Performance of screening algorithms in systemic sclerosis-related pulmonary arterial hypertension: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a major cause of mortality in systemic sclerosis (SSc). There is emerging evidence that screening may enable the earlier detection and treatment of SSc-PAH, and thereby improve survival. AIMS: We undertook a systematic review to evaluate the performance of current screening algorithms in SSc-PAH. METHODS: We searched the Medline and EMBASE databases to 31 March 2012. We selected studies if they applied a screening algorithm to consecutively enrolled SSc patients not known to have PAH; SSc-PAH had to be confirmed on right heart catheterisation (RHC). The performance of each screening algorithm and the methodological quality of each study was evaluated. RESULTS: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria with a total intent-to-screen population of 3504 participants. In studies of patients with prevalent disease, the positive predictive value (PPV) of screening for PAH was 20.4-87.0%. In studies of patients with incident disease, the PPV of screening for PAH was 20.0-30.7%. The PPV of algorithms using echocardiography alone, or in combination with other tests, was comparable. No study enabled an accurate determination of negative predictive value, sensitivity or specificity of the screening algorithm as only patients who screened positive underwent confirmatory testing with RHC. The optimal timing and frequency of repeat screening is unknown. CONCLUSION: The low to moderate PPV of current screening algorithms, coupled with the inability to determine accurately the negative predictive value, sensitivity and specificity, suggests that there is a need to validate further these algorithms before making recommendations regarding screening for SSc-PAH.

Responder analysis for pain relief and numbers needed to treat in a meta-analysis of etoricoxib osteoarthritis trials: bridging a gap between clinical trials and clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Population mean changes from clinical trials are difficult to apply to individuals in clinical practice. Responder analysis may be better, but needs validating for level of response and treatment duration. METHODS: The numbers of patients with pain relief over baseline (> or =15%, > or =30%, > or =50%, > or =70%) at 2, 4, 8 and 12 weeks of treatment were obtained using the WOMAC 100 mm visual analogue pain subscale score for each treatment group in seven randomised placebo-controlled trials of etoricoxib in osteoarthritis lasting > or =6 weeks. Dropouts were assigned 0% improvement from baseline from then on. The numbers needed to treat (NNTs) were calculated at each level of response and time point. RESULTS: 3554 patients were treated with placebo, etoricoxib 30 mg and 60 mg, celecoxib 200 mg, naproxen 1000 mg or ibuprofen 2400 mg daily. Response rates fell with increasing pain relief: 60-80% experienced minimally important pain relief (> or =15%), 50-60% moderate pain relief (> or =30%), 40-50% substantial pain relief (> or =50%) and 20-30% extensive pain relief (> or =70%). NNTs for etoricoxib, celecoxib and naproxen were stable over 2-12 weeks. Ibuprofen showed lessening of effectiveness with time. CONCLUSION: Responder rates and NNTs are reproducible for different levels of response over 12 weeks and have relevance for clinical practice at the individual patient level. An average 10 mm improvement in pain equates to almost one in two patients having substantial benefit.

Systematic review of the use of honey as a wound dressing.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate topical honey in superficial burns and wounds though a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, reference lists and databases were used to seek randomised controlled trials. Seven randomised trials involved superficial burns, partial thickness burns, moderate to severe burns that included full thickness injury, and infected postoperative wounds. REVIEW METHODS: Studies were randomised trials using honey, published papers, with a comparator. Main outcomes were relative benefit and number-needed-to-treat to prevent an outcome relating to wound healing time or infection rate. RESULTS: One study in infected postoperative wounds compared honey with antiseptics plus systemic antibiotics. The number needed to treat with honey for good wound healing compared with antiseptic was 2.9 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 9.7). Five studies in patients with partial thickness or superficial burns involved less than 40% of the body surface. Comparators were polyurethane film, amniotic membrane, potato peel and silver sulphadiazine. The number needed to treat for seven days with honey to produce one patient with a healed burn was 2.6 (2.1 to 3.4) compared with any other treatment and 2.7 (2.0 to 4.1) compared with potato and amniotic membrane. For some or all outcomes honey was superior to all these treatments. Time for healing was significantly shorter for honey than all these treatments. The quality of studies was low. CONCLUSION: Confidence in a conclusion that honey is a useful treatment for superficial wounds or burns is low. There is biological plausibility.