Suppr超能文献

β受体阻滞剂与安慰剂或不干预用于预防慢性肝病或门静脉血栓形成儿童的食管静脉曲张出血的一级预防。

Beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

机构信息

Division of Paediatrics, Evidence-based Health Care Programme, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department, Division of Paediatrics, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jan 26;1(1):CD011973. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011973.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Therefore, prevention is important. Band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. However, primary prophylaxis is not the current standard of care in paediatric patients because it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of beta-blockers compared with placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded (April 2020). We screened the reference lists of the retrieved publications and manually searched the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conference (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2008 to December 2019. We searched clinicaltrials.gov, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for ongoing clinical trials. We imposed no language or document type restrictions on our search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomised clinical trials, irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status to assess benefits and harms. We included observational studies, retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials, for a narrative report of harm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials by standard Cochrane methodologies. We planned to asses risk of bias and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We planned to use intention-to-treat principle. We planned to analyse data with RevMan Analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no randomised clinical trials that assessed beta-blockers compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. We found four observational studies that reported on harms. As a systematic search for observational studies was not planned, we only listed the reported harms in a table.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of beta-blockers versus placebo on patient-relevant clinical outcomes, such as mortality, quality of life, failure to control variceal bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of the two interventions.

摘要

背景

门静脉高压症常伴有晚期肝病,常导致危及生命的并发症,包括食管和胃肠道静脉曲张出血。静脉曲张出血常见于慢性肝病或门静脉血栓形成的儿童。因此,预防很重要。套扎、β受体阻滞剂和硬化疗法已被提议作为儿童食管静脉曲张出血一级预防的替代方法。然而,一级预防并不是儿科患者的现行标准护理,因为尚不清楚这些治疗方法在儿童和青少年中用于一级预防时是否有益或有害。

目的

确定β受体阻滞剂与安慰剂或不干预相比,在预防慢性肝病或门静脉血栓形成儿童的食管静脉曲张出血方面的益处和危害。

检索方法

我们检索了 Cochrane 肝胆病组对照试验注册库、CENTRAL、PubMed、Embase、LILACS 和科学引文索引扩展版(2020 年 4 月)。我们筛选了检索文献的参考文献列表,并手动检索了 2008 年至 2019 年 12 月的主要儿科胃肠病学和肝病学会议(NASPGHAN 和 ESPGHAN)摘要集。我们在 clinicaltrials.gov、美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)、欧洲药品管理局(EMA)和世界卫生组织(WHO)中搜索了正在进行的临床试验。我们对搜索没有语言或文件类型限制。

选择标准

我们计划纳入随机临床试验,无论是否存在盲法、语言或发表状态,以评估益处和危害。我们纳入了观察性研究,这些研究是通过对随机临床试验的检索获得的,用于报告危害。

数据收集和分析

我们计划通过标准的 Cochrane 方法总结随机临床试验的数据。我们计划评估偏倚风险,并使用 GRADE 评估证据的确定性。我们的主要结局是全因死亡率、严重不良事件和肝脏相关发病率以及健康相关生活质量。我们的次要结局是食管静脉曲张出血和不被认为是严重的不良事件。我们计划使用意向治疗原则。我们计划使用 RevMan 分析进行数据分析。

主要结果

我们没有发现评估β受体阻滞剂与安慰剂或不干预相比,在预防慢性肝病或门静脉血栓形成儿童的食管静脉曲张出血方面的益处的随机临床试验。我们发现了四项观察性研究报告了危害。由于没有计划对观察性研究进行系统搜索,因此我们仅在表格中列出了报告的危害。

作者结论

缺乏评估β受体阻滞剂与安慰剂或不干预相比,在预防慢性肝病或门静脉血栓形成儿童的食管静脉曲张出血方面的益处或危害的随机临床试验。因此,需要进行具有足够效力和适当设计的试验,评估β受体阻滞剂与安慰剂对患者相关临床结局(如死亡率、生活质量、静脉曲张出血控制失败和不良事件)的益处和危害。除非进行这些试验并公布结果,否则我们无法就这两种干预措施的益处或危害得出任何结论。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

10
Cirrhosis and Portal Hypertension in the Pediatric Population.小儿肝硬化和门静脉高压症。
Clin Liver Dis. 2018 Nov;22(4):735-752. doi: 10.1016/j.cld.2018.06.007. Epub 2018 Aug 22.

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