Cochrane Db Syst Rev
-
Guillain-Barré syndrome is an acute symmetric usually ascending and usually paralysing illness due to inflammation of peripheral nerves. It is thought to be caused by autoimmune factors, such as antibodies. Plasma exchange removes antibodies and other potentially injurious factors from the blood stream. It involves connecting the patient's blood circulation to a machine which exchanges the plasma for a substitute solution, usually albumin. Several studies have evaluated plasma exchange for Guillain-Barré syndrome. ⋯ Plasma exchange is the first and only treatment that has been proven to be superior to supportive treatment alone in Guillain-Barré syndrome. Consequently, plasma exchange should be regarded as the treatment against which new treatments, such as intravenous immunoglobulin, should be judged. In mild Guillain-Barré syndrome two sessions of plasma exchange are superior to none. In moderate Guillain-Barré syndrome four sessions are superior to two. In severe Guillain-Barré syndrome six sessions are no better than four. Continuous flow plasma exchange machines may be superior to intermittent flow machines and albumin to fresh frozen plasma as the exchange fluid. Plasma exchange is more beneficial when started within seven days after disease onset rather than later, but was still beneficial in patients treated up to 30 days after disease onset. The value of plasma exchange in children less than 12 years old is not known.
-
There is an increasing global burden of disease from injuries. Models of trauma care initially developed in high-income countries are also being adopted in low and middle-income countries (LMIC). Amongst these ambulance crews with Advanced Life Support (ALS) training are being promoted in LMIC as a strategy for improving outcomes for victims of trauma. However there is controversy as to the effectiveness of this health service intervention, and the evidence has yet to be rigorously appraised. ⋯ In the absence of evidence of the effectiveness of advanced life support, strong argument could be made that it should not be promoted outside the context of a properly concealed and otherwise rigorously conducted randomised controlled trial.
-
The effectiveness of screening for lung cancer with chest radiography, sputum cytology or spiral CT has not been established. ⋯ The current evidence does not support screening for lung cancer with chest radiography or sputum cytology. Frequent chest x-ray screening might be harmful. Further, methodologically rigorous trials are required.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Jan 2001
ReviewSuburethral sling operations for urinary incontinence in women.
Suburethral slings are surgical operations used to treat women with urinary incontinence. They were originally designed for recurrent stress incontinence, but have also been used recently for primary cases. ⋯ Preliminary results from a larger trial provide reassuring evidence about the performance of the less invasive TVT sling procedure. Cure rates after TVT were similar to those following open abdominal retropubic suspension, but with confidence intervals of around 10% absolute difference. About one in 11 women had a complication during TVT, most commonly bladder perforation, but none had serious consequences. Long term results are awaited. The data were too few to address whether other types of suburethral slings were as effective as open abdominal retropubic suspension or needle suspension. There was limited evidence from one small trial that slings made of Goretex had more complications than slings made of rectus fascia. The broader effects of suburethral slings could not be established since trials did not include appropriate outcome measures such as general health status, health economics, pad testing, third party analysis and time to return to normal activity level. Evidence that suburethral slings may be better or worse than other surgical or conservative management is lacking because no trials addressed these comparisons.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Jan 2001
ReviewCombined oral contraceptive pill (OCP) as treatment for primary dysmenorrhoea.
Dysmenorrhoea refers to the occurrence of painful menstrual cramps and is a common gynaecological complaint. Research as early as 1937 has shown that dysmenorrhoea responds favourably to ovulation inhibition, and that the synthetic hormones in the combined oral contraceptive pill can be used to treat dysmenorrhoea. These hormones act by suppressing ovulation and lessening the endometrial lining of the uterus. Therefore, menstrual fluid volume decreases along with the amount of prostaglandins produced, in turn effectively reducing dysmenorrhoea by decreasing uterine motility, and thus uterine cramping. The use of combined oral contraceptive pills (OCP) has been advocated as a treatment for primary dysmenorrhoea since their introduction for general use in 1960. There is evidence from epidemiological studies of general populations that combined OCPs can effectively treat dysmenorrhoea. ⋯ No conclusions can be made about the efficacy of commonly used modern lower dose combined oral contraceptives for dysmenorrhoea. While there is some evidence from four RCTs that combined OCPs with medium dose oestrogen and 1st/2nd generation progestogens are more effective than placebo it should be emphasised that the studies were small, of poor quality and all included much higher doses of hormones that those commonly prescribed today. Therefore no recommendations can be made regarding the efficacy of modern combined oral contraceptives.