scholarly journals Efficacy of Probiotics as Adjunctive Therapy to Nonsurgical Treatment of Peri-Implant Mucositis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Zhao ◽  
Huimin Hu ◽  
Yan Wang ◽  
Wenli Lai ◽  
Fan Jian

Background: Peri-implant mucositis (PiM) is an inflammation of the soft tissues surrounding the dental implant and is the precursor of the destructive inflammatory peri-implantitis. PiM is usually reversible, but difficult to eradicate. Mechanical debridement (MD) is the conventional procedure to treat PiM although not enough to reach a complete resolution. Recently, probiotics have been considered in the treatment of peri-implant disease. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy of the probiotic therapy combined with MD compared with MD alone or MD + placebo in patients with PiM.Methods: A search using electronic databases (MEDLINE, Science Direct databases, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and a manual search were performed up to November 2019 by two reviewers independently of each other. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MD + probiotic vs. MD were included. The quality assessment for all the selected RCTs was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Probing depth reduction was selected as the primary outcome. Weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for continuous outcomes, and odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, using random effect models. This review was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42020213625).Results: Five eligible publications were included in this systematic review and four in the meta-analysis. As regards the implant, the WMD in the probing depth reduction between the test and control group was −0.12 mm [95% CI (−0.38, 0.14), p = 0.38], meaning that the adjunctive probiotic therapy was not improving PiM compared with MD alone or MD + placebo. The meta-analysis also showed no statistically significant results in the secondary outcomes (reduction of full mouth plaque index and full mouth bleeding on probing, absence of bleeding on probing at implant level, and changes in microorganism load and species).Conclusion: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggested that the additional use of probiotics did not improve the efficacy of MD in PiM treatment regarding clinical and microbial outcomes, at least in a short-term.

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. e0240862
Author(s):  
Qishou Tang ◽  
Zhaohui Huang ◽  
Huan Zhou ◽  
Peijie Ye

Background We aimed to determine and compare the effects of music therapy and music medicine on depression, and explore the potential factors associated with the effect. Methods PubMed (MEDLINE), Ovid-Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Clinical Evidence were searched to identify studies evaluating the effectiveness of music-based intervention on depression from inception to May 2020. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) were estimated with random-effect model and fixed-effect model. Results A total of 55 RCTs were included in our meta-analysis. Music therapy exhibited a significant reduction in depressive symptom (SMD = −0.66; 95% CI = -0.86 to -0.46; P<0.001) compared with the control group; while, music medicine exhibited a stronger effect in reducing depressive symptom (SMD = −1.33; 95% CI = -1.96 to -0.70; P<0.001). Among the specific music therapy methods, recreative music therapy (SMD = -1.41; 95% CI = -2.63 to -0.20; P<0.001), guided imagery and music (SMD = -1.08; 95% CI = -1.72 to -0.43; P<0.001), music-assisted relaxation (SMD = -0.81; 95% CI = -1.24 to -0.38; P<0.001), music and imagery (SMD = -0.38; 95% CI = -0.81 to 0.06; P = 0.312), improvisational music therapy (SMD = -0.27; 95% CI = -0.49 to -0.05; P = 0.001), music and discuss (SMD = -0.26; 95% CI = -1.12 to 0.60; P = 0.225) exhibited a different effect respectively. Music therapy and music medicine both exhibited a stronger effects of short and medium length compared with long intervention periods. Conclusions A different effect of music therapy and music medicine on depression was observed in our present meta-analysis, and the effect might be affected by the therapy process.


Author(s):  
Kesley Pablo Morais de Azevedo ◽  
Victor Hugo de Oliveira ◽  
Gidyenne Christine Bandeira Silva de Medeiros ◽  
Ádala Nayana de Sousa Mata ◽  
Daniel Ángel García ◽  
...  

The aim of this study was to analyze the evidence available in the literature about the effects of exercise on brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels in adolescents. The literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, SportDiscus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and CINAHL. Randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled trials performed with adolescents (10–19 years) who underwent different exercise programs and who evaluated BDNF levels before and after the intervention were included. We included six studies, four RCTs and two non-RCTs in the systematic review with a total of 407 adolescents. In two randomized trials and one non-RCT, the intervention groups showed significant improvements in BDNF levels compared with the control group. The results presented in the meta-analysis indicate that despite the positive effect in favor of the intervention, there were no significant differences (standardized mean difference 0.28 ng/mL, 95% confidence interval −0.28 to 0.85; p = 0.32, I² = 0%). The results presented in our review indicate that aerobic exercise programs practiced in moderate- or high-intensity are promising strategies to increase BDNF levels in adolescents. However, further studies are required to support this finding.


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. e022012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alina Rigabert ◽  
Emma Motrico ◽  
Patricia Moreno-Peral ◽  
Davinia M Resurrección ◽  
Sonia Conejo-Cerón ◽  
...  

IntroductionAlthough evidence exists for the efficacy of psychosocial interventions in preventing depression, little is known about its prevention through online interventions. The objective of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of online interventions in preventing depression in heterogeneous populations.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials that will be identified through searches of PubMed, PsycINFO, WOS, Scopus, OpenGrey, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov and Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Register . We will also search the reference lists provided in relevant studies and reviews. Experts in the field will be contacted to obtain more references. Two independent reviewers will assess the eligibility criteria of all articles, extract data and determine their risk of bias (Cochrane Collaboration Tool). Baseline depression will be required to have been discarded through standardised interviews or validated self-reports with standard cut-off points. The outcomes will be the incidence of new cases of depression and/or the reduction of depressive symptoms as measured by validated instruments. Pooled standardised mean differences will be calculated using random-effect models. Heterogeneity and publication bias will be estimated. Predefined sensitivity and subgroup analyses will be performed. If heterogeneity is relevant, random-effect meta-regression will be performed.Ethics and disseminationThe results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and will be presented at a professional conference. Ethical assessment is not required as we will search and assess existing sources of literature.Trial registration numberCRD42014014804; Results.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e044357
Author(s):  
Caio Chaves Guimaraes ◽  
Luciane Cruz Lopes ◽  
Cristiane de Cássia Bergamaschi ◽  
Juliana Cama Ramacciato ◽  
Marcus Tolentino Silva ◽  
...  

ObjectivesThere is a lack of evidence about the use of local anaesthetics (LAs) in patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVD) in dental procedures. Thus, this study evaluated the safety of using LA with vasoconstrictor to determine the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with CVD.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsWe have searched in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Healthstar (via Ovid), CINAHL, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) up to January 2020. We have included RCTs involving adults with CVD within two groups: intervention group with LA with vasoconstrictor and control group with LA without vasoconstrictor. The primary outcomes assessed were death, mortality by a specific cause, stroke, acute myocardial infarction, hospitalisation, pain, bleeding and arrhythmias. The secondary outcomes were ST segment depression, anxiety, adverse effects and changes in haemodynamic parameters. The data were pooled using random effects meta-analyses and the confidence in the estimates was verified using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).ResultsTen RCTs (n=478 participants) were included. Most of them had a high risk of bias. There were more cases of pain and bleeding in groups without vasoconstrictor. Meta-analysis demonstrated a decrease in the systolic blood pressure with the use of LA with vasoconstrictor (standard mean difference −0.95, 95% CI −1.35 to −0.55) after procedure. Overall, for the other outcomes assessed there was no statistical difference. The quality of evidence was considered low according to the GRADE profile.ConclusionsThe results suggest that the use of LA with vasoconstrictors (epinephrine in low doses) is safe in patients with some types of CVD. However, the low quality of evidence demonstrated that literature needs further studies in order to confirm these results.Protocol registrationPROSPERO (CRD42016045421).


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 3840
Author(s):  
Chun-Hung Chang ◽  
Hsiao-Lun Kuo ◽  
Wei-Fen Ma ◽  
Hsin-Chi Tsai

Objective: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a complex and severe neurodegenerative disease and still lacks effective methods of diagnosis. Dysfunction of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) has been found to be involved in synapse dysfunction and neurotoxicity of AD mechanisms. d-Serine, an NMDAR receptor coagonist, is reported as a potential new biomarker for AD. However, the results of serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) d-serine levels are conflicting. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the serum and CSF d-serine levels in patients with AD. Methods: We searched PubMed, the Cochrane central register of controlled trials, and the Cochrane database of systematic reviews for trials that measured d-serine levels both in patients with AD and in controls. We included controlled trials that analyzed d-serine levels in human samples (e.g., serum and CSF). Studies were pooled using a random-effect model for comparisons between AD and control group. We used effect size (ES; expressed as d-serine levels) in each selected meta-analysis to calculate standardized mean difference (SMD). Positive values indicated increased d-serine levels in AD group. We presented results with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The heterogeneity of the included trials was evaluated through visually inspecting funnel plots and using the I2 statistic. Moderators of effects were explored using metaregression. Results: Seven trials with more than 1186 participants were included in this meta-analysis. d-serine levels in patients with AD were significantly higher than those in controls (SMD = 0.679, 95% CI = 0.335 to 1.022, p < 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed that the AD group had significantly higher d-serine levels in serum and CSF compared with the control group (SMD = 0.566 (serum) and 1.008 (CSF); 95% CI = 0.183 to 0.948 (serum) and 0.168 to 1.849 (CSF)). Moreover, a metaregression revealed a significant negative association between ES and mean mini-mental state examination score in AD group (slope = −0.1203, p = 0.0004). Conclusions: Our results revealed higher d-serine levels in the serum and CSF of patients with AD relative to the controls. Further studies with a larger sample size and longer follow-up are recommended to clarify this association.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vinícius Y Moraes ◽  
Alexandre R Marra ◽  
Leandro L Matos ◽  
Ary Serpa Neto ◽  
Luiz Vicente Rizzo ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: We performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS (2019 to March 2021) for patients aged 18 years or older, who had COVID-19 and were treated with hydroxychloroquine versus placebo or standard of care. We also searched the WHO Clinical Trials Registry for ongoing and recently completed studies, and the reference lists of selected articles and reviews for possible relevant studies, with no restrictions regarding language or publication status. Random-effects models were used to obtain pooled mean differences of treatment effect on mortality, and serious adverse effects between hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and the control group (standard of care or placebo); heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 and the Cochran´s Q statistic. Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in mortality rate between patients treated with HCQ compared to standard of care or placebo (16.7% vs. 18.5%; pooled risk ratio 1.09; 95%CI: 0.99-1.19). Also, therate of serious adverse effects was similar between both groups, HCQ and control (3.7% vs. 2.9%; pooled risk ratio 1.22; 95%CI: 0.76-1.96). Conclusion: Hydroxychloroquine is not efficacious in reducing mortality of COVID-19 patients.Systematic review registration: Prospero database, registration number: CRD42020197070.


2021 ◽  
pp. jnnp-2021-327195
Author(s):  
Tom J Moullaali ◽  
Xia Wang ◽  
Else Charlotte Sandset ◽  
Lisa J Woodhouse ◽  
Zhe Kang Law ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo summarise evidence of the effects of blood pressure (BP)-lowering interventions after acute spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH).MethodsA prespecified systematic review of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from inception to 23 June 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials that compared active BP-lowering agents versus placebo or intensive versus guideline BP-lowering targets for adults <7 days after ICH onset. The primary outcome was function (distribution of scores on the modified Rankin scale) 90 days after randomisation. Radiological outcomes were absolute (>6 mL) and proportional (>33%) haematoma growth at 24 hours. Meta-analysis used a one-stage approach, adjusted using generalised linear mixed models with prespecified covariables and trial as a random effect.ResultsOf 7094 studies identified, 50 trials involving 11 494 patients were eligible and 16 (32.0%) shared patient-level data from 6221 (54.1%) patients (mean age 64.2 [SD 12.9], 2266 [36.4%] females) with a median time from symptom onset to randomisation of 3.8 hours (IQR 2.6–5.3). Active/intensive BP-lowering interventions had no effect on the primary outcome compared with placebo/guideline treatment (adjusted OR for unfavourable shift in modified Rankin scale scores: 0.97, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.06; p=0.50), but there was significant heterogeneity by strategy (pinteraction=0.031) and agent (pinteraction<0.0001). Active/intensive BP-lowering interventions clearly reduced absolute (>6 ml, adjusted OR 0.75, 95%CI 0.60 to 0.92; p=0.0077) and relative (≥33%, adjusted OR 0.82, 95%CI 0.68 to 0.99; p=0.034) haematoma growth.InterpretationOverall, a broad range of interventions to lower BP within 7 days of ICH onset had no overall benefit on functional recovery, despite reducing bleeding. The treatment effect appeared to vary according to strategy and agent.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019141136.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thaiana Barbosa Ferreira Pacheco ◽  
Candice Simões Pimenta de Medeiros ◽  
Victor Hugo Brito de Oliveira ◽  
Edgar Ramos Vieira ◽  
Fabrícia Azevêdo da Costa Cavalcanti

Abstract Background: Exergaming is a fun, engaging, and interactive form of exercising and it may help overcome some of the traditional exercise barriers and help improve adherence by older adults providing therapeutic applications for balance recovery and functional mobility. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize the effects of exergames in older adults’ mobility and balance. Methods: The PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews were followed. The following databases were searched from inception to August 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, CINAHL and INSPEC. We selected randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of exergames on balance or mobility of older adults without neurological conditions, in comparison to no intervention or health education. Two review authors independently screened the trials titles and abstracts and identified trials for inclusion according to the eligibility criteria. Trial selection presented an almost perfect agreement between the authors regarding the interrater reliability (kappa = 0.84; p<0,001). Then, a descriptive analysis of the quantitative data was performed to summarize the evidence. Meta-analysis was carried using Revman. Random effects model was used to compute the pooled prevalence at 95% confidence interval. Results: After screening 822 trials, twelve trials comparing exergames with no intervention were included. A total of 1520 older adults participated in the studies, with mean age of 76±6 years for the experimental group and 76±5 years for the control group. Three studies found significant improvements in balance based on center of pressure sway and Berg Balance Scale scores. Three studies found improved mobility based on the timed up and go, 30-second chair stand, and 8-foot up and go test. Conclusions: Exergames improved balance and mobility in older adults without neurological disorders. High quality studies with standardized assessment protocols are necessary to improve evidence.


2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (8) ◽  
pp. 030006052110398
Author(s):  
Zhaoqiu Li ◽  
Cuiping Li ◽  
Maoxian Zhang

Objective We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review to evaluate the effects of dexmedetomidine on the hemodynamics of patients undergoing hysterectomy. Methods We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that allowed direct or indirect comparisons of hemodynamic indicators. We also searched nine English-language databases up to April 2021 to identify relevant research. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs was applied to assess the methodological quality of the eligible studies. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software. Results Nine trials were included in this systematic review. The effect of dexmedetomidine on heart rate during surgery was significantly smaller than that of other sedatives. Intraoperative systolic and diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure were more stable in the dexmedetomidine group compared with the control group. The postoperative modified Observer’s Assessment of Alertness Score was also better in the dexmedetomidine compared with the control group. Conclusions Dexmedetomidine increases hemodynamic stability in patients undergoing hysterectomy, reduces the cardiovascular stress response during surgery, and effectively prevents postoperative adverse reactions, with good safety.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e035411
Author(s):  
Arlinda Ruco ◽  
Fahima Dossa ◽  
Jill Tinmouth ◽  
Diego Llovet ◽  
Teruko Kishibe ◽  
...  

IntroductionCancer is one of the leading causes of death globally and many jurisdictions have developed population-based cancer screening programmes to reduce the public health burden of disease. However, screening participation remains suboptimal. Social media and other mobile health (mHealth) technologies are increasingly being used for health promotion and behaviour change. This paper reports on the protocol for a systematic review exploring the effect of social media and other mHealth interventions on cancer screening participation and intention.Methods and analysisThis protocol is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist. We will include any randomised controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies with a pre/post design conducted in adults ≥18 years of age that report on the effectiveness of a social media or mHealth intervention on screening participation or intention (inclusive of breast, cervical, colorectal, prostate and lung cancer). Interventions will be inclusive of those delivered online or through a computer using an established social media platform or a new purpose-built platform, or those delivered through cellphones or other wireless technologies. Any comparator will be acceptable (control group, alternate intervention or pre/post design). We will search Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Communication and Mass Media Complete from 1 January 2000 to 31 May 2019. Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts and full-text articles with conflicts resolved through discussion or by a third reviewer, as needed. The two reviewers will also independently complete risk of bias assessments for each included study. We will report on the characteristics of the studies, participants and interventions in descriptive narrative form and report the absolute and relative differences in screening and intention attributable to social media and mobile technology interventions.Ethics and disseminationAs this is a systematic review, ethical approval for conduct of this study is not required. We will pursue publication of study results in a relevant peer-reviewed journal and report our findings according to the PRISMA checklist.Trial registration numberCRD42019139615.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document