Suppr超能文献

治疗蛔虫病的驱虫药。

Anthelmintic drugs for treating ascariasis.

作者信息

Conterno Lucieni O, Turchi Marilia D, Corrêa Ione, Monteiro de Barros Almeida Ricardo Augusto

机构信息

State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Medical School, Department of Internal Medicine, Infectious Diseases Division, Rua Tessália Vieira de Camargo, 126, Cidade Universitária "Zeferino Vaz", Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil, 13083-887.

Federal University of Goias, Department of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Pathology and Public Health, Rua Amorinopolis QdR2 Lt13 Residencial Goias, Alphaville Flamboyant, Goiania, Goias, Brazil, 74884-540.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Apr 14;4(4):CD010599. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010599.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Ascaris lumbricoides is a common infection, and mainly affects children living in low-income areas. Water and sanitation improvement, health education, and drug treatment may help break the cycle of transmission, and effective drugs will reduce morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of anthelmintic drugs (albendazole, mebendazole, ivermectin) for treating people with Ascaris infection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, three other databases, and reference lists of included studies, without language restrictions, up to 4 July 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) that compared albendazole, mebendazole, and ivermectin in children and adults with confirmed Ascaris infection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data from the included trials. A third review author checked the quality of data extraction. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' assessment tool to determine the risk of bias in included trials. We used risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to compare dichotomous outcomes in treatment and control groups. We used the fixed-effect model for studies with low heterogeneity and the random-effects model for studies with moderate to high heterogeneity. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the control rate average to provide illustrative cure rates in the comparison groups.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 30 parallel-group RCTs, which enrolled 6442 participants from 17 countries across Africa, Asia, Central America and the Caribbean, and South America. Participants were from 28 days to 82 years of age, recruited from school, communities, and health facilities. Twenty studies were funded or co-funded by manufacturers, while 10 studies were independent of manufacturer funding. Twenty-two trials had a high risk of bias for one or two domains (blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting). Single dose of albendazole (four trials), mebendazole (three trials) or ivermectin (one trial) was compared to placebo. Parasitological cure at 14 to 60 days was high in all the studies (illustrative cure of 93.0% in the anthelmintic group and 16.1% in the placebo group; RR 6.29, 95% CI 3.91 to 10.12; 8 trials, 1578 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Single dose of albendazole is as effective as multiple doses of albendazole (illustrative cure of 93.2% with single dose, 94.3% with multiple doses; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.05; 3 trials, 307 participants; high-certainty evidence); or as single dose of mebendazole (illustrative cure of 98.0% with albendazole, 96.9% with mebendazole; RR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02; 6 trials, 2131 participants; high-certainty evidence). Studies did not detect a difference between a single dose of albendazole and a single dose of ivermectin (cure rates of 87.8% with albendazole, 90.2% with ivermectin; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.08; 3 trials, 519 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Across all the studies, failure after single dose of albendazole ranged from 0.0% to 30.3%, mebendazole from 0.0% to 22.2%, and ivermectin from 0.0% to 21.6%. The egg reduction rate (ERR) measured up to 60 days after the treatment was high in all treated groups, regardless of the anthelmintic used (range 96% to 100%). It was not possible to evaluate parasitological cure by classes of infection intensity. No included trials reported complication or serious adverse events. Other adverse events were apparently similar among the compared anthelmintic groups (moderate- to low-certainty evidence). The most commonly reported other adverse events were nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, headache, and fever.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose of albendazole, mebendazole, and ivermectin all appeared effective against Ascaris lumbricoides infection, yielding high parasitological cure and large reductions in eggs excreted, with no differences detected between them. The drugs appear to be safe to treat children and adults with confirmed Ascaris infection. There is little to choose between drugs and regimens in terms of cure or adverse events.

摘要

背景

蛔虫感染十分常见,主要影响生活在低收入地区的儿童。改善水和卫生条件、开展健康教育以及进行药物治疗可能有助于打破传播循环,而有效的药物将降低发病率。

目的

比较驱虫药物(阿苯达唑、甲苯达唑、伊维菌素)治疗蛔虫感染患者的疗效和安全性。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane传染病组专业注册库、Cochrane系统评价数据库、医学期刊数据库、荷兰医学文摘数据库、拉丁美洲和加勒比卫生科学数据库以及其他三个数据库,并检索了纳入研究的参考文献列表,检索截至2019年7月4日,无语言限制。

入选标准

比较阿苯达唑、甲苯达唑和伊维菌素治疗确诊蛔虫感染的儿童和成人的随机对照试验(RCT)。

数据收集与分析

两名综述作者独立评估纳入研究,评估偏倚风险,并从纳入试验中提取数据。第三名综述作者检查数据提取质量。我们使用Cochrane“偏倚风险”评估工具来确定纳入试验中的偏倚风险。我们使用风险比(RRs)及95%置信区间(CIs)来比较治疗组和对照组的二分结局。对于异质性低的研究,我们使用固定效应模型;对于异质性中等至高的研究,我们使用随机效应模型。我们使用GRADE方法评估证据的确定性。我们使用对照组平均治愈率来提供比较组中的说明性治愈率。

主要结果

我们纳入了30项平行组RCT,共纳入来自非洲、亚洲、中美洲和加勒比地区以及南美洲17个国家的6442名参与者。参与者年龄从28天至82岁,从学校、社区和卫生机构招募。20项研究由制造商资助或共同资助,而10项研究独立于制造商资助。22项试验在一个或两个领域(盲法、结局数据不完整、选择性报告)存在高偏倚风险。将单剂量阿苯达唑(四项试验)、甲苯达唑(三项试验)或伊维菌素(一项试验)与安慰剂进行比较。在所有研究中,14至60天时的寄生虫学治愈率都很高(驱虫组的说明性治愈率为93.0%,安慰剂组为16.1%;RR 6.29,95%CI 3.91至10.12;8项试验,1578名参与者;中等确定性证据)。单剂量阿苯达唑与多剂量阿苯达唑效果相同(单剂量的说明性治愈率为93.2%,多剂量为94.3%;RR 0.98,95%CI 0.92至1.05;3项试验,307名参与者;高确定性证据);或与单剂量甲苯达唑效果相同(阿苯达唑的说明性治愈率为98.0%,甲苯达唑为96.9%;RR 1.01,95%CI 1.00至1.02;6项试验,2131名参与者;高确定性证据)。研究未发现单剂量阿苯达唑与单剂量伊维菌素之间存在差异(阿苯达唑治愈率为87.8%,伊维菌素为90.2%;RR 0.99,95%CI 0.91至1.08;3项试验,519名参与者;中等确定性证据)。在所有研究中,单剂量阿苯达唑后的失败率为0.0%至30.3%,甲苯达唑为0.0%至22.2%,伊维菌素为0.0%至21.6%。治疗后60天内测量的虫卵减少率(ERR)在所有治疗组中都很高,无论使用何种驱虫药(范围为96%至100%)。无法按感染强度类别评估寄生虫学治愈率。纳入试验均未报告并发症或严重不良事件。在比较的驱虫药组中,其他不良事件明显相似(中等至低确定性证据)。最常报告的其他不良事件是恶心、呕吐、腹痛、腹泻、头痛和发热。

作者结论

单剂量阿苯达唑、甲苯达唑和伊维菌素对蛔虫感染似乎均有效,寄生虫学治愈率高,虫卵排泄大幅减少,且三者之间未发现差异。这些药物治疗确诊蛔虫感染的儿童和成人似乎是安全的。在治愈率或不良事件方面,药物和治疗方案之间几乎没有差别。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5785/7156140/2fc8988ba8ec/nCD010599-AFig-FIG01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验