNASSIGNED: In total, 200 physicians completed the survey. Cost of treatment and patient access to treatment were reported as the most common barriers physicians consider in their prescribing decisions. Physicians were more likely to switch a patient\'s maintenance inhaler to triple therapy versus no change to maintenance inhaler if they considered the patient\'s history of new symptoms, insurance status, and clinical guidelines in their decision. Physicians with more experience treating patients with COPD, and those who treat more patients with COPD per week, were more likely to switch to triple therapy versus no change to maintenance inhaler.
    UNASSIGNED: This study demonstrates the complexity of factors that can influence physicians\' decisions when prescribing treatments for patients with COPD, including considerations of treatment cost, patient access and adherence, patient comorbidities, efficacy of current treatment, clinical guidelines, and provider\'s level of experience treating COPD. Further research may help elucidate the relative importance of the factors influencing physicians\' decisions and inform what types of decision-support tools would be most beneficial.
    Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) symptoms can be effectively managed with maintenance therapies, which are treatments that are taken routinely to help improve symptoms. A combination of three different therapies (triple therapy maintenance) has been shown to be more effective than a combination of two different therapies (dual therapy maintenance) in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. However, maintenance therapies, including triple therapy, are underutilized. This study aimed to explore how physicians make their treatment decisions for patients with COPD, and how combination maintenance therapies are utilized. To do so, we administered a survey to a sample of practicing physicians in the United States. The survey included five clinically based, fictitious profiles, or vignettes, of patients with COPD, with common symptoms and patient characteristics being described. Physicians were then asked to answer questions about what treatment they would prescribe for each patient, and any factors they considered when deciding on a treatment for a patient. We found that cost of treatment and patient access to treatment were the most common barriers that physicians considered when choosing a treatment. Physicians were also more likely to switch a patient’s maintenance inhaler to a triple therapy maintenance inhaler if they considered the patient’s history of new symptoms, patient’s insurance status, and clinical guidelines when making their decisions. Our study shows that there are many complex factors that influence physicians’ decisions when deciding on a treatment for patients with COPD.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:幽门螺杆菌(H.幽门螺杆菌)根除率在全球范围内下降,在很大程度上可能是由于抗生素对传统疗法的耐药性增加。在像我们这样的高克拉霉素和甲硝唑耐药性的地区,马斯特里赫特VI指南建议大剂量阿莫西林双重治疗(HDADT)可以考虑,以当地疗效的证据为准。在这项研究中,我们评估了HDADT治疗在爱尔兰队列中根除幽门螺杆菌的疗效。
    目的:为了评估HDADT治疗在爱尔兰队列中根除幽门螺杆菌的疗效,以及诊断为幽门螺杆菌的患者的后续治疗。
    方法:在一个三级中心检测幽门螺杆菌阳性的所有患者均接受HDADT(阿莫西林1gtid和埃索美拉唑40mgbid×14d)的前瞻性治疗,为期8个月。在停止治疗后至少4周用尿素呼气试验确认根除。超过基线的delta>4%被认为是阳性的。记录患者的人口统计学和治疗结果,分析和控制基本人口统计学和先前的幽门螺杆菌治疗。
    结果:一百九十八例患者被确定为幽门螺杆菌感染,10例患者因青霉素过敏而被排除,38例患者拒绝随访测试。在所有139个被包括在分析中,55%(n=76)是女性,平均年龄为46.6岁.总的来说,93例(67%)患者未接受治疗,46例(33%)患者至少接受过一次治疗。各组在统计学上相似。自我报告的HDADT依从性为97%,7%的患者出现轻度副作用。无严重药物不良反应。我们队列的总体根除率为56%(78/139)。先前接受过治疗的患者的根除率更差[43%(20/46)对62%(58/93),P=0.0458,比值比=2.15]。年龄和性别对根除状态没有影响。
    结论:HDADT的总体根除率令人失望。尽管是一个简单且可能容忍更好的政权,这些结果不支持其在高双重阻力国家的常规使用。需要进一步研究其他方案以达到>90%的根除目标。
    BACKGROUND: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication rates have fallen globally, likely in large part due to increasing antibiotic resistance to traditional therapy. In areas of high clarithromycin and metronidazole resistance such as ours, Maastricht VI guidelines suggest high dose amoxicillin dual therapy (HDADT) can be considered, subject to evidence for local efficacy. In this study we assess efficacy of HDADT therapy for H. pylori eradication in an Irish cohort.
    OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of HDADT therapy for H. pylori eradication in an Irish cohort as both first line, and subsequent therapy for patients diagnosed with H. pylori.
    METHODS: All patients testing positive for H. pylori in a tertiary centre were treated prospectively with HDADT (amoxicillin 1 g tid and esomeprazole 40 mg bid × 14 d) over a period of 8 months. Eradication was confirmed with Urea Breath Test at least 4 wk after cessation of therapy. A delta-over-baseline > 4% was considered positive. Patient demographics and treatment outcomes were recorded, analysed and controlled for basic demographics and prior H. pylori treatment.
    RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-eight patients were identified with H. pylori infection, 10 patients were excluded due to penicillin allergy and 38 patients refused follow up testing. In all 139 were included in the analysis, 55% (n = 76) were female, mean age was 46.6 years. Overall, 93 (67%) of patients were treatment-naïve and 46 (33%) had received at least one previous course of treatment. The groups were statistically similar. Self-reported compliance with HDADT was 97%, mild side-effects occurred in 7%. There were no serious adverse drug reactions. Overall the eradication rate for our cohort was 56% (78/139). Eradication rates were worse for those with previous treatment [43% (20/46) vs 62% (58/93), P = 0.0458, odds ratio = 2.15]. Age and Gender had no effect on eradication status.
    CONCLUSIONS: Overall eradication rates with HDADT were disappointing. Despite being a simple and possibly better tolerated regime, these results do not support its routine use in a high dual resistance country. Further investigation of other regimens to achieve the > 90% eradication target is needed.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    关于三联疗法(包括长效β2激动剂,长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂,吸入皮质类固醇,LABA/LAMA/ICS)治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的结果相互矛盾。随着合成数量的增加,识别和解释证据的任务变得越来越复杂和苛刻。
    对COPD三联疗法的疗效和安全性进行全面概述。
    SRs概述。
    两位独立的审阅者在PubMed中进行了全面的搜索,Embase,WebofScience,和Cochrane图书馆,以确定将三联疗法与任何非三联疗法进行比较的相关SR,从这些数据库开始到2023年6月1日。使用AMSTAR2和GRADE工具评估纳入研究的质量和每个结果的证据。
    分析了18项SR,包括30项原始研究,涉及47,340名参与者。总体AMSTAR2评级显示3个SR质量低,13个SR的质量极低,2个SR是高质量的。没有高确定性证据显示三联疗法在改善肺功能或减少急性加重方面具有显著优势。然而,所有的证据,包括一个高度的确定性,支持提高生活质量的好处。关于全因死亡率,与LAMA或ICS/LABA相比,没有发现显着差异;然而,与LABA/LAMA相比,高确定性证据证实了其有效性。值得注意的是,高确定性证据表明,与LABA/LAMA相比,三联疗法与肺炎风险显著增加相关.
    三联疗法在改善肺功能方面显示出显着益处,减少恶化,提高生活质量,降低全因死亡率。然而,值得注意的是,它也可能显著增加肺炎的风险。
    该概述协议在PROSPERO(编号:CRD42023431548)。
    UNASSIGNED: Some systematic reviews (SRs) on triple therapy (consisting of long-acting β2-agonist, long-acting muscarinic antagonist, and inhaled corticosteroid, LABA/LAMA/ICS) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have reported conflicting results. As the number of syntheses increases, the task of identifying and interpreting evidence becomes increasingly complex and demanding.
    UNASSIGNED: To provide a comprehensive overview of the efficacy and safety of triple therapy for COPD.
    UNASSIGNED: Overview of SRs.
    UNASSIGNED: Two independent reviewers conducted comprehensive searches in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant SRs that compared triple therapy with any non-triple therapy for COPD, from the inception of these databases until 1 June 2023. The AMSTAR 2 and GRADE tools were utilized to assess the quality of the included studies and the evidence for each outcome.
    UNASSIGNED: Eighteen SRs encompassing 30 original studies and involving 47,340 participants were analyzed. The overall AMSTAR 2 rating revealed that 3 SRs were of low quality, 13 SRs were of critically low quality, and 2 SRs were of high quality. No high-certainty evidence revealed a significant advantage of triple therapy in improving lung function or reducing acute exacerbations. However, all evidence, including one high certainty, supported the benefits of improving quality of life. Regarding all-cause mortality, no significant difference was found when compared to LAMA or ICS/LABA; however, high-certainty evidence confirmed its effectiveness when compared with LABA/LAMA. Notably, high-certainty evidence indicated that triple therapy was associated with a significant increase in the risk of pneumonia compared to LABA/LAMA.
    UNASSIGNED: Triple therapy demonstrated notable benefits in improving lung function, reducing exacerbations, improving quality of life, and reducing all-cause mortality. However, it is important to note that it may also significantly increase the risk of pneumonia.
    UNASSIGNED: This overview protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42023431548).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    幽门螺杆菌感染是一种常见的胃肠道感染,影响全球约50%的人口。这种感染会导致各种健康状况,如消化性溃疡疾病,消化不良,胃癌,和粘膜相关淋巴组织淋巴瘤。由质子泵抑制剂组成的三联疗法,克拉霉素,和阿莫西林或甲硝唑14天被认为是幽门螺杆菌的一线治疗和根除,特别是在克拉霉素敏感性仍然很高的地区。然而,最近的研究表明,由于抗生素耐药性,这种治疗的疗效正在下降。
    这是一项在Jazan的Al-HayatJazan医院进行的回顾性研究,沙特阿拉伯。该研究分析了186例接受标准三联疗法的幽门螺杆菌患者的医疗记录。本研究的目的是通过使用标准三联疗法来确定幽门螺杆菌的根除率。并强调一些人口特征的影响,如年龄,性别,糖尿病,和吸烟对根除率的影响,在Jazan地区,沙特阿拉伯。
    研究中纳入了186名患者的医疗记录。根除成功率为77.4%。研究结果表明,根除率的下降与糖尿病和吸烟状况的存在显着相关(p值分别为<0.001和<0.004)。
    这项研究发现,根除幽门螺杆菌的标准三联疗法不如最佳标准有效,根据文献和指南。鉴于其在全球范围内的疗效下降,替代一线治疗可能是必要的。需要进一步研究以评估其在各种区域背景下的有效性。
    UNASSIGNED: Helicobacter pylori infection is a common gastrointestinal infection that affects around 50% of the global population. This infection can lead to various health conditions such as peptic ulcer disease, dyspepsia, gastric carcinoma, and mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma. The triple therapy which consists of proton-pump inhibitors, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin or metronidazole for 14 days is considered the first-line treatment for H. pylori and its eradication, especially in areas where clarithromycin sensitivity is still high. However, recent research shows that the efficacy of this treatment is decreasing due to antibiotic resistance.
    UNASSIGNED: This was a retrospective study that took place at Al-Hayat Jazan Hospital in Jazan, Saudi Arabia. The study analyzed the medical records of 186 patients with H. pylori who had undergone the standard triple therapy. The objectives of this study were to determine the eradication rate of H. pylori by using the standard triple therapy, and to highlight the influence of some demographic characteristics such as age, gender, diabetes mellitus, and smoking on the eradication rate, in Jazan region, Saudi Arabia.
    UNASSIGNED: The medical records of 186 patients were included in the study. The overall rate of successful eradication was found to be 77.4%. The results of the study showed that the decline in the eradication rate was significantly associated with the presence of diabetes and smoking status (with p-values of <0.001 and <0.004, respectively).
    UNASSIGNED: This study finds that the standard triple therapy for H. pylori eradication is less effective than optimal standards, as per literature and guidelines. Given its declining efficacy globally, alternative first-line treatments may be necessary. Further research is needed to assess its effectiveness in various regional contexts.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:这项成本效用分析从魁北克社会的角度评估了糠酸氟替卡松/灭替溴铵/维兰特罗(FF/UMEC/VI)三联疗法与FF/VI或UMEC/VI治疗的长期临床和经济效益。
    方法:使用经过验证的GALAXY疾病进展模型,参数设置为基线,疗效数据来自IMPACT。治疗费用(2017加元[C$])是使用魁北克特定的单位成本估算的。费用和健康结果以1.5%/年折扣。支付意愿阈值为50,000加元/质量调整生命年(QALY)被认为是具有成本效益的。结果模型是恶化率,QALYs,生命年(LYs),成本和增量成本效益比(ICER)。根据之前的治疗进行亚组分析,前一年的恶化史,和基线肺功能。
    结果:在一生中,FF/UMEC/VI获得了更多的QALY和LYs,与FF/VI和UMEC/VI相比,增量成本较小。从社会的角度来看,基本情况下的估计ICER为18,152加元/季度vsFF/VI,和15847加元/季度对UMEC/VI。对于亚组分析(FF/UMEC/VI与FF/VI和UMEC/VI相比),ICERs范围为:C$17,412-25,664/QALY和C$16,493-18,663/QALY(先前治疗);C$15,247-19,924/QALY和C$15,444-28,859/QALY(恶化史);C$14,025-34,154/QALY和C$16,083-17,509
    结论:FF/UMEC/VI在基础病例和所有亚组分析中相对于两个比较者而言,预测可改善结局并具有成本效益。基于这一分析,将是魁北克卫生服务基金的适当投资。
    背景:影响试验NCT02164513。
    BACKGROUND: This cost-utility analysis assessed the long-term clinical and economic benefits of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) triple therapy vs FF/VI or UMEC/VI from a Quebec societal perspective in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with ≥1 moderate/severe exacerbation in the previous year.
    METHODS: The validated GALAXY disease progression model was utilized, with parameters set to baseline and efficacy data from IMPACT. Treatment costs (2017 Canadian dollars [C$]) were estimated using Quebec-specific unit costs. Costs and health outcomes were discounted at 1.5 %/year. A willingness-to-pay threshold of C$50,000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was considered cost-effective. Outcomes modeled were exacerbation rates, QALYs, life years (LYs), costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Subgroup analyses were performed according to prior treatment, exacerbation history in the previous year, and baseline lung function.
    RESULTS: Over a lifetime horizon, FF/UMEC/VI resulted in more QALYs and LYs gained, at a small incremental cost compared with FF/VI and UMEC/VI. From a societal perspective, the estimated ICER for the base case was C$18,152/QALY vs FF/VI, and C$15,847/QALY vs UMEC/VI. For the subgroup analyses (FF/UMEC/VI compared with FF/VI and UMEC/VI), ICERs ranged from: C$17,412-25,664/QALY and C$16,493-18,663/QALY (prior treatment); C$15,247-19,924/QALY and C$15,444-28,859/QALY (exacerbation history); C$14,025-34,154/QALY and C$16,083-17,509/QALY (baseline lung function).
    CONCLUSIONS: FF/UMEC/VI was predicted to improve outcomes and be cost-effective vs both comparators in the base case and all subgroup analyses, and based on this analysis would be an appropriate investment of health service funds in Quebec.
    BACKGROUND: IMPACT trial NCT02164513.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:肠套叠,儿童腹痛的常见原因,通常缺乏明确的根本原因,并且大多是特发性的。复发,虽然罕见,引起临床关注,每次发作后费率都在上升。病理性导联点和过敏性紫癜(HSP)等因素与复发病例有关。另一方面,幽门螺杆菌(H.pylori),通常无症状,儿童人数一直在下降。尽管据报道其感染与HSP有关,其在复发性肠套叠中的作用仍有待探索。需要进一步的研究来了解幽门螺杆菌(罪魁祸首病原体)之间的相互作用,HSP(触发器),以及顽固性肠套叠,从而制定有效的管理策略。
    方法:一个两岁的女孩在不同的部位经历了四次不典型的肠套叠,后来与HSP相吻合。尽管用类固醇治疗,复发性肠套叠持续存在,这表明HSP本身并不是棘手演讲的主要原因。随后确定幽门螺杆菌感染并采用三联疗法治疗可完全缓解其顽固性肠套叠。
    结论:这个有指导意义的案例强调了一个序列,其中幽门螺杆菌感染引发了HSP,随后导致复发性肠套叠。虽然幽门螺杆菌感染在幼儿中并不常见,顽固性肠套叠和激素耐药复发性HSP并存,需要考虑幽门螺杆菌感染是潜在的潜在病原体.
    BACKGROUND: Intussusception, a common cause of abdominal pain in children, often lacks clear underlying causes and is mostly idiopathic. Recurrence, though rare, raises clinical concerns, with rates escalating after each episode. Factors like pathological lead points and Henoch-Schönlein purpura (HSP) are associated with recurrent cases. On the other hand, the prevalence of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori), often asymptomatic, in children has been declining. Although its infection is reported to be linked with HSP, its role in recurrent intussusception remains unexplored. Further research is needed to understand the interplay among H. pylori (culprit pathogen), HSP (trigger), and intractable intussusception so as to develop effective management strategies.
    METHODS: A two-year-old girl experienced four atypical episodes of intussusception at distinct locations, which later coincided with HSP. Despite treatment with steroids, recurrent intussusception persisted, suggesting that HSP itself was not a major cause for intractable presentations. Subsequent identification of H. pylori infection and treatment with triple therapy resulted in complete resolution of her recalcitrant intussusception.
    CONCLUSIONS: This instructive case underscored a sequence wherein H. pylori infection triggered HSP, subsequently resulting in recurrent intussusception. While H. pylori infection is not common in young children, the coexistence of intractable intussusception and steroid-resistant recurrent HSP necessitates consideration of H. pylori infection as a potential underlying pathogen.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:分析复发性特发性声门下狭窄(iSGS)激光楔形切除术(LWE)后无症状间隔的持续时间。次要目标包括评估患者相关因素或疾病因素的影响。
    方法:回顾性回顾。
    方法:第三系中心。
    方法:回顾在2002年至2021年期间接受LWE的iSGS患者。先前没有气道手术的LWE患者被标记为LWE原发性(LWEP),而先前有扩张史的患者被标记为LWE继发性(LWES)。条件性虚弱重复事件模型用于分析每n次复发的中位复发时间(MTR)。次要分析包括通过使用药物治疗和瘢痕的初始术前特征进行分层(Myer-Cotton级,声门和疤痕的最上层之间的距离,DGS;疤痕的长度,DL)。
    结果:200名iSGS患者接受了LWE(131LWEP,79LWES)。经历至少1、3、6和12复发的患者比例,分别,为68.0%(n=143),40.7%(n=85),20.0%(n=42),5.2%(n=11)。从第1到第12次复发,时间呈指数级缩短(P<0.0001)。虽然地铁在第一次LWE后4.1年,第二次下降到2.8年、1.7年、1.0年和0.7年,3rd,6th,和第12次复发。此外,在前6次复发中,LWEP患者的MTR比LWES患者长(P<0.01)。术中间隔时间与服药依从性无显著关系,DL,DGS,或等级超过第一个(P=0.207,P=0.20,P=0.43,P=0.16)。
    结论:iSGS中的无症状间隔随着每次复发和LWE而缩短。LWEP和LWES组之间的MTR差异在前6次复发中是显著的,其中LWEP具有较长的MTR。
    方法:
    OBJECTIVE: Analyze the duration of symptom-free intervals following laser wedge excision (LWE) for recurrent idiopathic subglottic stenosis (iSGS). Secondary aim includes evaluating the influence of patient-related or disease factors.
    METHODS: Retrospective review.
    METHODS: Tertiary center.
    METHODS: Review of iSGS patients who underwent LWE between 2002 and 2021. LWE patients without prior airway surgery were labeled LWE primary (LWEP) and those with prior history of dilation were labeled LWE secondary (LWES). A conditional frailty repeated events model was used to analyze the median time to recurrence (MTR) for each nth recurrence. Secondary analysis included stratification by use of medical therapy and initial preoperative characteristics of scar (Myer-Cotton grade, distance between the glottis and superior-most aspect of scar, DGS; length of scar, DL).
    RESULTS: Two hundred and ten iSGS patients underwent LWE (131 LWEP, 79 LWES). The proportion of patients experiencing at least 1, 3, 6, and 12 recurrences, respectively, was 68.0% (n = 143), 40.7% (n = 85), 20.0% (n = 42), and 5.2% (n = 11). There was exponential time-shortening from the 1st to 12th recurrence (P < .0001). While MTR was 4.1 years after the first LWE, this fell to 2.8, 1.7, 1.0, and 0.7 years for the 2nd, 3rd, 6th, and 12th recurrences. Furthermore, LWEP patients experienced longer MTR than LWES counterparts within the first 6 recurrences (P < .01). There was no significant relationship between intersurgical interval and medication adherence, DL, DGS, or grade for recurrences beyond the first (P = .207, P = .20, P = .43, P = .16).
    CONCLUSIONS: Symptom-free intervals in iSGS shorten with each subsequent recurrence and LWE. The difference in MTR between LWEP and LWES groups was significant within the first 6 recurrences with LWEP having longer MTR.
    METHODS:
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    胃溃疡和胃癌是由幽门螺杆菌引起的,定植在胃粘膜下。使用不同的药物治疗方案来去除它,但是疾病又回来了,变得更有抵抗力,这降低了治疗率。此外,这种细菌现在表现出急剧上升的多重耐药性,需要反复治疗。与常规疗法相比,合成药物的负面影响是非药物疗法的另一个重要因素。流行的抗胃溃疡药物最显著的副作用包括恶心,呕吐,和腹泻。胃溃疡以前已经用草药和补充治疗如益生菌治疗。当摄入益生菌时,宿主经历了一些可能通过改变消化系统中的细菌菌群而带来的优势。此外,更有效的化合物和植物提取物可用于治疗患者。在这篇文章中,我们来看看用于合成胃溃疡治疗的物质和药物。
    Gastric ulcers and gastric cancer are brought on by the Helicobacter pylori bacteria, which colonizes under the stomach mucous membrane. Different medication regimens are used to remove it, but the illness returns and becomes more resistant, which lowers the treatment rates. Additionally, this bacterium now exhibits a skyrocketing level of multi-drug resistance, necessitating recurrent therapeutic treatments. The negative effects of synthetic medications in comparison to conventional therapies are another significant factor in favor of non-pharmacological therapy. The most significant side effects of popular anti-gastric ulcer medications include nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Stomach ulcers have previously been treated with herbal remedies and complementary treatments like probiotics. When probiotics are ingested, the host experiences several advantages that may be brought about by altering the bacterial flora in the digestive system. Additionally, stronger-acting chemical compounds and plant extracts can be employed to treat patients. In this article, we look at the substances and medications that are utilized in place of synthetic stomach ulcer-curing treatments.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    肝细胞癌(HCC)和门静脉癌栓(PVTT)患者的预后极差,全身治疗是目前的主流治疗方法。本研究旨在评估lenvatinib联合抗PD-1抗体和经导管动脉化疗栓塞(三联疗法)在HCC和PVTT患者中的疗效和安全性。
    这项回顾性多中心研究包括接受三联疗法的HCC和PVTT患者,年龄在18到75岁之间,分类为ChildPughA级或B级,至少有一个可测量的病变。总生存期(OS),无进展生存期(PFS),客观反应率,和疾病控制率进行分析以评估疗效。分析治疗相关的不良事件以评估安全性。
    在11.23个月的中位随访期间(范围,3.07-34.37个月),中位OS大于24个月,中位PFS为12.53个月.两年OS率为54.9%。客观有效率和疾病控制率分别为69.8%(74/106)和84.0%(89/106),20.8%(22/106)的患者出现3/4级治疗相关不良事件,无治疗相关死亡.肝切除的转化率为31.1%(33/106),术后并发症可控。手术组未达到中位OS,但非手术组为19.08个月.手术组和非手术组的中位PFS分别为20.50和9.00个月,分别。
    三联疗法在HCC和PVTT患者中显示出有希望的生存益处和高反应率,具有可控的不良反应。
    UNASSIGNED: The prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) is extremely poor, and systemic therapy is currently the mainstream treatment. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib combined with anti-PD-1 antibodies and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (triple therapy) in patients with HCC and PVTT.
    UNASSIGNED: This retrospective multicenter study included patients with HCC and PVTT who received triple therapy, were aged between 18 and 75 years, classified as Child Pugh class A or B, and had at least one measurable lesion. The overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rates, and disease control rates were analyzed to assess efficacy. Treatment-related adverse events were analyzed to assess safety profiles.
    UNASSIGNED: During a median follow-up of 11.23 months (range, 3.07-34.37 months), the median OS was greater than 24 months, and median PFS was 12.53 months. The two-year OS rate was 54.9%. The objective response rate and disease control rate were 69.8% (74/106) and 84.0% (89/106), respectively; 20.8% (22/106) of the patients experienced grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events and no treatment-related deaths occurred. The conversion rate to liver resection was 31.1% (33/106), with manageable postoperative complications. The median OS was not reached in the surgery group, but was 19.08 months in the non-surgery group. The median PFS in the surgery and non-surgery groups were 20.50 and 9.00 months, respectively.
    UNASSIGNED: Triple therapy showed promising survival benefits and high response rates in patients with HCC and PVTT, with manageable adverse effects.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号