Search

Summary: Background: Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a relapsing and remitting condition affecting between 5% and 10% of people. Efficacious therapies are available, but their relative efficacy is unknown. Aim: To perform a systematic review with network meta‐analysis to resolve this uncertainty. Methods: We searched the medical literature through July 2020 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing efficacy of drugs for adults with FD, compared with each other, or placebo. Trials reported a dichotomous assessment of symptom status after completion of therapy. We pooled data using a random effects model. Efficacy was reported as a pooled relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic with a 95% confidence interval (CI) to summarise efficacy of each comparison tested. Relative ranking was assessed with surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probabilities. Results: We identified 71 eligible RCTs (19 243 participants). Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) were ranked second for efficacy (RR of remaining symptomatic = 0.71; 95% CI 0.58‐0.87, SUCRA 0.87), and first when only low risk of bias trials were included. Most RCTs that used TCAs recruited patients who were refractory to other drugs included in the network. Although sulpiride or levosulpiride were ranked first for efficacy (RR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.36‐0.69, SUCRA 0.99), trial quality was low and only 86 patients received active therapy. TCAs were more likely to cause adverse events than placebo. Conclusions: TCAs, histamine‐2 receptor antagonists, standard‐ and low‐dose proton pump inhibitors, sulpiride or levosulpiride, itopride and acotiamide were all more efficacious than placebo for FD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To comprehensively compare and rank the efficacy and safety of available treatment options for patients with MDR and XDR Acinetobacter baumannii (AB) infection.Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane register of trials systematically for studies that examined treatment options for patients with MDR- and XDR-AB infections until April 2016. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to estimate the risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI from both direct and indirect evidence. Primary outcomes were clinical cure and microbiological cure. Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and nephrotoxic and non-nephrotoxic adverse events.Results: A total of 29 studies with 2529 patients (median age 60 years; 65% male; median APACHE II score 19.0) were included. Although there were no statistically significant differences between treatment options, triple therapy with colistin, sulbactam and tigecycline had the highest clinical cure rate. Colistin in combination with sulbactam was associated with a significantly higher microbiological cure rate compared with colistin in combination with tigecycline (RR 1.23; 95% CI 1.03-1.47) and colistin monotherapy (RR 1.21; 95% CI 1.06-1.38). No significant differences in all-cause mortality were noted between treatment options. Tigecycline-based therapy also appeared less effective for achieving a microbiological cure and is not appropriate for treating bloodstream MDR- and XDR-AB infections.Conclusions: Combination therapy of colistin with sulbactam demonstrates superiority in terms of microbiological cure with a safety profile similar to that of colistin monotherapy. Thus, our findings support the use of this combination as a treatment for MDR- and XDR-AB infections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]