Effect of weekly vitamin D supplementation on the severity of atopic dermatitis and type 2 immunity biomarkers in children: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D (VD) deficiency is common among patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) and often associated with severity. However, randomized trials of VD supplementation in AD have had equivocal results, and there is little information regarding the effect of VD supplementation on type 2 immunity in AD patients. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy of VD supplementation to decrease severity of AD and to alter type 2 immunity biomarkers. METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. We randomly assigned 101 children with AD to weekly oral vitamin D3 (VD3) or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the change in the Severity Scoring of AD (SCORAD). RESULTS: Mean age of subjects was 6.3 ± 4.0 years, and baseline SCORAD was 32 ± 29. At baseline, 57% of children were VD deficient, with no difference between groups. Change in 25(OH)D was significantly greater with VD3 than placebo (+43.4 ± 34.5 nmol/L vs. +2.3 ± 21.2 nmol/L, p < 0.001). SCORAD change at 6 weeks was not different between VD and placebo (-5.3 ± 11.6 vs. -5.5 ± 9.9, p = 0.91). There were no significant between-group differences in change of eosinophil counts, total IgE, Staphylococcal enterotoxin specific IgE, CCL17, CCL22, CCL27, LL-37 or Staphylococcus aureus lesional skin colonization. Vitamin D receptor (VDR) gene single nucleotide polymorphisms FokI, ApaI and TaqI did not modify subjects' response to VD supplementation. CONCLUSIONS: Among children with AD, weekly VD supplementation improved VD status but did not modify AD severity or type 2 immunity biomarkers compared to placebo (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01996423).

Association between obesity and atopic dermatitis in children: A case-control study in a high obesity prevalence population.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease. Research suggests an association between obesity and AD, although evidence is lacking from Latin American populations. This study evaluated the association of obesity with AD in children from Chile, a country with high obesity prevalence. METHODS: A case-control study was performed in children with active AD (cases) and healthy controls (HCs) from Santiago, Chile. Body mass index was evaluated by z-score (z-BMI), with overweight defined as z-BMI ≥+1 and <+2, and obesity as z-BMI ≥+2. Abdominal obesity was defined by a waist circumference-to-height ratio (WHR) ≥0.5. AD severity was evaluated by Scoring AD (SCORAD) index. RESULTS: A total of 174 children with AD and 101 controls were included. AD patients had similar overweight (27% vs. 28%) and obesity (21% vs. 26%) rates as HCs (p = .65). Abdominal obesity rates were also comparable (64% vs. 62%, p = .81). In sex-specific analyses, girls with AD had higher abdominal obesity rates than HCs (71% vs. 53%, p < .05) while boys with AD had lower abdominal obesity rates than HCs (53% vs. 75%, p = .03). Among children with AD, higher z-BMI or WHR did not correlate with higher SCORAD, eosinophil counts or total IgE. CONCLUSION: In our study, Chilean children with AD had high but similar rates of obesity as HCs, but showed sex-specific associations of abdominal obesity and AD. Further research is needed to evaluate these associations and the roles that weight excess and weight loss could play in the pathogenesis and treatment of AD.

Beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Therefore, prevention is important. Band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. However, primary prophylaxis is not the current standard of care in paediatric patients because it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of beta-blockers compared with placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded (April 2020). We screened the reference lists of the retrieved publications and manually searched the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conference (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2008 to December 2019. We searched clinicaltrials.gov, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for ongoing clinical trials. We imposed no language or document type restrictions on our search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised clinical trials, irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status to assess benefits and harms. We included observational studies, retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials, for a narrative report of harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials by standard Cochrane methodologies. We planned to asses risk of bias and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We planned to use intention-to-treat principle. We planned to analyse data with RevMan Analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We found no randomised clinical trials that assessed beta-blockers compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. We found four observational studies that reported on harms. As a systematic search for observational studies was not planned, we only listed the reported harms in a table. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of beta-blockers versus placebo on patient-relevant clinical outcomes, such as mortality, quality of life, failure to control variceal bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of the two interventions.

Band ligation versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Prevention is, therefore, important. Randomised clinical trials have shown that non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal band ligation decrease the incidence of variceal bleeding in adults. In children and adolescents, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as primary prophylaxis alternatives for oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, it is unknown whether these interventions are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, and two other databases (April 2020). We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications, and we also handsearched abstract books of the two main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences from January 2008 to December 2019. We also searched clinicaltrials.gov, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for ongoing clinical trials. We imposed no language or document type restrictions on our search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We aimed to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status, to assess the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. If the search for randomised clinical trials retrieved quasi-randomised and other observational studies, then we read them through to extract information on harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodology to perform this systematic review. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We used the intention-to-treat principle. We analysed data using Review Manager 5. MAIN RESULTS: One conference abstract, describing a feasibility multi-centre randomised clinical trial, fulfilled our review inclusion criteria. We judged the trial at overall high risk of bias. This trial was conducted in three hospital centres in the United Kingdom. The aim of the trial was to determine the feasibility and safety of further larger randomised clinical trials of prophylactic band ligation versus no active treatment in children with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. Twelve children received prophylactic band ligation and 10 children received no active treatment. There was no information on the age of the children included, or about the diagnosis of any child included. All children were followed up for at least six months. Mortality was 8% (1/12) in the band ligation group versus 0% (0/10) in the no active intervention group (risk ratio (RR) 2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 56.25; very low certainty of evidence). The abstract did not report when the death occurred, but we assume it happened between the six-month follow-up and one year. No child (0%) in the band ligation group developed adverse events (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.25; very low certainty of evidence) but one child out of 10 (10%) in the no active intervention group developed idiopathic thrombocytopaenic purpura. One child out of 12 (8%) in the band ligation group underwent liver transplantation versus none in the no active intervention group (0%) (RR 2.54, 95% CI 0.11 to 56.25; very low certainty of evidence). The trial reported no other serious adverse events or liver-related morbidity. Quality of life was not reported. Oesophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 8% (1/12) of the children in the band ligation group versus 30% (3/10) of the children in the no active intervention group (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.27; very low certainty of evidence). No adverse events considered non-serious were reported. Two children were lost to follow-up by one-year. Ten children in total completed the trial at two-year follow-up. There was no information on funding.  We found two observational studies on endoscopic variceal ligation when searching for randomised trials. One found no harm, and the other reported E nterobacter cloacae septicaemia in one child and mild, transient, upper oesophageal sphincter stenosis in another. We did not assess these studies for risk of bias. We did not find any ongoing randomised clinical trials of interest to our review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence, obtained from only one feasibility randomised clinical trial at high risk of bias, is very scanty. It is very uncertain about whether prophylactic band ligation versus sham or no (active) intervention may affect mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, or oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. We have no data on quality of life. No adverse events considered non-serious were reported. The results presented in the trial need to be interpreted with caution. In addition, the highly limited data cover only part of our research question; namely, children with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. Data on children with portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Larger randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with sham treatment for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are needed. The trials should include important clinical outcomes such as death, quality of life, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.

Band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Prevention is therefore important. In adults, numerous randomised clinical trials have demonstrated benefits of non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation as primary prevention in decreasing the risk of variceal haemorrhage. In children, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, primary prophylaxis is not the current standard of care in children because it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or cause harm when used for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded (27 April 2020). We scrutinised the reference lists of retrieved publications, and performed a manual search from the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2008 to 2019. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, EMA, and WHO for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status for assessment of benefits and harms. If the search for randomised clinical trials retrieved quasi-randomised and observational studies, then we read them through to extract information on harms. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials by standard Cochrane methodologies. We planned to assess risk of bias and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence per outcome. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We planned to analyse data with intention-to-treat. We planned to use Review Manager 5 to analyse the data. MAIN RESULTS: We found no randomised clinical trials assessing band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy on patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, quality of life, failure to control variceal bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of these two interventions.

Sclerotherapy versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Therefore, prevention is important. Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in adults is the established standard of care because of the results of numerous randomised clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic variceal ligation in decreasing the incidence of variceal bleeding. In children, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase Elsevier, and two other registers in February 2019. We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications, and performed a manual search of the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conference (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstracts from January 2008 to December 2018. We searched four registries for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status assessing sclerotherapy versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodology to perform this systematic review. We used the intention-to-treat principle to analyse outcome data, and GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence per outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We found only one randomised clinical trial that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The trial was at high risk of bias. The trial included 108 Brazilian children with median age of 4.3 years (range 11 months to 13 years). Fifty-six children were randomised to prophylactic sclerotherapy (ethanolamine oleate 2%) and 52 children to no intervention (control). Children were followed up for a median of 4.5 years. Eight children (six from the sclerotherapy group versus two from the control group) dropped out before the end of the trial. The follow-up was from 18 months to eight years. Mortality was 16% (9/56 children) in the sclerotherapy group versus 15% (8/52 children) in the control group (risk ration (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 2.50; very low-certainty evidence). Upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 21% (12/56) of the children in the sclerotherapy group versus 46% (24/52) in the control group (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.83; very low-certainty evidence). There were more children with congestive hypertensive gastropathy in the sclerotherapy group than in the control group (14% (8/56) versus 6% (3/52); RR 2.48, 95% CI 0.69 to 8.84; very low-certainty evidence). The incidence of gastric varices was similar between the sclerotherapy group and the control group (11% (6/56) versus 10% (5/52); RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.43; very low-certainty evidence). The incidence of bleeding from gastric varices was higher in the sclerotherapy group than in the control group (4% (3/56) versus 0% (0/52); RR 6.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 123.06; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not assess health-related quality of life. Oesophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 5% (3/56) of the children in the sclerotherapy group versus 40% (21/52) of the children in the control group (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.42; very low-certainty evidence). The most prevalent complications (defined as non-serious) were pain and fever after the procedure, which promptly resolved with analgesics. However, numerical data on the frequency of these adverse events and their occurrences in the two groups were lacking. No funding information was provided. We found no ongoing trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence, obtained from one randomised clinical trial at high risk of bias, is very uncertain on whether sclerotherapy has an influence on mortality and if it may decrease first upper gastrointestinal or oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. The evidence is very uncertain on whether sclerotherapy has an influence on congestive hypertensive gastropathy, incidence on gastric varices, and incidence of bleeding from gastric varices. Health-related quality of life was not measured. There were no serious events caused by sclerotherapy, and analysis of non-serious adverse events could not be performed due to lack of numerical data. The GRADE assessment of each outcome showed a very low-certainty evidence. The results of the trial need to be interpreted with caution. Larger randomised clinical trials, following the SPIRIT and CONSORT statements, assessing the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are needed. The trials should include important clinical outcomes such as death, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.

Sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Prevention is therefore important. Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in adults is the established standard of care because of the results of numerous randomised clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic variceal ligation in decreasing the incidence of variceal bleeding. However, sclerotherapy is the only endoscopic prophylactic option currently available in infants weighing less than 10 kg of bodyweight due to the size of the endoscopic ligator. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy versus any type of beta-blocker for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase Elsevier, LILACS (Bireme), and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science) in February 2019. We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications and performed a manual search from the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from January 2008 to December 2018. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, EMA, and WHO, for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status, assessing sclerotherapy versus any type of beta-blocker for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. We planned to include quasi-randomised and other observational studies retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials for report of harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We planned to collect and summarise data from randomised clinical trials as described in our protocol, using standard Cochrane methodologies. MAIN RESULTS: We found no randomised clinical trials assessing sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers on patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of the two interventions.

Vitamin D modulates the allergic phenotype of dendritic cells in children with atopic dermatitis.

Vitamin D (VD) deficiency has been associated with increased incidence and severity of atopic dermatitis (AD), but the mechanisms through which VD may ameliorate AD are unclear. We compared the phenotypic characteristics of circulating myeloid and plasmacytoid dendritic cells (mDCs and pDCs, respectively) of children with AD vs healthy controls (HC) and evaluated if VD can modulate the allergic phenotype of circulating DCs in AD patients. Although there was no difference in frequency of circulating DCs between groups, among children with AD there was an inverse correlation between SCORAD and circulating total DCs and mDCs. In AD, serum IgE concentration correlated with FcεRI and surface-bound IgE expression on mDCs and pDCs; pDCs expressing FcεRI and IgE were significantly increased compared to HC. Ex vivo, 1,25(OH)2 D3 significantly decreased FcεRI expression on mDCs and surface-bound IgE on mDCs and pDCs. Oral VD supplementation reduced expression of surface-bound IgE on pDCs in children with AD. In summary, VD decreases the allergic phenotype of circulating DCs in children with AD, a potential mechanism for how VD supplementation may improve AD severity. Future studies are needed to further assess the role of VD supplementation as an immunomodulatory therapy for AD.

Band ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

BACKGROUND: Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Prevention is therefore important. Following numerous randomised clinical trials demonstrating efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation in decreasing the incidence of variceal haemorrhage, primary prophylaxis of variceal haemorrhage in adults has become the established standard of care. Hence, band ligation and beta-blockers have been proposed to be used as primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with any type of beta-blocker for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register (February 2019), CENTRAL (December 2018), PubMed (December 2018), Embase Ovid (December 2018), LILACS (Bireme; January 2019), and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science; December 2018). We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications and performed a manual search from the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2009 to 2018. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status for assessment of benefits and harms. We planned to also include quasi-randomised and other observational studies retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials for report of harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials using standard Cochrane methodologies. MAIN RESULTS: We found no randomised clinical trials assessing band ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of band ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. There is a need for well-designed, adequately powered randomised clinical trials to assess the benefits and harms of band ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Those randomised clinical trials should include patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.

[Diagnostic validity of fecal occult blood test in infants with food protein-induced allergic proctocolitis]. / Estudio de validez diagnóstica de la prueba de hemorragia oculta fecal en lactantes con proctocolitis alérgica inducida por proteína alimentaria.

INTRODUCTION: Food protein-induced allergic proctocolitis (FPIAP) is the most frequent presenta tion of non-IgE mediated food allergy (FA). The diagnosis is made by oral food challenge, however, non-invasive diagnostic tests are not available. In Chile, the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) is fre quently used to confirm FPIAP, however, there are no studies that support this practice. OBJECTIVE: To establish the diagnostic validity of FOBT in the evaluation of infants with FPIAP. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Case-control study with prospective recruitment of infants with rectal bleeding and suspicion of FPIAP, and controls were healthy infants, in whom the FOBT was conducted. All cases underwent an elimination diet, after which the diagnosis of FPIAP was confirmed by oral food cha llenge. RESULTS: 25 cases and 29 controls were included without significant differences in age, gen der, type of delivery, feeding, and maternal age. The cases had higher rates of allergic comorbidities, medication use, and family history of allergy. The FOBT was positive in 84% of cases and in 34% of controls (p < 0.001). The sensitivity of the FOBT for the diagnosis of FPIAP was 84%, specificity was 66%, positive predictive value 68%, and the negative predictive value 83%. The area under the ROC curve was 0.75 (CI 95% 0.61-0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Although the FOBT has an adequate sensitivity to diagnose FPIAP in infants with rectal bleeding, this test had abnormal results in more than a third of healthy infants. Therefore, the routine use of FOBT is not recommended for the diagnosis of FPIAP.

Agreement between dermatologic and pediatric researchers in scoring of atopic dermatitis in children.

The Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) index is a widely applied instrument for measuring the severity of atopic dermatitis (AD), but few studies have evaluated the interobserver agreement between different disciplines. A cross-sectional study of 21 children with AD evaluated by dermatology and pediatric researchers found excellent agreement between the SCORAD, the objective SCORAD, and the Three Item Severity score, confirming the applicability of these scores by nondermatologists.

[The GRADE system: a change in the way of assessing the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations]. / El sistema GRADE: un cambio en la forma de evaluar la calidad de la evidencia y la fuerza de recomendaciones.

Individual clinicians and organizations making health care decisions should not only consider the magnitude of the benefits and harms of different courses of action (interventions), but also the confidence we can have in those estimates. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach offers a systematic and transparent way to summarize the evidence, to rate the confidence we can have in the effects of the interventions and to move from evidence to recommendations. The GRADE approach has been adopted by several organizations worldwide, including the World Health Organization and the Cochrane Collaboration. In Chile, this approach has already been used by guidelines produced by the Chilean Ministry of Health. In this paper we describe the core concepts of the GRADE approach to rate the quality of the evidence and to grade the strength of recommendations. As clinicians, being familiar with such concepts may be helpful to make decisions informed by the best available evidence.

Barriers for research activities in residency programs: A mix-methods study.

Introduction: Research activities have a positive impact on the performance of residents. However, information on research conducted by residents from developing countries is scarce. Our study sought to identify the barriers and facilitators for developing research in medical residency programs in a Latin-American faculty of medicine. Methods: A mixed methodology study design was carried out. We used a grounded theory approach for the qualitative phase, collecting data through semi-structured interviews and focus groups with faculty and residents. For the quantitative phase, surveys were administered to residents and teachers. We used factor analysis and scree plot (validity), Cronbach's alpha, and Intraclass correlation coefficient (reliability) to evaluate the surveys' psychometric properties. Results: Focus groups involving ten faculty members and 15 residents were conducted, and the following domains were identified: a) facilitators for resident participation, b) barriers, c) strategies for introducing research into the curriculum, d) arguments supporting research activities throughout medical residency, and e) profile of research-motivated residents. Both residents and faculty members identified a lack of protected time and adequate mentoring as the major barriers. A gender gap was found related to international publications (34% vs. 66% women/men); women perceived that research activities 'compete with other activities' (OR: 2.04, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.07). Conclusions: Research is highly valued by both residents and faculty members at a Latin-American university with a strong academic output. Major barriers to promoting research in this context include lack of protected time and effective mentoring, and gender gaps. Strategies proposed to improve research within medical residency programs include: establishing an interdisciplinary mentoring program between residents and researchers, promoting elective rotations, and rewarding proposals that consider gender equity.

Introducción: Las actividades de investigación tienen un impacto positivo en el rendimiento de los médicos residentes. Falta información sobre investigaciones desarrolladas por residentes de países en vías de desarrollo. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar las barreras y facilitadores para la investigación en programas de residencia en una Facultad de Medicina de América Latina. Métodos: Se llevó a cabo un diseño de estudio de metodología mixta. Utilizamos un enfoque de teoría fundamentada para la fase cualitativa, recopilando los datos a través de entrevistas semiestructuradas y grupos focales con profesores y residentes. Para la fase cuantitativa, se administraron encuestas a residentes y profesores. Para evaluar las propiedades psicométricas de las encuestas utilizamos análisis factorial y scree plot (validez); alfa de Cronbach y coeficiente de Correlación Intraclase (confiabilidad). Resultados: Se realizaron grupos focales que incluyeron diez profesores y quince residentes, y se identificaron los siguientes dominios: a) facilitadores para la participación de los residentes, b) barreras, c) estrategias para introducir la investigación en el currículo, d) argumentos que respaldan las actividades de investigación durante la residencia, y e) perfil de los residentes motivados en la investigación. Tanto los residentes como el profesorado identificaron la falta de tiempo protegido y la ausencia de tutoría adecuada como las principales barreras. Se encontró una brecha de género relacionada con las publicaciones internacionales (34% vs 66% mujeres/hombres), las mujeres percibieron que las actividades de investigación 'compiten con otras actividades' (OR: 2.04, IC 95% 1.03 a 4.07). Conclusiones: Los residentes y profesores de una universidad latinoamericana de alta productividad valoran mucho la investigación. La presencia de brecha de género, la falta de tiempo protegido y de tutorías destacan como las principales barreras. Las estrategias propuestas para mejorar la investigación dentro de los programas de residencia son: establecer un programa de tutoría interdisciplinario entre residentes e investigadores; promover las rotaciones electivas; y premiar propuestas que consideren la equidad de género.

[Using ROC curves in clinical investigation: theoretical and practical issues]. / Uso de curvas ROC en investigación clínica: Aspectos teórico-prácticos.

Numerous diagnostic tests report their results quantitatively, using continuous scales. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis provides a statistical method for the assessment of the diagnostic accuracy of these tests, being used for three specific purposes: determine of the cutoff value with the highest sensitivity and specificity, evaluate the discriminative capacity of the diagnostic test, in other words, its ability to differentiate healthy versus sick individuals, and compare the discriminative capacity of two or more diagnostic tests that express their results as continuous scales. Based on a real clinical investigation, this article illustrates theoretical aspects regarding the construction of ROC curves, being its objective to help readers and investigators interpret correctly their results.

[Clinical use of diagnostic tests (Part 2). Clinical application and usefulness of a diagnostic test]. / Uso de tests diagnósticos en la práctica clínica (Parte 2). Aplicación clínica y utilidad de un test diagnóstico.

The clinical usefulness of a diagnostic test is determined by the extent to which it helps to modify the pretest probability of occurrence of a certain diagnosis. For this purpose, the calculation and application of likelihood ratios (LR) is a very useful tool. Every possible result of a test has a LR, which allows for an estimation of the magnitude by which the pretest probability increases or decreases, thereby helping the physician rule out, confirm, or continue investigating a diagnosis with new tests. In the first part of this article the properties of a diagnostic test (validity, reproducibility and safety) were analyzed. This second part illustrates the theoretical background underlying the concept of LR, explains the methodology for calculating them and describes their clinical application.

Predicting Asthma Using Clinical Indexes.

Asthma is no longer considered a single disease, but a common label for a set of heterogeneous conditions with shared clinical symptoms but associated with different cellular and molecular mechanisms. Several wheezing phenotypes coexist at preschool age but not all preschoolers with recurrent wheezing develop asthma at school-age; and since at the present no accurate single screening test using genetic or biochemical markers has been developed to determine which preschooler with recurrent wheezing will have asthma at school age, the asthma diagnosis still needs to be based on clinical predicted models or scores. The purpose of this review is to summarize the existing and most frequently used asthma predicting models, to discuss their advantages/disadvantages, and their accomplishment on all the necessary consecutive steps for any predictive model. Seven most popular asthma predictive models were reviewed (original API, Isle of Wight, PIAMA, modified API, ucAPI, APT Leicestersher, and ademAPI). Among these, the original API has a good positive LR~7.4 (increases the probability of a prediction of asthma by 2-7 times), and it is also simple: it only requires four clinical parameters and a peripheral blood sample for eosinophil count. It is thus an easy model to use in any rural or urban health care system. However, because its negative LR is not good, it cannot be used to rule out the development of asthma.

Do inhaled corticosteroids have a role for bronchiolitis? / ¿Tienen los corticoides inhalatorios un rol en la bronquiolitis?

INTRODUCTION: Bronchiolitis consists of an acute small airways inflammation secondary to a viral infection and is a frequent pathology among children under 2 years. The use of inhaled corticosteroids during bronchiolitis has been proposed to reduce recurrent wheeze or asthma, however there is controversy about it. METHODS: To answer this question we used Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We identified three systematic reviews including 11 randomized trials. We concluded that inhaled corticosteroids do not reduce recurrent wheeze or asthma in patients with bronchiolitis.

INTRODUCCIÓN: La bronquiolitis corresponde a una inflamación aguda de las vías aéreas pequeñas secundaria a infección viral y es una patología frecuente en menores de dos años. Se ha propuesto que el uso de corticoides inhalatorios durante una bronquiolitis podría reducir la recurrencia de sibilancias o el desarrollo de asma, sin embargo, existe controversia al respecto. MÉTODOS: Para responder a esta interrogante utilizamos Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, entre otras. Extrajimos los datos desde las revisiones identificadas, reanalizamos los datos de los estudios primarios, realizamos un metanálisis y preparamos una tabla de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE. RESULTADOS Y CONCLUSIONES: Identificamos tres revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyen 11 ensayos aleatorizados. Concluimos que el uso de corticoides inhalatorios no reduce la recurrencia de sibilancias o asma en pacientes con bronquiolitis.

Should systemic corticosteroids be used for bronchiolitis? / ¿Deben utilizarse corticoides sistémicos en la bronquiolitis?

INTRODUCTION: Bronchiolitis is an acute small airways inflammation mainly caused by a viral infection. It is frequent in children under two years of age, particularly under 12 months. The use of systemic corticosteroids has been proposed for bronchiolitis, especially for severely ill patients. However, its efficacy is still controversial. METHODS: To answer this question we gathered information using Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data from primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We identified four systematic reviews, including 20 randomized trials overall. We concluded the use of systemic corticosteroids has no benefit for the treatment of bronchiolitis, even for patients with mechanical ventilation.

INTRODUCCIÓN: La bronquiolitis es una inflamación aguda de las vías aéreas pequeñas debida principalmente a una infección viral. Es una patología frecuente en menores de dos años y en especial en menores de 12 meses. Se ha propuesto el uso de corticoides sistémicos en bronquiolitis, en especial en pacientes de mayor severidad, siendo controversial su utilidad. MÉTODOS: Para evaluarlo utilizamos Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, entre otras. Extrajimos los datos desde las revisiones identificadas, reanalizamos los datos de los estudios primarios, realizamos un metanálisis y preparamos una tabla de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE. RESULTADOS Y CONCLUSIONES: Identificamos cuatro revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyeron 20 ensayos aleatorizados. Concluimos que el uso de corticoides sistémicos no aporta ningún beneficio en el tratamiento de la bronquiolitis, aún en pacientes con ventilación mecánica.

[Does a clinical prediction rule anticipate the diagnosis for streptococcal pharyngitis in children aged 2 to 15?] / Una regla de predicción clínica ¿anticipa el diagnóstico de la faringitis estreptocóccica en niños de 2 a 15 años?

BACKGROUND: The etiology of a streptococcal pharyngitis must be documented by laboratory techniques to avoid unnecessary antimicrobial treatment, but this strategy increases cost for the patient. Available scores applied in children or adults are imperfect. AIM: To develop a clinical prediction rule to aid the diagnostic process of streptococcal pharyngitis (SP) in children in a low-resource setting. METHODS: Three hundred and eighteen patients aged 2 to 15 years who were evaluated for suspected SP at the Pediatric Emergency Department and the Pediatric Ambulatory Unit of Red Salud UC-Christus entered the study. A throat culture and a rapid antigen detection test for Streptococcus pyogenes were obtained from each patient. Data were analyzed for possible clinical predictors of SP with univariate and multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: Seventy-three cases of SP were diagnosed (23.9%). In the univariate analysis, fever was inversely associated with SP (p = 0.002). Odynophagia, palatal petechiae, and season of the year (autumn and winter) were positively associated with SP (p = 0.007, p < 0.001 and p = 0.03 respectively). In multiple regression analysis the models did not have sufficient power to predict streptococcal etiology. CONCLUSION: Clinical predictors, even those systematically included in clinical prediction rules, did not show sufficient predictive power to safely include or exclude SP in this setting, and thus, it is necessary to improve access to confirmatory tests.

Barreras para las actividades de investigación en los programas de residencia: estudio de métodos mixtos / Barriers for research activities in residency programs: A mix-methods study

Introducción Las actividades de investigación tienen un impacto positivo en el rendimiento de los médicos residentes. Falta información sobre investigaciones desarrolladas por residentes de países en vías de desarrollo. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar las barreras y facilitadores para la investigación en programas de residencia en una Facultad de Medicina de América Latina. Métodos Se llevó a cabo un diseño de estudio de metodología mixta. Utilizamos un enfoque de teoría fundamentada para la fase cualitativa, recopilando los datos a través de entrevistas semiestructuradas y grupos focales con profesores y residentes. Para la fase cuantitativa, se administraron encuestas a residentes y profesores. Para evaluar las propiedades psicométricas de las encuestas utilizamos análisis factorial y scree plot (validez); alfa de Cronbach y coeficiente de Correlación Intraclase (confiabilidad). Resultados Se realizaron grupos focales que incluyeron diez profesores y quince residentes, y se identificaron los siguientes dominios: a) facilitadores para la participación de los residentes, b) barreras, c) estrategias para introducir la investigación en el currículo, d) argumentos que respaldan las actividades de investigación durante la residencia, y e) perfil de los residentes motivados en la investigación. Tanto los residentes como el profesorado identificaron la falta de tiempo protegido y la ausencia de tutoría adecuada como las principales barreras. Se encontró una brecha de género relacionada con las publicaciones internacionales (34% vs 66% mujeres/hombres), las mujeres percibieron que las actividades de investigación 'compiten con otras actividades' (OR: 2.04, IC 95% 1.03 a 4.07). Conclusiones Los residentes y profesores de una universidad latinoamericana de alta productividad valoran mucho la investigación. La presencia de brecha de género, la falta de tiempo protegido y de tutorías destacan como las principales barreras. Las estrategias propuestas para mejorar la investigación dentro de los programas de residencia son: establecer un programa de tutoría interdisciplinario entre residentes e investigadores; promover las rotaciones electivas; y premiar propuestas que consideren la equidad de género.

Introduction Research activities have a positive impact on the performance of residents. However, information on research conducted by residents from developing countries is scarce. Our study sought to identify the barriers and facilitators for developing research in medical residency programs in a Latin-American faculty of medicine. Methods A mixed methodology study design was carried out. We used a grounded theory approach for the qualitative phase, collecting data through semi-structured interviews and focus groups with faculty and residents. For the quantitative phase, surveys were administered to residents and teachers. We used factor analysis and scree plot (validity), Cronbach's alpha, and Intraclass correlation coefficient (reliability) to evaluate the surveys' psychometric properties. Results Focus groups involving ten faculty members and 15 residents were conducted, and the following domains were identified: a) facilitators for resident participation, b) barriers, c) strategies for introducing research into the curriculum, d) arguments supporting research activities throughout medical residency, and e) profile of research-motivated residents. Both residents and faculty members identified a lack of protected time and adequate mentoring as the major barriers. A gender gap was found related to international publications (34% vs. 66% women/men); women perceived that research activities 'compete with other activities' (OR: 2.04, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.07). Conclusions Research is highly valued by both residents and faculty members at a Latin-American university with a strong academic output. Major barriers to promoting research in this context include lack of protected time and effective mentoring, and gender gaps. Strategies proposed to improve research within medical residency programs include: establishing an interdisciplinary mentoring program between residents and researchers, promoting elective rotations, and rewarding proposals that consider gender equity.