ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of different drugs for patients with methamphetamine-induced psychotic disorders by network meta-analysis.MethodsAn electronical search was conducted in PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMbase, CNKI, CBM, WanFang Data and VIP databases from inception to October 2016 to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about different drugs for methamphetamine-induced psychotic disorders. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk bias of included studies, and then RevMan 5.3, R 3.3.2 and JAGS 4.2.0 softwares were used to perform network meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 16 RCTs involving 1 676 patients and 9 kinds of drugs were included. The results of network meta-analysis showed that: compared with the placebo group, olanzapine (OR=28.00, 95%CI 8.10 to 110.00), risperidone (OR=20.00, 95%CI 7.70 to 58.00), quetiapine (OR=30.00, 95%CI 6.60 to 160.00), ziprasidone (OR=28.00, 95%CI 3.70 to 230.00), chlorpromazine (OR=29.00, 95%CI 5.00 to 200.00), aripiprazole (OR=13.00, 95%CI 1.70 to 93.00), haloperidol (OR=19.00, 95%CI 2.10 to 190.00) could significantly improve the psychotic disorders of patients with methamphetamine, respectively, in which quetiapine was the best choice. There were no significant differences between any other pairwise comparisons of these different drugs.ConclusionFor the treatment of psychotic disorders caused by methamphetamine, quetiapine should be of a priority choice, follows by ziprasidone, chlorpromazine, olanzapine, risperidone, aripiprazole or haloperidol in a descending priority. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify above conclusion.
Objectives To systematically review the efficacy and safety of carbetocinversusoxytocin on the prevention of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) for women undergoing vaginal delivery. Methods PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on carbetocinversusoxytocin on the prevention of PPH for women undergoing vaginal delivery from inception to January 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies, then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0 software. Results A total of 16 RCTs including 2 537 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared to oxytocin, carbetocin could reduce the amount of blood loss within 24h (MD=–107.68, 95%CI–130.21 to –85.15, P<0.000 01) and 2h (MD=–85.98, 95%CI–93.37 to –78.59,P<0.000 01), hemoglobin (Hb) within 24h after delivery (MD=–5.63, 95%CI–6.82 to –4.43,P<0.000 01), the occurrence of PPH (RR=0.46, 95%CI 0.32 to 0.66,P<0.000 01) and the requirement for additional uterotonic agents (RR=0.63, 95%CI 0.48 to 0.84,P=0.002). There was no significant difference in the risk of adverse effects between two groups. Conclusions Current evidence shows that carbetocin is superior to oxytocin in the prevention of PPH for women undergoing vaginal delivery, without increasing the adverse effects. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are required to verify above the conclusion.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of adefovir monotherapy (ADF) versus adefovir-Matrine combination therapy (ADF+M) for chronic hepatitis B. Methods Such databases as The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PubMed, CBM, CNKI, WanFang and VIP Database were searched from the date of their establishment to July 2010, and the references of all included studies were also traced so as to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ADF versus ADF+M. Quality assessment and data extraction were conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook 5.0.2 by two reviewers independently. Meta-analyses were conducted by using RevMan 5.0 software. Results A total of 24 RCTs involving 2 092 patients were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that at the end of the treatment for both six months and 12 months, respectively, the ADF+M group was superior to ADF group with a significant difference in both the HBeAg seroconversion rate as the primary outcome (six months: RR=2.05, 95%CI 1.53 to 2.74; 12 months: RR=2.13 95%CI 1.74 to 2.60) and the secondary outcome such as HBV-DNA negative conversion, HBeAg negative conversion, ALT normalization, HBV-DNA variation, complete response and HBsAg negative conversion, etc. Conclusion As the current evidence shows, ADF+M therapy is superior to ADF therapy for chronic hepatitis B. The significant difference can even be observed at the end of the treatment for six months. However, the results should be interpreted with caution because of the low quality of the included studies. High-quality, large-scale RCTs are needed to further prove the results.
Objective To compare adefovir monotherapy with adefovir-thymosin alpha-1 combination therapy for chronic hepatitis B. Methods We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PubMed, the Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM), CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases up to February 2010 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing adefovir plus thymosin alpha-1 versus adefovir alone for chronic hepatitis B. We also scanned references of all included studies and pertinent reviews. The methodological quality assessment and data extraction were conducted by two reviewers independently according to the Cochrane Reviewer’s Handbook 5.0.2 . Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.0 software. Results Eleven trials involving 895 patients were included. The results of meta-analyses shoued: the HBeAg seroconversion rate of the combination therapy group was higher than that of the monotherapy group, both at the sixth month and the twelfth month (RR=1.77, 95%CI 1.38 to 2.27; RR=1.74, 95%CI 1.44 to 2.10); and there were also significant differences between the two groups for secondary outcomes including HBV-DNA negative, ALT normalization, etc.Conclusion Adefovir-thymosin alpha-1 combination therapy might be more effective than adefovir monotherapy for chronic hepatitis B. Significant differences are even observed at the sixth month. However, the results should be interpreted with caution because of the low quality of the included studies. High-quality, large-scale RCTs are needed to further prove the results.