Evidence-based dentistry · 2006
Prevention of oral mucositis in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy or radiotherapy.
КомментарийСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Richards Derek
Аннотация
DATA SOURCES: The Medline, Embase and CINAHL databases were used to source studies, along with the reference lists of identified articles.
STUDY SELECTION: Studies were restricted to randomised controlled trials (RCT), written in English, where the outcome of mucositis was recorded using the World Health Organization score or the NCI-CTC (National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria) score, the absence or presence of ulcerations, or the presence or absence of grades 3 and 4 mucositis.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A total of 45 studies was included in a meta-analysis. When the included studies showed heterogeneity regarding the effect estimates, the results of the meta-analyses were based on the random-effects models; otherwise, the results were based on the fixed-effects models.
RESULTS: The search yielded 109 publications, 45 articles being included in the meta-analyses. These evaluated eight different interventions: local application of chlorhexidine; iseganan; PTA (polymyxin E, tobramycine and amphotericin B); granulocyte macrophage-colony-stimulating factor/ granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF/ G-CSF); oral cooling; sucralfate and glutamine; and systemic administration of amifostine and GM-CSF/G-CSF. Four interventions showed a significant preventive effect on the development or severity of oral mucositis: PTA [odds ratio (OR), 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.39-0.96]; GM-CSF (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.33-0.87); oral cooling (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.16-0.56); and amifostine (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.15-0.89).
CONCLUSIONS: From current data, it can be concluded that no single intervention is capable of completely preventing oral mucositis. Future studies should evaluate a combination of interventions for the prevention of oral mucositis. In contrast, novel therapies could be developed that will improve outcomes and be used as single agents.
STUDY SELECTION: Studies were restricted to randomised controlled trials (RCT), written in English, where the outcome of mucositis was recorded using the World Health Organization score or the NCI-CTC (National Cancer Institute-Common Toxicity Criteria) score, the absence or presence of ulcerations, or the presence or absence of grades 3 and 4 mucositis.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A total of 45 studies was included in a meta-analysis. When the included studies showed heterogeneity regarding the effect estimates, the results of the meta-analyses were based on the random-effects models; otherwise, the results were based on the fixed-effects models.
RESULTS: The search yielded 109 publications, 45 articles being included in the meta-analyses. These evaluated eight different interventions: local application of chlorhexidine; iseganan; PTA (polymyxin E, tobramycine and amphotericin B); granulocyte macrophage-colony-stimulating factor/ granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF/ G-CSF); oral cooling; sucralfate and glutamine; and systemic administration of amifostine and GM-CSF/G-CSF. Four interventions showed a significant preventive effect on the development or severity of oral mucositis: PTA [odds ratio (OR), 0.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.39-0.96]; GM-CSF (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.33-0.87); oral cooling (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.16-0.56); and amifostine (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.15-0.89).
CONCLUSIONS: From current data, it can be concluded that no single intervention is capable of completely preventing oral mucositis. Future studies should evaluate a combination of interventions for the prevention of oral mucositis. In contrast, novel therapies could be developed that will improve outcomes and be used as single agents.