各种皮质类固醇治疗儿童过敏性鼻炎的有效性和安全性:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-23 DOI:10.1111/jebm.12645
Yuxin Li, Jun Xiong, Zheng Zhang, Kai Liao, Xiaohong Zho, Jun Li, Jie Xiang, Lingling Xu
{"title":"各种皮质类固醇治疗儿童过敏性鼻炎的有效性和安全性:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Yuxin Li,&nbsp;Jun Xiong,&nbsp;Zheng Zhang,&nbsp;Kai Liao,&nbsp;Xiaohong Zho,&nbsp;Jun Li,&nbsp;Jie Xiang,&nbsp;Lingling Xu","doi":"10.1111/jebm.12645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Intranasal corticosteroids were recommended as first-line drugs for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) children. A variety of corticosteroids were available for clinical choice; however, which could relieve the clinical symptoms of patients to the greatest extent was currently unknown. Thus, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different corticosteroids in treating children with AR, which might provide a basis for more rational clinical treatment decisions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Seven electronic databases were searched, and the retrieval time range was the time from their inception to November 2023. The literature screening, data extraction, and assessment of the risk of bias of included studies were completed independently by two reviewers. A frequentist NMA was performed with Stata17.0 software.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 43 RCTs covering 10,897 participants were included. In the improvement of reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS) and instantaneous total nasal symptom score (iTNSS), fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) and beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) nasal aerosol presented the best efficacy. Regarding the incidence of adverse reactions, mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray (MFANS) and BDP showed a good safety profile. In terms of the influence of cortisol (urinary free cortisol, plasma cortisol) and growth, no significant difference was observed between the different groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The results showed that BDP nasal aerosol and FFNS had best efficacy; MFANS and BDP had the best safety profile. However, this conclusion was less convincing because of the limited numbers of patients/controls and study quality.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"17 3","pages":"626-642"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of various corticosteroids in the treatment of children with allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Yuxin Li,&nbsp;Jun Xiong,&nbsp;Zheng Zhang,&nbsp;Kai Liao,&nbsp;Xiaohong Zho,&nbsp;Jun Li,&nbsp;Jie Xiang,&nbsp;Lingling Xu\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jebm.12645\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Intranasal corticosteroids were recommended as first-line drugs for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) children. A variety of corticosteroids were available for clinical choice; however, which could relieve the clinical symptoms of patients to the greatest extent was currently unknown. Thus, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different corticosteroids in treating children with AR, which might provide a basis for more rational clinical treatment decisions.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Seven electronic databases were searched, and the retrieval time range was the time from their inception to November 2023. The literature screening, data extraction, and assessment of the risk of bias of included studies were completed independently by two reviewers. A frequentist NMA was performed with Stata17.0 software.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>A total of 43 RCTs covering 10,897 participants were included. In the improvement of reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS) and instantaneous total nasal symptom score (iTNSS), fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) and beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) nasal aerosol presented the best efficacy. Regarding the incidence of adverse reactions, mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray (MFANS) and BDP showed a good safety profile. In terms of the influence of cortisol (urinary free cortisol, plasma cortisol) and growth, no significant difference was observed between the different groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>The results showed that BDP nasal aerosol and FFNS had best efficacy; MFANS and BDP had the best safety profile. However, this conclusion was less convincing because of the limited numbers of patients/controls and study quality.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16090,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"626-642\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jebm.12645\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jebm.12645","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:鼻内皮质类固醇被推荐为治疗儿童过敏性鼻炎(AR)的一线药物。临床上有多种皮质类固醇可供选择,但目前尚不清楚哪种药物能最大程度地缓解患者的临床症状。因此,我们进行了一项网络荟萃分析(NMA),以系统评估不同皮质类固醇治疗儿童过敏性鼻炎的有效性和安全性,从而为更合理的临床治疗决策提供依据:方法:检索了七个电子数据库,检索时间范围为这些数据库的起始时间至 2023 年 11 月。文献筛选、数据提取和纳入研究的偏倚风险评估由两名审稿人独立完成。使用Stata17.0软件进行了频数主义NMA分析:结果:共纳入 43 项 RCT 研究,覆盖 10,897 名参与者。在改善反射性鼻部症状总分(rTNSS)和瞬时鼻部症状总分(iTNSS)方面,糠酸氟替卡松鼻喷雾剂(FFNS)和二丙酸倍氯米松(BDP)鼻气雾剂的疗效最佳。在不良反应发生率方面,糠酸莫米松水鼻喷雾剂(MFANS)和二丙酸倍氯米松(BDP)显示出良好的安全性。在皮质醇(尿游离皮质醇、血浆皮质醇)和生长的影响方面,不同组之间没有观察到显著差异:结果表明,BDP 鼻用气雾剂和 FFNS 的疗效最好;MFANS 和 BDP 的安全性最好。然而,由于患者/对照组数量有限以及研究质量问题,这一结论的说服力较弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Efficacy and safety of various corticosteroids in the treatment of children with allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Intranasal corticosteroids were recommended as first-line drugs for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR) children. A variety of corticosteroids were available for clinical choice; however, which could relieve the clinical symptoms of patients to the greatest extent was currently unknown. Thus, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different corticosteroids in treating children with AR, which might provide a basis for more rational clinical treatment decisions.

Methods

Seven electronic databases were searched, and the retrieval time range was the time from their inception to November 2023. The literature screening, data extraction, and assessment of the risk of bias of included studies were completed independently by two reviewers. A frequentist NMA was performed with Stata17.0 software.

Results

A total of 43 RCTs covering 10,897 participants were included. In the improvement of reflective total nasal symptom score (rTNSS) and instantaneous total nasal symptom score (iTNSS), fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) and beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) nasal aerosol presented the best efficacy. Regarding the incidence of adverse reactions, mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray (MFANS) and BDP showed a good safety profile. In terms of the influence of cortisol (urinary free cortisol, plasma cortisol) and growth, no significant difference was observed between the different groups.

Conclusion

The results showed that BDP nasal aerosol and FFNS had best efficacy; MFANS and BDP had the best safety profile. However, this conclusion was less convincing because of the limited numbers of patients/controls and study quality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine
Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
1.40%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine (EMB) is an esteemed international healthcare and medical decision-making journal, dedicated to publishing groundbreaking research outcomes in evidence-based decision-making, research, practice, and education. Serving as the official English-language journal of the Cochrane China Centre and West China Hospital of Sichuan University, we eagerly welcome editorials, commentaries, and systematic reviews encompassing various topics such as clinical trials, policy, drug and patient safety, education, and knowledge translation.
期刊最新文献
Extraversion and the Brain: A Coordinate-Based Meta-Analysis of Functional Brain Imaging Studies on Positive Affect. Characteristics of Quality Improvement Projects in Health Services: A Systematic Scoping Review. Clinical Practice Guidelines for Topical NSAIDs in the Treatment of Sports Injuries. Issue Information Barriers and Facilitators to the Participation of Pregnant Women in Clinical Research: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1