Effect of acupuncture and metformin on insulin sensitivity in women with polycystic ovary syndrome and insulin resistance: a three-armed randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Does acupuncture improve insulin sensitivity more effectively than metformin or sham acupuncture in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and insulin resistance (IR)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Among women with PCOS and IR, acupuncture was not more effective than metformin or sham acupuncture in improving insulin sensitivity. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Uncontrolled trials have shown that acupuncture improved insulin sensitivity with fewer side effects compared with metformin in women with PCOS and IR. However, data from randomized trials between acupuncture and metformin or sham acupuncture are lacking. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This was a three-armed randomized controlled trial enrolling a total of 342 women with PCOS and IR from three hospitals between November 2015 and February 2018, with a 3-month follow-up until October 2018. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Women aged from 18 to 40 years with PCOS and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) ≥2.14 were randomly assigned (n = 114 per group) to receive true acupuncture plus placebo (true acupuncture), metformin plus sham acupuncture (metformin, 0.5 g three times daily) or sham acupuncture plus placebo (sham acupuncture) for 4 months, with an additional 3-month follow-up. True or sham acupuncture was given three times per week, and 0.5 g metformin or placebo was given three times daily. The primary outcome was change in HOMA-IR from baseline to 4 months after baseline visit. Secondary outcomes included changes in the glucose AUC during an oral glucose tolerance test, BMI and side effects at 4 months after baseline visit. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: After 4 months of treatment, the changes of HOMA-IR were -0.5 (decreased 14.7%) in the true acupuncture group, -1.0 (decreased 25.0%) in the metformin group and -0.3 (decreased 8.6%) in the sham acupuncture group, when compared with baseline. True acupuncture is not as effective as metformin in improving HOMA-IR at 4 months after baseline visit (difference, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.1-1.1). No significant difference was found in change in HOMA-IR between true and sham acupuncture groups at 4 months after baseline visit (difference, -0.2; 95% CI, -0.7 to 0.3). During the 4 months of treatment, gastrointestinal side effects were more frequent in the metformin group, including diarrhea, nausea, loss of appetite, fatigue, vomiting and stomach discomfort (31.6%, 13.2%, 11.4%, 8.8%, 14.0% and 8.8%, respectively). Bruising was more common in the true acupuncture group (14.9%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This study might have underestimated the sample size in the true acupuncture group with 4 months of treatment to enable detection of statistically significant changes in HOMA-IR with fixed acupuncture (i.e. a non-personalized protocol). Participants who withdrew because of pregnancy did not have further blood tests and this can introduce bias. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: True acupuncture did not improve insulin sensitivity as effectively as metformin in women with PCOS and IR, but it is better than metformin in improving glucose metabolism (which might reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes) and has less side effects. Metformin had a higher incidence of gastrointestinal adverse effects than acupuncture groups, and thus acupuncture might be a non-pharmacological treatment with low risk for women with PCOS. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effect of acupuncture combined with metformin on insulin sensitivity in these women. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was supported by grants 2017A020213004 and 2014A020221060 from the Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong Province. The authors have no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT02491333. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 8 July 2015. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLLMENT: 11 November 2015.

Ultrasound-guided transvaginal ovarian needle drilling for clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovarian syndrome in subfertile women.

BACKGROUND: Ovulatory disturbance is a key diagnostic feature of polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), leading to infertility and correspondingly heavy disease burden. Many therapeutic strategies have been used to induce ovulation for women with PCOS who are infertile. Ultrasound-guided transvaginal ovarian needle drilling (UTND) is a novel surgical method used to induce ovulation for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS at the outpatient clinic.  OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of UTND for subfertile women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and other databases to December 2020. We checked conference abstracts, reference lists, and clinical trials registries. We also contacted experts and specialists in the field for any additional trials . SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to include randomised controlled trials comparing UTND to laparoscopic ovarian drilling, and UTND combined with gonadotropins to gonadotropins, in women of reproductive age with clomiphene-resistant PCOS and infertility. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the trials identified by the search for inclusion, assessed methodological quality and risk of bias, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were live birth rate and incidence of surgical complications (bleeding and infection). Secondary outcomes included pregnancy rate, ovulation rate, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. We planned to calculate odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals for dichotomous data. We would assess overall quality of the evidence by applying the GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We did not identify any trials for inclusion in the review. We were unable to assess the benefit or harm of applying UTND for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS, as no studies could be included in the current review. We moved the previously included trials to studies awaiting classification due to concerns regarding methodology. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since we did not identify any studies for inclusion, we were unable to assess the benefit or harm of applying UTND for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS.

Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Thrombolytic therapy is usually reserved for people with clinically serious or massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Evidence suggests that thrombolytic agents may dissolve blood clots more rapidly than heparin and may reduce the death rate associated with PE. However, there are still concerns about the possible risk of adverse effects of thrombolytic therapy, such as major or minor haemorrhage. This is the fourth update of the Cochrane review first published in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy for acute pulmonary embolism. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 17 August 2020. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared thrombolytic therapy followed by heparin versus heparin alone, heparin plus placebo, or surgical intervention for people with acute PE (massive/submassive). We did not include trials comparing two different thrombolytic agents or different doses of the same thrombolytic drug. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (ZZ, QH) assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of trials and extracted data. We calculated effect estimates using the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) or the mean difference (MD) with a 95% CI. The primary outcomes of interest were death, recurrence of PE and haemorrhagic events. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified three new studies for inclusion in this update. We included 21 trials in the review, with a total of 2401 participants. No studies compared thrombolytics versus surgical intervention. We were not able to include one study in the meta-analysis because it provided no extractable data. Most studies carried a high or unclear risk of bias related to randomisation and blinding. Meta-analysis showed that, compared to control (heparin alone or heparin plus placebo), thrombolytics plus heparin probably reduce both the odds of death (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.88; 19 studies, 2319 participants; low-certainty evidence), and recurrence of PE (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.91; 12 studies, 2050 participants; low-certainty evidence). Effects on mortality weakened when six studies at high risk of bias were excluded from analysis (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.13; 13 studies, 2046 participants) and in the analysis of submassive PE participants (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.02; 1993 participants). Effects on recurrence of PE also weakened after removing one study at high risk of bias for sensitivity analysis (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.04; 11 studies, 1949 participants). We downgraded the certainty of evidence to low because of 'Risk of bias' concerns. Major haemorrhagic events were probably more common in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.92 to 4.20; 15 studies, 2101 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), as were minor haemorrhagic events (OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.66 to 5.30; 13 studies,1757 participants; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate or low because of 'Risk of bias' concerns and inconsistency. Haemorrhagic stroke may occur more often in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 7.59, 95% CI 1.38 to 41.72; 2 studies, 1091 participants). Limited data indicated that thrombolytics may benefit haemodynamic outcomes, perfusion lung scanning, pulmonary angiogram assessment, echocardiograms, pulmonary hypertension, coagulation parameters, composite clinical outcomes, need for escalation and survival time to a greater extent than heparin alone. However, the heterogeneity of the studies and the small number of participants involved warrant caution when interpreting results. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (mean difference (MD) -1.40 days, 95% CI -2.69 to -0.11; 5 studies, 368 participants). Haemodynamic decompensation may occur less in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.66; 3 studies, 1157 participants). Quality of life was similar between the two treatment groups. None of the included studies provided data on post-thrombotic syndrome or on cost comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence suggests that thrombolytics may reduce death following acute pulmonary embolism compared with heparin (the effectiveness was mainly driven by one trial with massive PE). Thrombolytic therapy may be helpful in reducing the recurrence of pulmonary emboli but may cause more major and minor haemorrhagic events, including haemorrhagic stroke. More studies of high methodological quality are needed to assess safety and cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy for people with pulmonary embolism.

Guidelines for Reporting Trial Protocols and Completed Trials Modified Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Other Extenuating Circumstances: The CONSERVE 2021 Statement.

Importance: Extenuating circumstances can trigger unplanned changes to randomized trials and introduce methodological, ethical, feasibility, and analytical challenges that can potentially compromise the validity of findings. Numerous randomized trials have required changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but guidance for reporting such modifications is incomplete. Objective: As a joint extension for the CONSORT and SPIRIT reporting guidelines, CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstances) aims to improve reporting of trial protocols and completed trials that undergo important modifications in response to extenuating circumstances. Evidence: A panel of 37 international trial investigators, patient representatives, methodologists and statisticians, ethicists, funders, regulators, and journal editors convened to develop the guideline. The panel developed CONSERVE following an accelerated, iterative process between June 2020 and February 2021 involving (1) a rapid literature review of multiple databases (OVID Medline, OVID EMBASE, and EBSCO CINAHL) and gray literature sources from 2003 to March 2021; (2) consensus-based panelist meetings using a modified Delphi process and surveys; and (3) a global survey of trial stakeholders. Findings: The rapid review yielded 41 673 citations, of which 38 titles were relevant, including emerging guidance from regulatory and funding agencies for managing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on trials. However, no generalizable guidance for all circumstances in which trials and trial protocols might face unanticipated modifications were identified. The CONSERVE panel used these findings to develop a consensus reporting guidelines following 4 rounds of meetings and surveys. Responses were received from 198 professionals from 34 countries, of whom 90% (n = 178) indicated that they understood the concept definitions and 85.4% (n = 169) indicated that they understood and could use the implementation tool. Feedback from survey respondents was used to finalize the guideline and confirm that the guideline's core concepts were applicable and had utility for the trial community. CONSERVE incorporates an implementation tool and checklists tailored to trial reports and trial protocols for which extenuating circumstances have resulted in important modifications to the intended study procedures. The checklists include 4 sections capturing extenuating circumstances, important modifications, responsible parties, and interim data analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: CONSERVE offers an extension to CONSORT and SPIRIT that could improve the transparency, quality, and completeness of reporting important modifications to trials in extenuating circumstances such as COVID-19.

WHO Trial Registration Data Set (TRDS) extension for traditional Chinese medicine 2020: recommendations, explanation, and elaboration.

BACKGROUND: Although the WHO Trial Registration Data Set (TRDS) has been published for many years, the quality of clinical trial registrations with traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is still not satisfactory, especially about the inadequate reporting on TCM interventions. The development of the WHO TRDS for TCM Extension 2020 (WHO TRDS-TCM 2020) aims to address this inadequacy. METHODS: A group of clinical experts, methodologists, epidemiologists, and editors has developed this WHO TRDS-TCM 2020 through a comprehensive process, including the baseline survey, draft of the initial items, three-round of Delphi survey, solicitation of comments, revision, and finalization. RESULTS: The WHO TRDS-TCM 2020 statement extends the latest version (V.1.3.1) of TRDS published in November 2017. The checklist includes 11 extended items (including subitems), namely Source(s) of Monetary or Material Support (Item 4), Scientific Title (Item 10a and 10b), Countries of Recruitment (Item 11), Health Condition(s) or Problem(s) Studied (Item 12), Intervention(s) (Item 13a, 13b and 13c), Key Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria (Item 14), Primary and Key Secondary Outcomes (Item 19 to 20), and Lay Summary (Item B1). For Item 13 (Interventions), three common TCM interventions--i.e., Chinese herbal medicine formulas, acupuncture and moxibustion-are elaborated. CONCLUSIONS: The group hopes that the WHO TRDS-TCM 2020 can improve the reporting quality and transparency of TCM trial registrations, assist registries in assessing the registration quality of TCM trials, and help readers understand TCM trial design.

Ultrasound-guided transvaginal ovarian needle drilling for clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovarian syndrome in subfertile women.

BACKGROUND: Ovulatory disturbance is a key diagnostic feature of polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), leading to infertility and correspondingly heavy disease burden. Many therapeutic strategies have been used to induce ovulation for women with PCOS who are infertile. Ultrasound-guided transvaginal ovarian needle drilling (UTND) is a novel surgical method used to induce ovulation for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS at the outpatients clinic. Nevertheless, the quality in most of the studies seemed low, and the safety and efficacy of UTND is still uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of UTND for subfertile women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and six other databases to November 2018. We checked conference abstracts from the 2018 ESHRE, reference lists, and clinical trials registries. We contacted experts and specialists in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing UTND to laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD), and UTND combined with gonadotropins to gonadotropins alone for women of reproductive age with clomiphene-resistant PCOS and infertility. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened appropriate trials for inclusion, assessed methodological quality and risk of bias, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were live birth rate and incidence of surgical complications (bleeding and infection). We included ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as a secondary outcome. Meta-analyses could only be conducted for the secondary outcomes pregnancy rate and ovulation rate in the comparison of UTND versus LOD using a random-effect model. We calculated odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence by applying GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We included five trials involving 639 clomiphene-resistant women with PCOS. Three studies compared UTND with LOD, and two compared UTND combined with gonadotropins with gonadotropins alone. The evidence was of low to very low quality. The main limitations were serious risk of bias due to poor reporting of methods, inconsistency resulting from heterogeneity, imprecision induced by limited sample size, and lack of reporting of clinically relevant outcomes such as live birth and surgical complications.UTND versus LODNo studies reported on the main outcome live birth. One study reported on surgical complications; however, the evidence for this outcome was of very low quality because it was based on one study with small sample size and there were no events in either arm. Thus, we are uncertain whether there is any difference in surgical complications between UTND and LOD.We are also uncertain whether there is any difference in pregnancy rate when comparing UTND with LOD (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.03; I2 = 56%; 3 RCTs, n = 473; very-low quality evidence). UTND may lead to a slight decrease in ovulation rate when compared to LOD (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.97; I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, n = 473; low-quality evidence). This suggests that among clomiphene-resistant women with PCOS using LOD with an expected ovulation rate of 69.5%, the ovulation rate among women using UTND may be between 50.6% and 68.8%No studies reported on the outcomes OHSS and multiple pregnancy. There was also insufficient evidence to reach a conclusion regarding miscarriage as there was only one study of very low quality.UTND combined with gonadotropins versus gonadotropins aloneNo studies reported on the main outcomes live birth and incidence of surgical complications. The evidence for the outcomes OHSS, pregnancy, ovulation, miscarriage, and multiple pregnancy in this comparison was of very low quality. Thus, we are uncertain whether there is any difference in these outcomes for women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS using UTND combined with gonadotropins as compared with gonadotropins. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low-quality evidence, It is uncertain whether there is any difference in pregnancy rate, incidence of surgical complications, and miscarriage rate between UTND and LOD in women with clomiphene-resistant PCOS. UTND may lead to a slight decrease in ovulation rate when compared to LOD. No studies reported on the outcomes live birth rate, incidence of OHSS, and multiple pregnancy rate. No studies reported on the main outcomes live birth and surgical complications for the comparison UTND combined with gonadotrophins versus gonadotrophins alone. The evidence for the outcomes OHSS, pregnancy, ovulation, miscarriage, and multiple pregnancy in this comparison was of very low quality. Thus, it is unclear if there is a difference in any of the outcomes between UTND combined with gonadotrophins versus gonadotrophins alone.

Reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of acupuncture: the PRISMA for acupuncture checklist.

BACKGROUND: Acupuncture is widely used worldwide, and systematic reviews on acupuncture are increasingly being published. Although acupuncture systematic reviews share several essential elements with other systematic reviews, some essential information for the application of acupuncture is not covered by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Considering this, we aimed to develop an extension of the PRISMA statement for acupuncture systematic reviews. METHODS: We used the PRISMA statement as a starting point, and conducted this study referring to the development strategy recommended by the EQUATOR network. The initial items were collected through a wide survey among evidence users and a review of relevant studies. We conducted a three-round Delphi survey and one-day face-to-face meeting to select items and formulate the checklist. After the consensus meeting, we drafted the manuscript (including the checklist) and sent it to our advisory experts for comments, following which the checklist was refined and circulated to a group of acupuncture systematic review authors for pilot test. We also selected a sample of acupuncture systematic reviews published in 2017 to test the checklist. RESULTS: A checklist of five new sub-items (including sub items) and six modified items was formulated, involving content related to title, rationale, eligibility criteria, literature search, data extraction, and study characteristics. We clarified the rationales of the items and provided examples for each item for additional guidance. CONCLUSION: The PRISMA for Acupuncture checklist is developed for improving the reporting of systematic reviews of acupuncture interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: We have registered the study on the EQUATOR network ( http://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/#91 ).

WITHDRAWN: Traditional Chinese medicinal herbs for the treatment of idiopathic chronic fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Chronic fatigue is increasingly common. Conventional medical care is limited in treating chronic fatigue, leading some patients to use traditional Chinese medicine therapies, including herbal medicine. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of traditional Chinese medicine herbal products in treating idiopathic chronic fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome. SEARCH METHODS: The following databases were searched for terms related to traditional Chinese medicine, chronic fatigue, and clinical trials: CCDAN Controlled Trials Register (July 2009), MEDLINE (1966-2008), EMBASE (1980-2008), AMED (1985-2008), CINAHL (1982-2008), PSYCHINFO (1985-2008), CENTRAL (Issue 2 2008), the Chalmers Research Group PedCAM Database (2004), VIP Information (1989-2008), CNKI (1976-2008), OCLC Proceedings First (1992-2008), Conference Papers Index (1982-2008), and Dissertation Abstracts (1980-2008). Reference lists of included studies and review articles were examined and experts in the field were contacted for knowledge of additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Selection criteria included published or unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of participants diagnosed with idiopathic chronic fatigue or chronic fatigue syndrome comparing traditional Chinese medicinal herbs with placebo, conventional standard of care (SOC), or no treatment/wait lists. The outcome of interest was fatigue. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: 13 databases were searched for RCTs investigating TCM herbal products for the treatment of chronic fatigue. Over 2400 references were located. Studies were screened and assessed for inclusion criteria by two authors. MAIN RESULTS: No studies that met all inclusion criteria were identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although studies examining the use of TCM herbal products for chronic fatigue were located, methodologic limitations resulted in the exclusion of all studies. Of note, many of the studies labelled as RCTs and conducted in China did not utilize rigorous randomization procedures. Improvements in methodology in future studies is required for meaningful synthesis of data.

Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Thrombolytic therapy is usually reserved for patients with clinically serious or massive pulmonary embolism (PE). Evidence suggests that thrombolytic agents may dissolve blood clots more rapidly than heparin and may reduce the death rate associated with PE. However, there are still concerns about the possible risk of adverse effects of thrombolytic therapy, such as major or minor haemorrhage. This is the third update of the Cochrane review first published in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of thrombolytic therapy for acute pulmonary embolism. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 16 April 2018. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared thrombolytic therapy followed by heparin versus heparin alone, heparin plus placebo, or surgical intervention for patients with acute PE. We did not include trials comparing two different thrombolytic agents or different doses of the same thrombolytic drug. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (JY, QH) assessed the eligibility and quality of trials and extracted data. We calculated effect estimates using the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) or the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified no new studies for inclusion in this 2018 update. We included in the review 18 trials with a total of 2197 participants. We were not able to include one study in the meta-analysis because it provided no data that we could extract. Most of the studies carried a high risk of bias because of high or unclear risk related to randomisation and blinding. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with heparin alone, or heparin plus placebo, thrombolytics plus heparin can reduce the odds of death (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.87, 2167 participants, P = 0.01, low-quality evidence) and recurrence of PE (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.89, 1898 participants, P = 0.02, low-quality evidence). Effects on mortality weakened when we excluded from analysis four studies at high risk of bias (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.06, 2054 participants, P = 0.08). The incidence of major and minor haemorrhagic events was higher in the thrombolytics group than in the control group (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.95 to 4.31, 1897 participants, P < 0.001, low-quality evidence; OR 3.09, 95% CI 1.58 to 6.06, 1553 participants, P = 0.001, very low-quality evidence, respectively). We downgraded the quality of the evidence to low or very low because of design limitations, potential influence of pharmaceutical companies, and small sample sizes. Length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -0.89, 95% CI -3.13 to 1.34) and quality of life were similar between the two treatment groups. Limited information from a small number of trials indicated that thrombolytics may improve haemodynamic outcomes, perfusion lung scanning, pulmonary angiogram assessment, echocardiograms, pulmonary hypertension, coagulation parameters, clinical outcomes, and survival time to a greater extent than heparin alone. However, the heterogeneity of the studies and the small number of participants involved warrant caution when results are interpreted. Similarily, fewer participants from the thrombolytics group required escalation of treatment. None of the included studies reported on post-thrombotic syndrome or compared the costs of different treatments. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-quality evidence suggests that thrombolytics reduce death following acute pulmonary embolism compared with heparin. The included studies used a variety of thrombolytic drugs. Thrombolytic therapy may be helpful in reducing the recurrence of pulmonary emboli but may cause major and minor haemorrhagic events and stroke. More high-quality, blinded randomised controlled trials assessing safety and cost-effectiveness of therapies for pulmonary embolism are required.

CONSORT Extension for Chinese Herbal Medicine Formulas 2017: Recommendations, Explanation, and Elaboration (Simplified Chinese Version).

Editors' Note: This article is the simplified Chinese version of the CONSORT Extension for Chinese Herbal Medicine Formulas 2017: Recommendations, Explanation, and Elaboration. (Cheng C, Wu T, Shang H, Li, Y, Altman D, Moher D; CONSORT-CHM Formulas 2017 Group. CONSORT Extension for Chinese Herbal Medicine Formulas 2017: Recommendations, Explanation, and Elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:112-21. [Epub 27 June 2017]. doi:10.7326/M16-2977).

CONSORT Extension for Chinese Herbal Medicine Formulas 2017: Recommendations, Explanation, and Elaboration.

Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) formulas are the major components of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) interventions. The general reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of CHM formulas is disappointing, although CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement extensions for herbal medicinal interventions and acupuncture interventions are available. A group of TCM clinical experts, methodologists, epidemiologists, and editors has developed this CONSORT Extension for CHM Formulas (CONSORT-CHM Formulas 2017) through a comprehensive process, including publication of the draft version, solicitation of comments, revision, and finalization. The CONSORT 2010 Statement was extended by introducing the idea of TCM Pattern and the features of CHM formulas. One new checklist subitem, keywords, was added to facilitate indexing and data searching. Seven of the 25 CONSORT checklist items, namely title and abstract, background and objectives, participants, interventions, outcomes, generalizability, and interpretation, are now elaborated, and the explanation of harms specific to CHM formulas is revised. Illustrative examples and explanations are also provided. The group hopes that CONSORT-CHM Formulas 2017 can improve the reporting quality of RCTs of CHM formulas.

CONSORT Extension for Chinese Herbal Medicine Formulas 2017: Recommendations, Explanation, and Elaboration (Traditional Chinese Version).

Editors' Note: This article is the traditional Chinese version of the CONSORT Extension for Chinese Herbal Medicine Formulas 2017: Recommendations, Explanation, and Elaboration. (Cheng C, Wu T, Shang H, Li, Y, Altman D, Moher D; CONSORT-CHM Formulas 2017 Group. CONSORT Extension for Chinese Herbal Medicine Formulas 2017: Recommendations, Explanation, and Elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:112-21. [Epub 27 June 2017]. doi:10.7326/M16-2977).

Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory partial epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 7, 2014) on 'Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy'. Epilepsy is a chronic and disabling neurologic disorder, affecting approximately 1% of the population. Up to 30% of people with epilepsy have seizures that are resistant to currently available drugs. Felbamate is one of the second-generation antiepileptic drugs and we have assessed its effects as an add-on therapy to standard drugs in this review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of felbamate versus placebo when used as an add-on treatment for people with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update we searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, up to 20 October 2016. There were no language and time restrictions. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies to search for additional reports of relevant studies. We also contacted the manufacturers of felbamate and experts in the field for information about any unpublished or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised placebo-controlled add-on studies of people of any age with refractory partial-onset seizures. The studies could be double-blind, single-blind or unblinded and could be of parallel or cross-over design. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted information. We resolved disagreements by discussion. If disagreements persisted, the third review author arbitrated. We assessed the following outcomes: 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; absolute or percentage reduction in seizure frequency; treatment withdrawal; adverse effects; quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomised controlled trials with a total of 236 participants. Two trials were parallel design, the third had a two-period cross-over design, and the fourth had a three-period cross-over design. Two studies were at an unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment. These two studies did not include any description of their methods for outcome assessment and performance blinding (i.e. participants or doctors). Two studies were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data. Due to significant methodological heterogeneity, clinical heterogeneity and differences in outcome measures, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis of the results. Only one study reported 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. One study reported absolute and percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo, P values were 0.046 and 0.018, respectively. One study reported percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo, but there were no P values. Adverse effects rates were higher during the felbamate period than the placebo period, particularly headache, nausea and dizziness. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In view of the methodological deficiencies, limited number of individual studies and differences in outcome measures, we have found no reliable evidence to support the use of felbamate as an add-on therapy in people with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. A large-scale, randomised controlled trial conducted over a longer period of time is required to inform clinical practice.

Prophylactic chemotherapy for hydatidiform mole to prevent gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of the original Cochrane Review published in Cochrane Library, Issue 10, 2012.Hydatidiform mole (HM), also called a molar pregnancy, is characterised by an overgrowth of foetal chorionic tissue within the uterus. HMs may be partial (PM) or complete (CM) depending on their gross appearance, histopathology and karyotype. PMs usually have a triploid karyotype, derived from maternal and paternal origins, whereas CMs are diploid and have paternal origins only. Most women with HM can be cured by evacuation of retained products of conception (ERPC) and their fertility preserved. However, in some women the growth persists and develops into gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN), a malignant form of the disease that requires treatment with chemotherapy. CMs have a higher rate of malignant transformation than PMs. It may be possible to reduce the risk of GTN in women with HM by administering prophylactic chemotherapy (P-Chem). However, P-Chem given before or after evacuation of HM to prevent malignant sequelae remains controversial, as the risks and benefits of this practice are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of P-Chem to prevent GTN in women with a molar pregnancy. To investigate whether any subgroup of women with HM may benefit more from P-Chem than others. SEARCH METHODS: For the original review we performed electronic searches in the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 2, 2012), MEDLINE (1946 to February week 4, 2012) and Embase (1980 to 2012, week 9). We developed the search strategy using free text and MeSH. For this update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 5, 2017), MEDLINE (February 2012 to June week 1, 2017) and Embase (February 2012 to 2017, week 23). We also handsearched reference lists of relevant literature to identify additional studies and searched trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of P-Chem for HM. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review and extracted data using a specifically designed data collection form. Meta-analyses were performed by pooling data from individual trials using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5) software in line with standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane methodology. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified 161 records; after de-duplication and title and abstract screening 90 full-text articles were retrieved. From these we included three RCTs with a combined total of 613 participants. One study compared prophylactic dactinomycin to no prophylaxis (60 participants); the other two studies compared prophylactic methotrexate to no prophylaxis (420 and 133 participants). All participants were diagnosed with CMs. We considered the latter two studies to be of poor methodological quality.P-Chem reduced the risk of GTN occurring in women following a CM (3 studies, 550 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24 to 0.57; I² = 0%; P < 0.00001; low-quality evidence). However, owing to the poor quality (high risk of bias) of two of the included studies, we performed sensitivity analyses excluding these two studies. This left only one small study of high-risk women to contribute data for this primary outcome (59 participants; RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.73; P = 0.01); therefore we consider this evidence to be of low quality.The time to diagnosis was longer in the P-Chem group than the control group (2 studies, 33 participants; mean difference (MD) 28.72, 95% CI 13.19 to 44.24; P = 0.0003; low-quality evidence); and the P-Chem group required more courses to cure subsequent GTN (1 poor-quality study, 14 participants; MD 1.10, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.68; P = 0.0002; very low quality evidence).There were insufficient data to perform meta-analyses for toxicity, overall survival, drug resistance and reproductive outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: P-Chem may reduce the risk of progression to GTN in women with CMs who are at a high risk of malignant transformation; however, current evidence in favour of P-Chem is limited by the poor methodological quality and small size of the included studies. As P-Chem may increase drug resistance, delays treatment of GTN and may expose women toxic side effects, this practice cannot currently be recommended.

Effect of Acupuncture and Clomiphene in Chinese Women With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Acupuncture is used to induce ovulation in some women with polycystic ovary syndrome, without supporting clinical evidence. Objective: To assess whether active acupuncture, either alone or combined with clomiphene, increases the likelihood of live births among women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Design, Setting, and Participants: A double-blind (clomiphene vs placebo), single-blind (active vs control acupuncture) factorial trial was conducted at 21 sites (27 hospitals) in mainland China between July 6, 2012, and November 18, 2014, with 10 months of pregnancy follow-up until October 7, 2015. Chinese women with polycystic ovary syndrome were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to 4 groups. Interventions: Active or control acupuncture administered twice a week for 30 minutes per treatment and clomiphene or placebo administered for 5 days per cycle, for up to 4 cycles. The active acupuncture group received deep needle insertion with combined manual and low-frequency electrical stimulation; the control acupuncture group received superficial needle insertion, no manual stimulation, and mock electricity. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was live birth. Secondary outcomes included adverse events. Results: Among the 1000 randomized women (mean [SD] age, 27.9 [3.3] years; mean [SD] body mass index, 24.2 [4.3]), 250 were randomized to each group; a total of 926 women (92.6%) completed the trial. Live births occurred in 69 of 235 women (29.4%) in the active acupuncture plus clomiphene group, 66 of 236 (28.0%) in the control acupuncture plus clomiphene group, 31 of 223 (13.9%) in the active acupuncture plus placebo group, and 39 of 232 (16.8%) in the control acupuncture plus placebo group. There was no significant interaction between active acupuncture and clomiphene (P = .39), so main effects were evaluated. The live birth rate was significantly higher in the women treated with clomiphene than with placebo (135 of 471 [28.7%] vs 70 of 455 [15.4%], respectively; difference, 13.3%; 95% CI, 8.0% to 18.5%) and not significantly different between women treated with active vs control acupuncture (100 of 458 [21.8%] vs 105 of 468 [22.4%], respectively; difference, -0.6%; 95% CI, -5.9% to 4.7%). Diarrhea and bruising were more common in patients receiving active acupuncture than control acupuncture (diarrhea: 25 of 500 [5.0%] vs 8 of 500 [1.6%], respectively; difference, 3.4%; 95% CI, 1.2% to 5.6%; bruising: 37 of 500 [7.4%] vs 9 of 500 [1.8%], respectively; difference, 5.6%; 95% CI, 3.0% to 8.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among Chinese women with polycystic ovary syndrome, the use of acupuncture with or without clomiphene, compared with control acupuncture and placebo, did not increase live births. This finding does not support acupuncture as an infertility treatment in such women. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01573858.

Chinese herbal medicine for oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Oesophageal cancer is the seventh leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Traditional Chinese herbal medicine is sometimes used as an adjunct to radiotherapy or chemotherapy for this type of cancer. This review was first published in 2007 and updated in 2009; this 2016 update is the latest version of the review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and possible adverse effects of the addition of Chinese herbal medicine to treatment with radiotherapy or chemotherapy for oesophageal cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP database, Wanfang database and the Chinese Cochrane Centre Controlled Trials Register up to 1 October, 2015. We also searched databases of ongoing trials, the Internet and reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of radiotherapy or chemotherapy with and without the addition of Chinese herbal medicine. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. MAIN RESULTS: We tried to contact the 142 study authors by telephone, and finally included nine studies with 490 participants. All included studies were conducted in China, and allocated advanced oesophageal cancer patients to radiotherapy or chemotherapy groups, with and without additional Chinese herbal medicine. Quality of life, short-term therapeutic effects, TCM symptoms and adverse events caused by radiotherapy or chemotherapy were reported in these studies. Overall, we considered the trials to be at unclear or high risk of bias.The quality of life measure was conducted before and after the intervention; our analysis showed a beneficial effect, both in number of participants experiencing an improvement (risk ratio (RR) 2.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42 to 3.39; 5 RCTs, 233 participants, change of performance status score ≥ 10) and number of participants experiencing a deterioration (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.62; 6 RCTs, 287 participants, change of performance status score ≤ 10). We judged this to have low quality evidence, downgrading quality of evidence for risk of bias and imprecision, and upgrading quality of evidence for the large effect.For short-term therapeutic effects, the results suggest that traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has a positive impact on improvement (complete response + partial response) (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.35; 8 RCTs, 450 participants), moderate quality evidence and downgrading for risk of bias. There was no significant difference for progressive disease (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.01; 8 RCTs, 450 participants), low quality evidence and downgrading for risk of bias and imprecision. Three studies assessed this outcome after four weeks or three months' follow-up, the remaining studies gave no detailed information for this outcome. TCM symptoms, which was similar to short-term therapeutic effects evaluated with TCM clinical criteria, was diagnosed in two studies of 88 people at the end of the intervention. The results suggest that TCM has a positive impact on both total effectiveness (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.81) and ineffectiveness (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.93); we judged the studies to have very low quality evidence, downgrading for risk of bias and imprecision.Nine studies reported a series of adverse events caused by radiotherapy or chemotherapy at the end of the intervention, including mucositis, radiation oesophagitis, arrest of bone marrow, gastrointestinal reactions, renal and hepatic impairment, white blood cell descent, neurotoxicity, cardiac toxicity and anaemia. For those containing multiple studies, we conducted a pooled analysis. As a result, TCM showed a significant effect on radiation oesophagitis (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.94; 2 RCTs, 90 participants), gastrointestinal reactions (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.81; 4 RCTs, 268 participants) and white blood cell descent (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.83; 4 RCTs, 224 participants). The quality of evidence was low or very low, downgrading for risk of bias and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We currently find no evidence to determine whether TCM is an effective treatment for oesophageal cancer. The effect of TCM on short-term therapeutic effects is uncertain. TCM probably has positive effects on quality of life and on some adverse events caused by radiotherapy or chemotherapy in advanced oesophageal cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy or chemotherapy. The results of the review need to be interpreted cautiously owing to overall low quality evidence. Future trials should be large and correctly designed to detect important clinical effects and minimise risk of bias.

Chinese herbal medicine for subfertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) is one of the most common reproductive endocrinology abnormalities, and affects 5% to 10% of women of reproductive age. Western medicines, such as oral contraceptives, insulin sensitizers and laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD), have been used to treat PCOS. Recently, many studies have been published that consider Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) as an alternative treatment for women with PCOS. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of CHM for subfertile women with PCOS. SEARCH METHODS: We searched sources, including the following databases, from inception to 9 June 2016: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), PsycINFO, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, Wanfang and trial registries. In addition, we searched the reference lists of included trials and contacted experts in the field to locate trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that considered the use of CHM for the treatment of subfertile women with PCOS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened appropriate trials for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias in included studies and extracted data. We contacted primary study authors for additional information. We conducted meta-analyses. We used the odds ratios (ORs) to report dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs with 414 participants. The comparisons in the included trials were as follows: CHM versus clomiphene, CHM plus clomiphene versus clomiphene (with or without ethinyloestradiol cyproterone acetate (CEA)), CHM plus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction versus follicle aspiration plus ovulation induction alone, and CHM plus laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) versus LOD alone. The overall quality of the evidence for most comparisons was very low.None of the included studies reported live birth rate, and only one study reported data on adverse events.When CHM was compared with clomiphene (with or without LOD in both arms), there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in pregnancy rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 5.06; two studies, 90 participants, I² statistic = 0%, very low quality evidence). No study reported data on adverse events. When CHM plus clomiphene was compared with clomiphene (with or without CEA), there was low quality evidence of a higher pregnancy rate in the CHM plus clomiphene group (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.14; three RCTs, 300 women, I² statistic = 0%,low quality evidence). No data were reported on adverse events.When CHM with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction was compared with follicle aspiration and ovulation induction alone, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in pregnancy rates (OR 1.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 5.52; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence), severe luteinized unruptured follicle syndrome (LUFS) (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence), ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.00 to 8.19; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence) or multiple pregnancy (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.06 to 6.14; one study, 44 women, very low quality evidence).When CHM with LOD was compared with LOD alone, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of pregnancy (OR 3.50, 95% CI 0.72 to 17.09; one study, 30 women, very low quality evidence), No data were reported on adverse events.There was no evidence of a difference between any of the comparison groups for any other outcomes. The quality of the evidence for all other comparisons and outcomes was very low. The main limitations in the evidence were failure to report live birth or adverse events, failure to describe study methods in adequate detail and imprecision due to very low event rates and wide CIs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support the use of CHM for women with PCOS and subfertility. No data are available on live birth, and there is no consistent evidence to indicate that CHM influences fertility outcomes. However there is very limited low quality evidence to suggest that the addition of CHM to clomiphene may improve pregnancy rates. There is insufficient evidence on adverse effects to indicate whether CHM is safe.

Nitrates for the prevention of cardiac morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac complications are not uncommon in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery, especially in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) or at high risk of CAD. Perioperative cardiac complications can lead to mortality and morbidity, as well as higher costs for patient care. Nitrates, which are among the most commonly used cardiovascular drugs, perform the function of decreasing cardiac preload while improving cardiac blood perfusion. Sometimes, nitrates are administered to patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery to reduce the incidence of cardiac complications, especially for patients with CAD. However, their effects on patients' relevant outcomes remain controversial. OBJECTIVES: • To assess effects of nitrates as compared with other interventions or placebo in reducing cardiac risk (such as death caused by cardiac factors, angina pectoris, acute myocardial infarction, acute heart failure and cardiac arrhythmia) in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.• To identify the influence of different routes and dosages of nitrates on patient outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Chinese BioMedical Database until June 2014. We also searched relevant conference abstracts of important anaesthesiology or cardiology scientific meetings, the database of ongoing trials and Google Scholar.We reran the search in January 2016. We added three potential new studies of interest to the list of 'Studies awaiting classification' and will incorporate them into our formal review findings for the review update. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing nitrates versus no treatment, placebo or other pharmacological interventions in participants (15 years of age and older) undergoing non-cardiac surgery under any type of anaesthesia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. Two review authors selected trials, extracted data from included studies and assessed risk of bias. We resolved differences by discussion and, when necessary, sought help and suggestions from a third review author. We used a random-effects model for data analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We included 27 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (8244 participants analysed). Investigators reported 12 different comparisons of three different nitrates (nitroglycerin, isosorbide dinitrate and nicorandil) versus no treatment, placebo or other pharmacological interventions. All participants were older than 15 years of age. More than half of the trials used general anaesthesia. Surgical procedures in most trials were at low to moderate risk for perioperative cardiac complications. Only two comparisons including three studies reported the primary outcome - all-cause mortality up to 30 days post operation. Researchers reported other morbidity outcomes and adverse events in a variable and heterogeneous way, resulting in limited available data for inclusion in the meta-analysis. We determined that the overall methodological quality of included studies was fair to low, in accordance with risk of bias in most domains.In summary, we found no difference in the primary outcome - all-cause mortality up to 30 days post operation - when nitroglycerin was compared with no treatment (one study, 60 participants, 0/30 vs 1/30; (risk ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 7.87, very low-quality evidence based on GRADE criteria) or with placebo (two studies, 89 participants, 1/45 vs 0/44; RR 2.81, 95% CI 0.12 to 63.83, very low-quality evidence). Regarding our secondary outcomes, we noted no statistically significant differences in angina pectoris, acute myocardial infarction, acute heart failure, cardiac arrhythmia or cardiac arrest in any comparisons. In comparisons versus nitroglycerin, although more events of cardiac ischaemia were observed in participants receiving no treatment or placebo, we found no statistically significant differences in any comparisons, except the comparison of nicorandil versus placebo. One study revealed a potential dose-dependent protective effect of nicorandil for cardiac ischaemia.Adverse events were reported in a heterogeneous way among the comparisons. In general, more participants treated with nitrates had hypotension, tachycardia and headache, but investigators reported no statistically significant differences between groups in any comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that nitroglycerin or isosorbide dinitrate is not associated with improvement in mortality and cardiac complications among patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Limited evidence suggests that nicorandil may reduce the risk of cardiac ischaemia in participants undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Additional studies are needed to consolidate the evidence.However, the data included in many of the analyses in this review are sparse - that is, adequate data are few - resulting in very low power to detect differences between nitrates and comparators. Thus, a more objective conclusion would state that available evidence is insufficient to show whether nitrates are associated with improvement in mortality and cardiac complications among patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.Over the past decade, no high-quality studies have focused on association of cardiac mortality and morbidity with use of nitrates during non-cardiac surgery. This review underlines the need for well-designed trials in this field.

Linezolid versus vancomycin for skin and soft tissue infections.

BACKGROUND: The morbidity and treatment costs associated with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are high. Linezolid and vancomycin are antibiotics that are commonly used in treating skin and soft-tissue infections, specifically those infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects and safety of linezolid and vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs. SEARCH METHODS: For this first update of this review we conducted searches of the following databases: Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 24 March 2015; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. We also contacted manufacturers for details of unpublished and ongoing trials. We scrutinised citations within all obtained trials and major review articles to identify any additional trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing linezolid with vancomycin in the treatment of SSTIs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. The primary outcomes were clinical cure, microbiological cure, and SSTI-related and treatment-related mortality. We performed subgroup analyses according to age, and whether the infection was due to MRSA. MAIN RESULTS: No new trials were identified for this first update. We included nine RCTs (3144 participants). Linezolid was associated with a significantly better clinical (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.16) and microbiological cure rate in adults (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.16). For those infections due to MRSA, linezolid was significantly more effective than vancomycin in clinical (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.17) and microbiological cure rates (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.32). No RCT reported SSTI-related and treatment-related mortality. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between linezolid and vancomycin (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.80). There were fewer incidents of red man syndrome (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.29), pruritus (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.75) and rash (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.58) in the linezolid group compared with vancomycin, however, more people reported thrombocytopenia (RR 13.06, 95% CI 1.72 to 99.22), and nausea (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.94) when treated with linezolid. It seems, from the available data, that length of stay in hospital was shorter for those in the linezolid group than the vancomycin group. The daily cost of outpatient therapy was less with oral linezolid than with intravenous vancomycin. Although inpatient treatment with linezolid cost more than inpatient treatment with vancomycin per day, the median length of hospital stay was three days shorter with linezolid. Thus, total hospital charges per patient were less with linezolid treatment than with vancomycin treatment. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Linezolid seems to be more effective than vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs, including SSTIs caused by MRSA. The available evidence is at high risk of bias and is based on studies that were supported by the pharmaceutical company that makes linezolid. Further well-designed, independently-funded, RCTs are needed to confirm the available evidence.

Curative effect of acupuncture on quality of life in patient with depression: a clinical randomized single-blind placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of acupuncture on the quality of life in patients with depression by clinical randomized single-blind placebo-controlled study. METHODS: one hundred and sixty-three cases of depression according with the inclusion criteria were randomly divided into a group of acupuncture dredging liver and regulating flow of theosophy (group 1), a group of acupoint shallow stab (group 2) and a group of non-acupoint shallow stab (group 3) at 1 : 1 : 1 ratio, and treated with acupuncture, moxibustion, and intradermal embedding of needle, twice a week, for a total of 12 weeks. Scale of Quality of Life (SF-36) was used to measure the scores at four different time points and evaluate the effect of acupuncture on the quality of life of the patients with depression. RESULTS: At each time point after treatment, in scores of the 8 items, physical function, physical role, bodily pain, general physical condition, energy, social function, emotional function and mental health there were statistically significant differences among the 3 groups (P < 0.0125). CONCLUSION: Acupuncture can effectively improve the quality of life of patients with depression.