Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (4): CD003511, 2003.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-14583982

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Progesterone, a female sex hormone, is known to induce secretory changes in the lining of the uterus essential for successful implantation of a fertilized egg. It has been suggested that a causative factor in many cases of miscarriage may be inadequate secretion of progestogens. Therefore, progestational agents have been used, beginning in the first trimester of pregnancy, in an attempt to prevent spontaneous miscarriage. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of progestogens as a preventative therapy against miscarriage. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (April 2003), CENTRAL, MEDLINE (1966 to April 2003), EMBASE (1980 to April 2003), CINAHL (1982 to April 2003), NHMRC Clinical Trials Register (April 2003) and Meta-Register (April 2003). We searched references from relevant articles, attempting to contact authors where necessary, and contacted experts in the field for unpublished works. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing progestogens with placebo or no treatment given in an effort to prevent miscarriage. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Thirty trials were identified in the initial search. At least, two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data. Data for all outcomes were in dichotomous form and the Peto odds ratio was used in the meta-analysis for all comparisons. MAIN RESULTS: Fourteen trials (1988 women) met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of all women, regardless of gravidity and number of previous miscarriages, showed no statistically significant difference in the risk of miscarriage between progestogen and placebo or no treatment groups (odds ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.34) and no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse effect in either mother or baby. In a subgroup analysis of three trials involving women who had recurrent miscarriages (three or more consecutive miscarriages), progestogen treatment showed a statistically significant decrease in miscarriage rate compared to placebo or no treatment (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.91). No statistically significant differences were found between the route of administration of progestogen (oral, intramuscular, vaginal) versus placebo or no treatment. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to support the routine use of progestogen to prevent miscarriage in early to mid pregnancy. However, further trials in women with a history of recurrent miscarriage may be warranted, given the trend for improved live birth rates in these women and the finding of no statistically significant difference between treatment and control groups in rates of adverse effects suffered by either mother or baby in the available evidence.


Assuntos
Aborto Espontâneo/prevenção & controle , Progestinas/uso terapêutico , Aborto Habitual/prevenção & controle , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Segundo Trimestre da Gravidez , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
2.
Ann Emerg Med ; 14(12): 1145-51, 1985 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-3904543

RESUMO

In a prospective, randomized clinical trial, 19 patients with an acute exacerbation of asthma were given a loading dose of aminophylline by the IV (n = 10) or oral route (n = 9) of administration following treatment with epinephrine. Plasma concentrations of theophylline were measured prior to giving the loading dose, and one, two, three, and 24 to 48 hours later. Therapeutic effectiveness was evaluated by analyzing spirometric measurements prior to giving the loading dose, and one, three, and 24 to 48 hours later. Side effects also were recorded. In the IV group, the mean peak plasma theophylline concentration was 15.1 micrograms/mL one hour after loading, and in the oral group the mean peak serum theophylline concentration was 14.2 micrograms/mL three hours after loading. There was no correlation between theophylline concentrations and normalized change in spirometric values. There was no significant difference in spirometric values between the IV and oral groups. Nausea was slightly more common in the IV group. We conclude that there is no therapeutic advantage to giving a loading dose of aminophylline by the IV route rather than orally in patients with mild-to-moderate exacerbation of asthma initially treated with epinephrine.


Assuntos
Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Teofilina/administração & dosagem , Doença Aguda , Administração Oral , Adolescente , Adulto , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto , Feminino , Humanos , Injeções Intravenosas , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Distribuição Aleatória
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...