273 resultados para Grassman, Sven

em BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça


Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Bisphosphonates (BPs) are powerful drugs that inhibit bone metabolism. Adverse side effects are rare but potentially severe such as bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ). To date, research has primarily focused on the development and progression of BRONJ in cancer patients with bone metastasis, who have received high dosages of BPs intravenously. However, a potential dilemma may arise from a far larger cohort, namely the millions of osteoporosis patients on long-term oral BP therapy.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

To evaluate, in a prospective pilot study, the feasibility of identifying pathogens in urine using real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and to compare the results with the conventional urine culture-based procedures.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Objective To examine the presence and extent of small study effects in clinical osteoarthritis research. Design Meta-epidemiological study. Data sources 13 meta-analyses including 153 randomised trials (41 605 patients) that compared therapeutic interventions with placebo or non-intervention control in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee and used patients’ reported pain as an outcome. Methods We compared estimated benefits of treatment between large trials (at least 100 patients per arm) and small trials, explored funnel plots supplemented with lines of predicted effects and contours of significance, and used three approaches to estimate treatment effects: meta-analyses including all trials irrespective of sample size, meta-analyses restricted to large trials, and treatment effects predicted for large trials. Results On average, treatment effects were more beneficial in small than in large trials (difference in effect sizes −0.21, 95% confidence interval −0.34 to −0.08, P=0.001). Depending on criteria used, six to eight funnel plots indicated small study effects. In six of 13 meta-analyses, the overall pooled estimate suggested a clinically relevant, significant benefit of treatment, whereas analyses restricted to large trials and predicted effects in large trials yielded smaller non-significant estimates. Conclusions Small study effects can often distort results of meta-analyses. The influence of small trials on estimated treatment effects should be routinely assessed.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Major pelvic trauma results in high mortality. No standard technique to control pelvic hemorrhage has been identified.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of glucosamine, chondroitin, or the two in combination on joint pain and on radiological progression of disease in osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. Design Network meta-analysis. Direct comparisons within trials were combined with indirect evidence from other trials by using a Bayesian model that allowed the synthesis of multiple time points. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Pain intensity. Secondary outcome was change in minimal width of joint space. The minimal clinically important difference between preparations and placebo was prespecified at -0.9 cm on a 10 cm visual analogue scale. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases and conference proceedings from inception to June 2009, expert contact, relevant websites. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Large scale randomised controlled trials in more than 200 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip that compared glucosamine, chondroitin, or their combination with placebo or head to head. Results 10 trials in 3803 patients were included. On a 10 cm visual analogue scale the overall difference in pain intensity compared with placebo was -0.4 cm (95% credible interval -0.7 to -0.1 cm) for glucosamine, -0.3 cm (-0.7 to 0.0 cm) for chondroitin, and -0.5 cm (-0.9 to 0.0 cm) for the combination. For none of the estimates did the 95% credible intervals cross the boundary of the minimal clinically important difference. Industry independent trials showed smaller effects than commercially funded trials (P=0.02 for interaction). The differences in changes in minimal width of joint space were all minute, with 95% credible intervals overlapping zero. Conclusions Compared with placebo, glucosamine, chondroitin, and their combination do not reduce joint pain or have an impact on narrowing of joint space. Health authorities and health insurers should not cover the costs of these preparations, and new prescriptions to patients who have not received treatment should be discouraged.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Background Osteoarthritis is the most common form of joint disorder and a leading cause of pain and physical disability. Observational studies suggested a benefit for joint lavage, but recent, sham-controlled trials yielded conflicting results, suggesting joint lavage not to be effective. Objectives To compare joint lavage with sham intervention, placebo or non-intervention control in terms of effects on pain, function and safety outcomes in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL up to 3 August 2009, checked conference proceedings, reference lists, and contacted authors. Selection criteria We included studies if they were randomised or quasi-randomised trials that compared arthroscopic and non-arthroscopic joint lavage with a control intervention in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. We did not apply any language restrictions. Data collection and analysis Two independent review authors extracted data using standardised forms. We contacted investigators to obtain missing outcome information. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) for pain and function, and risk ratios for safety outcomes. We combined trials using inverse-variance random-effects meta-analysis. Main results We included seven trials with 567 patients. Three trials examined arthroscopic joint lavage, two non-arthroscopic joint lavage and two tidal irrigation. The methodological quality and the quality of reporting was poor and we identified a moderate to large degree of heterogeneity among the trials (I2 = 65%). We found little evidence for a benefit of joint lavage in terms of pain relief at three months (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.21), corresponding to a difference in pain scores between joint lavage and control of 0.3 cm on a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Results for improvement in function at three months were similar (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.11), corresponding to a difference in function scores between joint lavage and control of 0.2 cm on a WOMAC disability sub-scale from 0 to 10. For pain, estimates of effect sizes varied to some degree depending on the type of lavage, but this variation was likely to be explained by differences in the credibility of control interventions: trials using sham interventions to closely mimic the process of joint lavage showed a null-effect. Reporting on adverse events and drop out rates was unsatisfactory, and we were unable to draw conclusions for these secondary outcomes. Authors' conclusions Joint lavage does not result in a relevant benefit for patients with knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain relief or improvement of function.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Choline positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) is a currently used diagnostic tool in restaging prostate cancer (PCa) patients with increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after either radical prostatectomy (RP) or external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT). However, no final recommendations have been made on the use of this modality for patient management.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Recent studies report that intracoronary administration of autologous bone marrow mononucleated cells (BM-MNCs) may improve remodeling of the left ventricle after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Subgroup analysis suggest that early treatment between days 4 and 7 after AMI is probably most effective; however, the optimal time point of intracoronary cell administration has never been addressed in clinical trials. Furthermore, reliable clinical predictors are lacking for identifying patients who are thought to have most benefit from cellular therapy.