Probiotics for treating infectious diarrhoea.

BACKGROUND: Probiotics are microbial cell preparations or components of microbial cells that have a beneficial effect on the health and well being of the host. Probiotics may offer a safe intervention in acute infectious diarrhoea to reduce the duration and severity of the illness. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of probiotics in proven or presumed infectious diarrhoea. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group's trials register (December 2002), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2002), MEDLINE (1966 to 2002), EMBASE (1988 to 2002), and reference lists from studies and reviews. We also contacted organizations and individuals working in the field, and pharmaceutical companies manufacturing probiotic agents. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing a specified probiotic agent with placebo or no probiotic in people with acute diarrhoea that is proven or presumed to be caused by an infectious agent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial methodological quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 1917 participants, mainly in countries with low overall mortality rates. Trials varied in relation to the probiotic(s) tested, dosage, methodological quality, and the diarrhoea definitions and outcomes. Probiotics reduced the risk of diarrhoea at 3 days (relative risk 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 0.77, random effects model; 15 studies) and the mean duration of diarrhoea by 30.48 hours (95% confidence interval 18.51 to 42.46 hours, random effects model, 12 studies). Subgroup analysis by probiotic(s) tested, rotavirus diarrhoea, national mortality rates, and age of participants did not fully account for the heterogeneity. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Probiotics appear to be a useful adjunct to rehydration therapy in treating acute, infectious diarrhoea in adults and children. More research is needed to inform the use of particular probiotic regimens in specific patient groups.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for treating sepsis and septic shock.

OBJECTIVES: Death from severe sepsis and septic shock is common, and researchers have explored whether antibodies to the endotoxins in some bacteria reduces mortality. This review summarises the effects of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in patients with bacterial sepsis or septic shock on mortality, bacteriological failure rates, and duration of stay in hospital. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline 1966 to April 1999, EMBASE 1988 to February 1999; we contacted investigators active in the field for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing intravenous immunoglobulin (monoclonal or polyclonal) with placebo or no intervention, in patients with bacterial sepsis or septic shock. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Inclusion criteria, trial quality assessment, and data abstraction were done in duplicate. We conducted pre-specified subgroup analyses by type of immunoglobulin preparation. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-three out of 49 studies met our inclusion criteria. Overall mortality was reduced in patients who received polyclonal IVIG (n=413; RR=0.60; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.76). Mortality was not reduced among patients who received monoclonal antibodies such as anti-endotoxins (n=1,736 in 4 good-quality studies; RR=0.98; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.12) or anti-cytokines (n=4,318; RR=0.93; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01). A few studies measured secondary outcomes (deaths from sepsis or length of hospitalisation) but no differences in the intervention and control groups were identified except among those who received polyclonal IVIG, where sepsis-related mortality was significantly reduced (n=161; RR=0.35; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.69). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: In our opinion, polyclonal IVIG significantly reduces mortality and can be used as an adjuvant treatment for sepsis and septic shock. Adjunctive therapy with monoclonal IVIGs remains experimental.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for treating sepsis and septic shock.

BACKGROUND: Death from severe sepsis and septic shock is common, and researchers have explored whether antibodies to the endotoxins in some bacteria reduces mortality. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the effects of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in patients with bacterial sepsis or septic shock on mortality, bacteriological failure rates, and duration of stay in hospital. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group specialized register up to November 2001; the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Library issue 4, 2001; MEDLINE 1966 to November 2001; and EMBASE 1988 to September 2001. We contacted investigators active in the field for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing intravenous immunoglobulin (monoclonal or polyclonal) with placebo or no intervention, in patients with bacterial sepsis or septic shock. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Inclusion criteria, trial quality assessment, and data abstraction were done in duplicate. We conducted pre-specified subgroup analyses by type of immunoglobulin preparation. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-seven out of 55 studies met our inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis of all types of IVIG preparations revealed a significant trend toward reduction of mortality (n= 8,856; RR=0.91; 95%CI 0.86-0.96). Overall mortality was reduced in patients who received polyclonal IVIG (n=492; RR=0.64; 95% CI 0.51 to 0.80). For the two high-quality trials on polyclonal IVIG, the RR for overall mortality was 0.30, but the confidence interval was wide (95% CI 0.09 to 0.99, n=91). Mortality was not reduced among patients who received monoclonal antibodies such as anti-endotoxins (n=2,826 in 5 good-quality studies; RR=0.97; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.07) or anti-cytokines (n=4,318; RR=0.93; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01). A few studies measured secondary outcomes (deaths from sepsis or length of hospitalisation) but no differences in the intervention and control groups were identified except among those who received polyclonal IVIG, where sepsis-related mortality was significantly reduced (n=161; RR=0.35; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.69). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Polyclonal IVIG significantly reduced mortality and and is a promising adjuvant in the treatment of sepsis and septic shock. However, all the trials were small and the totality of the evidence is insufficient to support a robust conclusion of benefit. Adjunctive therapy with monoclonal IVIGs remains experimental.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for treating sepsis and septic shock.

OBJECTIVES: Death from severe sepsis and septic shock is common, and researchers have explored whether antibodies to the endotoxins in some bacteria reduces mortality. This review summarises the effects of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in patients with bacterial sepsis or septic shock on mortality, bacteriological failure rates, and duration of stay in hospital. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE 1966 to 2000, EMBASE 1988 to February 1999; we contacted investigators active in the field for unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing intravenous immunoglobulin (monoclonal or polyclonal) with placebo or no intervention, in patients with bacterial sepsis or septic shock. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Inclusion criteria, trial quality assessment, and data abstraction were done in duplicate. We conducted pre-specified subgroup analyses by type of immunoglobulin preparation. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-seven out of 55 studies met our inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis of all types of IVIG preparations revealed a significant trend toward reduction of mortality (n= 8,856; RR=0.91; 95% CI 0.86 to 0.96). Overall mortality was reduced in patients who received polyclonal IVIG (n=492; RR=0.64; 95% CI 0.51 to 0.80). Mortality was not reduced among patients who received monoclonal antibodies such as anti-endotoxins (n=2,826 in 5 good-quality studies; RR=0.97; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.07) or anti-cytokines (n=4,318 in 4 good quality studies; RR=0.93; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01). A few studies measured secondary outcomes (deaths from sepsis or length of hospitalisation) but no differences in the intervention and control groups were identified except among those who received polyclonal IVIG, where sepsis-related mortality was significantly reduced (n=161; RR=0.35; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.69). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: In our opinion, polyclonal IVIG significantly reduces mortality and can be used as an adjuvant treatment for sepsis and septic shock. Adjunctive therapy with monoclonal IVIGs remains experimental.

The prevalence of rheumatic diseases in a Filipino urban population: a WHO-ILAR COPCORD Study. World Health Organization. International League of Associations for Rheumatology. Community Oriented Programme for the Control of the Rheumatic Diseases.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the point prevalence of musculoskeletal complaints and rheumatic diseases in a Filipino urban community. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional 2 phase survey was conducted in an urban community in Metropolitan manila. Phase I (screening) used face-to-face interviews, while phase II (examination) involved case identification of the rheumatic diseases. We sampled 670 households (3065 adults) using a multistage cluster sampling method. A pilot study was conducted to pretest the questionnaire for cross-cultural adaptation and validation, field procedures, sampling design, and data management plan. Standardized translated COPCORD questionnaires (blind translation and blind back-translation) were administered by trained interviewers. Two weeks after Phase I, Phase II was conducted at local health centers. The COPCORD questionnaire screened the number of cases with musculoskeletal complaints. Identification of cases with rheumatic disease was based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria. RESULTS: Respondents completed 3006 questionnaires (phase I response rate 98%). Of these 489 respondents had musculoskeletal complaints. Functional disability was reported in 25% among these respondents. We examined 353 (phase II response rate 72%), revealing 294 with rheumatic conditions. In 26 persons there were no abnormalities, while 32 had nonrheumatic conditions at examination. The most common rheumatic diseases were osteoarthritis (OA) (n = 124) and soft tissue rheumatism (n = 115). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of musculoskeletal complaints was 16.3% (95% CI 8.6-24.0) of the adult population in a FIlipino urban community. The total prevalence of rheumatic disease is 9.8% (95% CI 8.2-11.4). The prevalence of OA was 4.1% (95% CI 3.3-4.9) and soft tissue rheumatism 3.8% (95% CI 2.9-4.8). The prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis, 0.17% (95% CI 0-9.36), was notably low compared to the prevalence in other developing countries.

Applying the results of trials and systematic reviews to individual patients.

Your patient is a 60-year-old hypertensive, alcoholic woman whose symptomless atrial fibrillation was first documented 3 months ago. An echocardiogram shows an enlarged left atrium, rendering successful cardioversion unlikely. She tells you that both of her parents had severe strokes that made the last years of their lives horrible, and she is terrified of having a stroke. You know that a meta-analysis of 5 randomized trials of warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation demonstrated a 68% relative risk reduction (RRR) in stroke (1). You consider prescribing warfarin for this patient but know that she would not have qualified for the study because alcoholism increases her risk for major hemorrhage (2).