COMPARATIVE EFFICACY OF ANTIVIRAL AGENTS FOR PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT OF HERPES LABIALIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND NETWORK META-ANALYSIS.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative efficacy and safety of antiviral agents used in the prevention and management of herpes labialis through a network meta-analysis of clinical trials. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in Ovid Medline PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus and Clinicaltrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting a comparison of antiviral agents in the management and prevention of herpes labialis in healthy/immunocompetent adults. The data extracted from the selected RCTs were assessed and a network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed. The interventions were ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). RESULTS: A total of 52 articles were included for qualitative synthesis and for the quantitative part, 26 articles were analyzed for the primary treatment outcome and 7 studies were analyzed for the primary prevention outcome. The combination therapy of oral valacyclovir and topical clobetasol was the best ranked with a mean reduction in healing time of -3.50 (95% CI -5.22 to -1.78) followed by vidarabine monophosphate of -3.22 (95% CI -4.59 to -1.85). No significant inconsistencies, heterogeneity, and publication bias were reported for TTH outcome analysis. For primary prevention outcomes, only 7 RCTs fulfilled the inclusion criteria, and none of the interventions was shown to be superior to each other. The absence of adverse events was reported by 16 studies, whereas other studies reported mild side effects only. CONCLUSION: NMA highlighted that several agents were effective in the management of herpes labialis among which the combination of oral valacyclovir with topical clobetasol therapy was the most effective in reducing the time to heal. However, further studies are required to determine which intervention is the most effective in preventing the recurrence of herpes labialis.

Association of proton-pump inhibitor use with adverse health outcomes: A systematic umbrella review of meta-analyses of cohort studies and randomised controlled trials.

AIMS: The aim was to perform an umbrella review to summarise the existing evidence on proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) use and adverse outcomes and to grade the certainty of evidence. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched up to July 2021 for meta-analyses of cohort studies and/or randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Summary effect sizes from a random-effects model, between-study heterogeneity, 95% prediction interval, small-study effect, excess significance and credibility ceilings were devised to classify the credibility of evidence from meta-analyses of cohort studies, whereas the GRADE approach was used for meta-analyses of RCTs. RESULTS: In meta-analyses of cohort studies, 52 of the 91 examined associations were statistically significant (P ≤ .05). Convincing evidence emerged from main analysis for the association between PPI use and risk of all-site fracture and chronic kidney disease in the elderly population. However, none of these associations remained supported by convincing evidence after sensitivity analyses. The use of PPI is also associated with an increased risk of mortality due to COVID-19 infection and other related adverse outcomes, but the quality of evidence was weak. In meta-analyses of RCTs, 38 of the 63 examined associations were statistically significant. However, no associations were supported by high or moderate-quality evidence. CONCLUSION: This study's findings imply that most putative adverse outcomes associated with PPI use may not be supported by high-quality evidence and are likely to have been affected by underlying confounding factors. Future research is needed to confirm the causal association between PPI use and risk of fracture and chronic kidney disease.