We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
Therapeutic effects of different drugs on obstructive sleep apnea/hypopnea syndrome in children.
World Journal of Pediatrics : WJP 2017 December
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the therapeutic effects of different drugs on obstructive sleep apnea/hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) in children by using a network meta-analysis approach.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched from the inception of each database to November 2015. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning the comparisons in the therapeutic effects of eight placebo-controlled drugs on OSAHS in children were included in this study. Network meta-analysis combined direct evidence and indirect evidence to evaluate the weighted mean difference (WMD) and surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) of therapeutic effects of eight drugs on OSAHS in children.
RESULTS: A total of seven RCTs were finally incorporated into our network meta-analysis. Pairwise meta-analysis results revealed that therapeutic effect of placebo was significantly poorer than that of intranasal mometasone furoate, montelukast, budesonide and fluticasone concerning apnea hypopnea index (AHI) value [WMD=1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.17-1.63; WMD=2.80, 95% CI=1.01-4.59; WMD=3.50, 95% CI=3.34-3.66; WMD=7.20, 95% CI=5.26-9.14, respectively], and fluticasone is better than placebo concerning sleep efficiency (WMD=3.50, 95% CI=2.42-4.58); regarding visual analogue scale, the therapeutic effect of placebo was poorer compared with sucralfate and clindamycin (WMD=1.94, 95% CI=1.13-2.75; WMD=1.06, 95% CI=0.22-1.90), and sucralfate is better than clindamycin (WMD=-0.88, 95% CI=-1.65 to -0.11). However, network meta-analysis results showed no obvious difference in the therapeutic effects of different drugs on OSAHS regarding AHI and sleep efficiency. Furthermore, the best SUCRA value was very high for fluticasone concerning AHI (86.6%) and budesonide concerning sleep efficiency (94.0%) for OSAHS treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Fluticasone and budesonide have relatively good effects in the treatment of OSAHS in children, thus providing an important guiding significance for the treatment of OSAHS in children.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched from the inception of each database to November 2015. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning the comparisons in the therapeutic effects of eight placebo-controlled drugs on OSAHS in children were included in this study. Network meta-analysis combined direct evidence and indirect evidence to evaluate the weighted mean difference (WMD) and surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) of therapeutic effects of eight drugs on OSAHS in children.
RESULTS: A total of seven RCTs were finally incorporated into our network meta-analysis. Pairwise meta-analysis results revealed that therapeutic effect of placebo was significantly poorer than that of intranasal mometasone furoate, montelukast, budesonide and fluticasone concerning apnea hypopnea index (AHI) value [WMD=1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.17-1.63; WMD=2.80, 95% CI=1.01-4.59; WMD=3.50, 95% CI=3.34-3.66; WMD=7.20, 95% CI=5.26-9.14, respectively], and fluticasone is better than placebo concerning sleep efficiency (WMD=3.50, 95% CI=2.42-4.58); regarding visual analogue scale, the therapeutic effect of placebo was poorer compared with sucralfate and clindamycin (WMD=1.94, 95% CI=1.13-2.75; WMD=1.06, 95% CI=0.22-1.90), and sucralfate is better than clindamycin (WMD=-0.88, 95% CI=-1.65 to -0.11). However, network meta-analysis results showed no obvious difference in the therapeutic effects of different drugs on OSAHS regarding AHI and sleep efficiency. Furthermore, the best SUCRA value was very high for fluticasone concerning AHI (86.6%) and budesonide concerning sleep efficiency (94.0%) for OSAHS treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Fluticasone and budesonide have relatively good effects in the treatment of OSAHS in children, thus providing an important guiding significance for the treatment of OSAHS in children.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app