Ximelagatran versus warfarin for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in major orthopedic surgery: systematic review of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUÇÃO: O ximelagatrano foi recentemente estudada para profilaxia do tromboembolismo venoso (TEV). OBJETIVO: Avaliar se o ximelagatrano comparado com a varfarina melhora a profilaxia do TEV em pacientes submetidos à cirurgia ortopédica do joelho. FONTE DE DADOS: Estudos randomizados identificados por pesquisa eletrônica na literatura médica, até 2006, cujos dados foram compilados no programa Review Manager, versão 4.2.5. RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos três estudos randomizados bem conduzidos envolvendo 4.914 participantes. Foram definidos dois sub-grupos com dosagens diferentes de ximelagatrano (24 mg and 36 mg, duas vezes ao dia). O tratamento com ximelagatrano mostrou freqüência significantemente menor de TEV que o tratamento com varfarina, mas somente na dosagem de 36-mg [risco relativo, RR 0.72 ([intervalo de confiança, IC, 95% 0.64, 0.81), p < 0.00001]. A freqüência de TEV no sub-grupo de 24-mg foi similar a da varfarina [RR 0.86 (IC 95% 0.73, 1.01), p = 0.06]. Para TEV maior, embolia pulmonar, sangramento e sangramento maior não houve diferença entre varfarina e a ximelagatrano. Ao final do tratamento, a elevação da alanino-aminotransferase (ALT) foi menos freqüente no sub-grupo de 24 mg de ximelagatrano que no grupo da varfarina [RR 0.33 (IC 95% 0.12, 0.91) p = 0.03], mas no período de acompanhamento essa elevação foi maior com 36 mg de ximelagatrano [RR 6.97 (IC 95% 1.26, 38.50) p = 0.03]. CONCLUSÃO: O ximelagatrano foi mais efetivo que a varfarina quando usado em dosagens maiores (36 mg, 2 vezes ao dia), mas às expensas de aumento de enzimas hepáticas no período de acompanhamento.

Cabergoline versus bromocriptine in the treatment of hyperprolactinemia: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Effects of motor intervention in elderly patients with dementia: An analysis of randomized controlled trials

The objective of this study was to analyze randomized controlled trials published in the last decades involving motor intervention as a treatment for dementia, based on Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) criteria. A database search was performed using the following keywords: randomized controlled trial, dementia, physiotherapy, physical therapy, occupational therapy, physical education, motor approach, exercise, and physical activity. Ten trials were found: 4 related to physiotherapy, 3 to occupational therapy, 1 to physical education, and 2 to interdisciplinary motor intervention. The efficacy of motor intervention was confirmed in the following variables: psychosocial function, physical health and function, affective status, and caregiver's distress (P < .05). Results related to mobility were not significant (P > .05). Behavior, cognitive performance, activities of daily living, and risk of falls were not similar among the articles. From a total score of 10 points, with excellence characterized as the highest punctuation, the articles were classified between 3 and 7 by PEDro. Motor intervention was shown to be an alternative for minimizing physical and mental decline. PEDro has been confirmed as a very reliable tool to analyze studies and as an evaluation criteria, both qualitative and quantitative, allowing the establishment of motor intervention strategies for the treatment of patients with dementia. © 2007 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of new anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in major orthopedic surgeries, compared with enoxaparin

Background: In the past 10 years, new anticoagulants (NACs) have been studied for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Objective: To evaluate the risk/benefit profile of NACs versus enoxaparin for VTE prophylaxis in major orthopedic surgery. Methods: A systematic review of double-blind randomized phase III studies was performed. The search strategy was run from 2000 to 2011 in the main medical electronic databases in any language. Independent extraction of articles was performed by 2 authors using predefined data fields, including study quality indicators. Results: Fifteen published clinical trials evaluating fondaparinux, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban were included. Primary efficacy (any deep vein thrombosis [DVT], nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or all-cause mortality) favored fondaparinux (relative risk [RR] 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39, 0.63) and rivaroxaban (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.34, 0.73) over enoxaparin, although significant heterogeneity was observed in both series. The primary efficacy of dabigatran at 220 mg, apixaban, and bemiparin were similar, with RRs of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.86, 1.20), 0.63 (95% CI, 0.39, 1.01), and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.65, 1.17), respectively. The primary efficacy of dabigatran at 150 mg (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.03, 1.41), was inferior to enoxaparin. The incidence of proximal DVT favored apixaban (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27, 0.75) only. Rivaroxaban (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27, 0,77) and apixaban (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16, 0.90) produced significantly lower frequencies of symptomatic DVT. The incidence of major VTE favored rivaroxaban (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.25, 0.81), only. Bleeding risk was similar for all NACs, except fondaparinux (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.04, 1.55), which exhibited a significantly higher any-bleeding risk compared with enoxaparin, and apixaban (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99), which was associated with a reduced risk of any bleeding. Alanine amino transferase was significantly lower with 220 mg of dabigatran, (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99) than with enoxaparin. Conclusions: NACs can be considered alternatives to conventional thromboprophylaxis regimens in patients undergoing elective major orthopedic surgery, depending on clinical characteristics and cost-effectiveness. The knowledge of some differences concerning efficacy or safety profile, pointed out in this systematic review, along with the respective limitations, may be useful in clinical practice. © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

A randomised controlled trial of periconal eye blockade with or without ultrasound guidance

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)