Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
Am J Kidney Dis ; 78(6): 804-815, 2021 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34364906

RESUMO

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disproportionately affects people with chronic diseases such as chronic kidney disease (CKD). We assessed the incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 in people with CKD. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed through February 2021. SETTING & STUDY POPULATIONS: People with CKD with or without COVID-19. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES: Cohort and case-control studies. DATA EXTRACTION: Incidences of COVID-19, death, respiratory failure, dyspnea, recovery, intensive care admission, hospital admission, need for supplemental oxygen, hospital discharge, sepsis, short-term dialysis, acute kidney injury, and fatigue. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Random-effects meta-analysis and evidence certainty adjudicated using an adapted version of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). RESULTS: 348 studies (382,407 participants with COVID-19 and CKD; 1,139,979 total participants with CKD) were included. Based on low-certainty evidence, the incidence of COVID-19 was higher in people with CKD treated with dialysis (105 per 10,000 person-weeks; 95% CI, 91-120; 95% prediction interval [PrI], 25-235; 59 studies; 468,233 participants) than in those with CKD not requiring kidney replacement therapy (16 per 10,000 person-weeks; 95% CI, 4-33; 95% PrI, 0-92; 5 studies; 70,683 participants) or in kidney or pancreas/kidney transplant recipients (23 per 10,000 person-weeks; 95% CI, 18-30; 95% PrI, 2-67; 29 studies; 120,281 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, the incidence of death in people with CKD and COVID-19 was 32 per 1,000 person-weeks (95% CI, 30-35; 95% PrI, 4-81; 229 studies; 70,922 participants), which may be higher than in people with CKD without COVID-19 (incidence rate ratio, 10.26; 95% CI, 6.78-15.53; 95% PrI, 2.62-40.15; 4 studies; 18,347 participants). LIMITATIONS: Analyses were generally based on low-certainty evidence. Few studies reported outcomes in people with CKD without COVID-19 to calculate the excess risk attributable to COVID-19, and potential confounders were not adjusted for in most studies. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of COVID-19 may be higher in people receiving maintenance dialysis than in those with CKD not requiring kidney replacement therapy or those who are kidney or pancreas/kidney transplant recipients. People with CKD and COVID-19 may have a higher incidence of death than people with CKD without COVID-19.


Assuntos
COVID-19/epidemiologia , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/complicações , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/terapia , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Incidência , Avaliação de Processos e Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Diálise Renal , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/epidemiologia , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/terapia , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação
2.
Transplantation ; 92(10): 1094-100, 2011 Nov 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21978995

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Trial registration was introduced to reduce research bias by promoting trial transparency and accountability. We aimed to evaluate the frequency of, and factors associated with, trial registration and declaration of trial registration. METHODS: We selected all randomized controlled trials in kidney transplantation published between October 2005 and December 2010 and determined whether a trial was registered and whether a trial declared their registration in subsequent trial reports. RESULTS: Of 307 eligible trials identified, 24% (74/307) were registered, and of those, 59% (44/74) contained trial registration details within at least one trial report. Trial registration was more likely for trials published more than once, in later years or reported in journals that followed the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors guidelines. Trial registration was less likely for trials that did not declare their funding sources. Registered trials were more likely to declare registration details in related reports if published in later years or in a journal that followed International Committee of Medical Journal Editors guidelines. Trials that did not declare their funding sources were less likely to declare registration details. CONCLUSIONS: Although still suboptimal, the situation is improving over time, with both trial registration and declaration of registration details more likely in later years.


Assuntos
Transplante de Rim/estatística & dados numéricos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/estatística & dados numéricos , Sistema de Registros , Estudos de Coortes , Humanos , Viés de Publicação/estatística & dados numéricos
3.
Pediatr Nephrol ; 25(12): 2383-92, 2010 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20694479

RESUMO

Limited pediatric-specific research can lead to sub-standard evidence for clinical decision making in children. We sought to systematically evaluate the methodological quality and the reporting standards of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of transplantation trials in children. We included RCTs of kidney transplant recipients that had enrolled at least one child (aged 17 years or less) and that were reported in English language, peer reviewed journals from 2000 onward in the Cochrane Renal Group's specialized register. Trial reports were assessed against the 22 item checklist of the CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. Twenty-seven RCTs were included. The reporting of the essential components of the methods, results and discussion domains was unsatisfactory. Mean CONSORT criteria score for the pediatric trials was 67% and 66% for trials including both adults and children (p value for the difference = 1.00). Trial reporting quality in pediatric transplantation trials is not different from trials involving adults. It is evident that the reporting standards of RCTs in both adult and pediatric transplantation require major improvements. This work bench-marks current standards for future quality improvement.


Assuntos
Transplante de Rim , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/normas , Projetos de Pesquisa/normas , Adolescente , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Rejeição de Enxerto/imunologia , Rejeição de Enxerto/prevenção & controle , Sobrevivência de Enxerto , Humanos , Imunossupressores/uso terapêutico , Lactente , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
4.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; (1): CD003897, 2010 Jan 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20091551

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Interleukin 2 receptor antagonists (IL2Ra) are used as induction therapy for prophylaxis against acute rejection in kidney transplant recipients. Use of IL2Ra has increased steadily since their introduction, but the proportion of new transplant recipients receiving IL2Ra differs around the globe, with 27% of new kidney transplant recipients in the United States, and 70% in Australasia receiving IL2Ra in 2007. OBJECTIVES: To systematically identify and summarise the effects of using an IL2Ra, as an addition to standard therapy, or as an alternative to another immunosuppressive induction strategy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify new records, and authors of included reports were contacted for clarification where necessary. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in all languages comparing IL2Ra to placebo, no treatment, other IL2Ra or other antibody therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data was extracted and assessed independently by two authors, with differences resolved by discussion. Dichotomous outcomes are reported as relative risk (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included 71 studies (306 reports, 10,537 participants). Where IL2Ra were compared with placebo (32 studies; 5,784 patients) graft loss including death with a functioning graft was reduced by 25% at six months (16 studies: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.98) and one year (24 studies: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.90), but not beyond this. At one year biopsy-proven acute rejection was reduced by 28% (14 studies: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.81), and there was a 19% reduction in CMV disease (13 studies: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.97). There was a 64% reduction in early malignancy within six months (8 studies: RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.86), and creatinine was lower (7 studies: MD -8.18 micromol/L 95% CI -14.28 to -2.09) but these differences were not sustained.When IL2Ra were compared to ATG (16 studies, 2211 participants), there was no difference in graft loss at any time point, or for acute rejection diagnosed clinically, but the was benefit of ATG therapy over IL2Ra for biopsy-proven acute rejection at one year (8 studies:, RR 1.30 95% CI 1.01 to 1.67), but at the cost of a 75% increase in malignancy (7 studies: RR 0.25 95% CI 0.07 to 0.87) and a 32% increase in CMV disease (13 studies: RR 0.68 95% CI 0.50 to 0.93). Serum creatinine was significantly lower for IL2Ra treated patients at six months (4 studies: MD -11.20 micromol/L 95% CI -19.94 to -2.09). ATG patients experienced significantly more fever, cytokine release syndrome and other adverse reactions to drug administration and more leucopenia but not thrombocytopenia. There were no significant differences in outcomes according to cyclosporine or tacrolimus use, azathioprine or mycophenolate, or to the study populations baseline risk for acute rejection. There was no evidence that effects were different according to whether equine or rabbit ATG was used. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Given a 38% risk of rejection, per 100 recipients compared with no treatment, nine recipients would need treatment with IL2Ra to prevent one recipient having rejection, 42 to prevent one graft loss, and 38 to prevent one having CMV disease over the first year post-transplantation. Compared with ATG treatment, ATG may prevent some experiencing acute rejection, but 16 recipients would need IL2Ra to prevent one having CMV, but 58 would need IL2Ra to prevent one having malignancy. There are no apparent differences between basiliximab and daclizumab. IL2Ra are as effective as other antibody therapies and with significantly fewer side effects.


Assuntos
Rejeição de Enxerto/prevenção & controle , Imunossupressores/uso terapêutico , Transplante de Rim , Receptores de Interleucina-2/antagonistas & inibidores , Creatinina/sangue , Infecções por Citomegalovirus/prevenção & controle , Taxa de Filtração Glomerular , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...