Glutamine for induction of remission in Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: Crohn's disease is a chronic relapsing condition of the alimentary tract with a high morbidity secondary to bowel inflammation. Glutamine plays a key role in maintaining the integrity of the intestinal mucosa and has been shown to reduce inflammation and disease activity in experimental models of Crohn's disease. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of glutamine supplementation for induction of remission in Crohn's disease. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases from inception to November 15, 2015: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialised Register. Study references were also searched for additional trials. There were no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared glutamine supplementation administered by any route to a placebo, active comparator or no intervention in people with active Crohn's disease were considered for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess methodological quality. The primary outcome measure was clinical or endoscopic remission. Secondary outcomes included intestinal permeability, clinical response, quality of life, growth in children and adverse events. Risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome was evaluated using the GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: Two small RCTs (total 42 patients) met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. One study (18 patients) compared four weeks of treatment with a glutamine-enriched polymeric diet (42% amino acid composition) to a standard polymeric diet (4% amino acid composition) with low glutamine content in paediatric patients ( 18 years of age) with acute exacerbation of inflammatory bowel disease. The paediatric study was rated as low risk of bias. The study in adult patients was rated as unclear risk of bias for blinding and low risk of bias for all other items. It was not possible to pool data for meta-analysis because of significant differences in study populations, nature of interventions, and the way outcomes were assessed. Data from one study showed no statistically significant difference in clinical remission rates at four weeks. Forty-four per cent (4/9) of patients who received a glutamine-enriched polymeric diet achieved remission compared to 56% (5/9) of patients who received a standard low-glutamine polymeric diet (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.04). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of evidence for this outcome was low due to serious imprecision (9 events). In both included studies, no statistically significant changes in intestinal permeability were found between patients who received glutamine supplementation and those who did not. Neither study reported on clinical response, quality of life or growth in children. Adverse event data were not well documented. There were no serious adverse events in the paediatric study. The study in adult patients reported three central catheter infections with positive blood cultures in the glutamine group compared to none in the control group (RR 7.00, 95% CI 0.40 to 122.44). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently there is insufficient evidence to allow firm conclusions regarding the efficacy and safety of glutamine for induction of remission in Crohn's disease. Data from two small studies suggest that glutamine supplementation may not be beneficial in active Crohn's disease but these results need to be interpreted with caution as they are based on small numbers of patients. This review highlights the need for adequately powered randomised controlled trials to investigate the efficacy and safety of glutamine for induction of remission in Crohn's diseas

Melatonin for the management of sleep problems in children with neurodevelopmental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Children with neurodevelopmental disorders have a higher prevalence of sleep disturbances. Currently there is variation in the use of melatonin; hence, an up-to-date systematic review is indicated to summarise the current available evidence. To determine the efficacy and safety of melatonin as therapy for sleep problems in children with neurodevelopmental disorders. PubMed, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception up to January 2018. Two reviewers performed data assessment and extraction. We assessed randomised controlled trials that compared melatonin with placebo or other intervention for the management of sleep disorders in children (<18 years) with neurodevelopmental disorders. We identified 3262 citations and included 13 studies in this meta-analysis. Main outcomes included total sleep time, sleep onset latency, frequency of nocturnal awakenings and adverse events. Thirteen randomised controlled trials (n=682) met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of nine studies (n=541) showed that melatonin significantly improved total sleep time compared with placebo (mean difference (MD)=48.26 min, 95% CI 36.78 to 59.73, I =31%). In 11 studies (n=581), sleep onset latency improved significantly with melatonin use (MD=-28.97, 95% CI -39.78 to -18.17). No difference was noted in the frequency of nocturnal awakenings (MD=-0.49, 95% CI -1.71 to 0.73). No medication-related serious adverse event was reported. Melatonin appeared safe and effective in improving sleep in the studied children. The overall quality of the evidence is limited due to heterogeneity and inconsistency. Further research is needed. [Abstract copyright: © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Oral 5-aminosalicylic acid for maintenance of medically-induced remission in Crohn's disease

Background The prevention of relapse is a major issue in the management of Crohn's disease. Corticosteroids, the mainstay of treatment of acute exacerbations, are not effective for maintenance of remission and its chronic use is limited by numerous adverse events. Randomised controlled trials assessing the efficacy of oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) agents for maintenance of medically-induced remission in Crohn's disease have produced conflicting results. Objectives To conduct a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral 5-ASA agents for the maintenance of medically-induced remission in Crohn's disease. Search methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the IBD Group Specialized Register from inception to 8 June 2016. We also searched reference lists and conference proceedings. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials that compared oral 5-ASA agents to either placebo or sulphasalazine in patients with quiescent Crohn's disease. The trials had to have a treatment duration of at least six months. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently extracted data and performed the risk of bias assessment. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion and consensus. The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of relapse as defined by the primary studies. Secondary outcomes included time to relapse, adverse events, withdrawal due to adverse events and serious adverse events. We calculated the pooled risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) using a fixed-effect model. All data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis and drop-outs were considered to be relapses. Sensitivity analyses included an available case analysis where drop-outs were ignored and using a random-effects model. We evaluated the overall quality of the evidence supporting the outcomes using the GRADE criteria. Main results Twelve studies (2146 participants) that compared 5-ASA to placebo were included. We did not identify any studies that compared sulphasalazine to placebo. Seven studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. The other studies were judged to have an unclear risk of bias for various items due to insufficient details to allow for a judgement. There was no statistically significant difference in relapse rates at 12 months. Fifty-three per cent (526/998) of 5-ASA patients (dose 1.6 g to 4 g/day) relapsed at 12 months compared to 54% (544/1016) of placebo patients (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.07; 11 studies; 2014 patients; moderate-quality evidence). Sensitivity analyses based on an available case analysis and a random-effects model had no impact on the results. One study found no difference in relapse rates at 24 months. Fifty-four per cent (31/57) of 5-ASA patients (dose 2 g/day) relapsed at 24 months compared to 58% (36/62) of placebo patients (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.29, 119 patients; low-quality evidence). One paediatric study found no statistically significant difference in relapse rates at 12 months. Sixty-two per cent (29/47) of paediatric 5-ASA patients (dose 50 mg/kg/day) relapsed at 12 months compared to 64% (35/55) of paediatric placebo patients (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.31; 102 patients; moderate-quality evidence). There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients who experienced an adverse event, withdrawal due to adverse events or serious adverse events. Thirty-four per cent (307/900) of 5-ASA patients had at least one adverse event compared to 33% (301/914) of placebo patients (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.17; 10 studies; 1814 patients). Fourteen per cent (127/917) of 5-ASA patients withdrew due to adverse events compared to 13% (119/916) of placebo patients (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.38; 9 studies; 1833 patients). One per cent (3/293) of 5-ASA patients had a serious adverse event compared to 0.7% (2/283) of placebo patients (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.83; 3 studies; 576 patients). Common adverse events reported in the studies included diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting, abdominal pain, headache and skin rash. Authors' conclusions We found no evidence in this review to suggest that oral 5-ASA preparations are superior to placebo for the maintenance of medically-induced remission in patients with Crohn's disease. Additional randomised trials may not be justified

The Quality of reporting Inflammatory Bowel Disease Randomized Control Trials: A systematic review

We set out to examine how reporting of these key elements of risk of bias within IBD RCT and factors associated with higher risk of bias through a systematic review of all IBD RCTs published since the Consort statement (1995)

Osmotic and stimulant laxatives for the management of childhood constipation

Background Constipation within childhood is an extremely common problem. Despite the widespread use of osmotic and stimulant laxatives by health professionals to manage constipation in children, there has been a long standing paucity of high quality evidence to support this practice. Objectives We set out to evaluate the efficacy and safety of osmotic and stimulant laxatives used to treat functional childhood constipation. Search methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Trials Register from inception to 10 March 2016. There were no language restrictions. We also searched the references of all included studies, personal contacts and drug companies to identify studies. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared osmotic or stimulant laxatives to placebo or another intervention, with participants aged 0 to 18 years old were considered for inclusion. The primary outcome was frequency of defecation. Secondary endpoints included faecal incontinence, disimpaction, need for additional therapies and adverse events. Data collection and analysis Relevant papers were identified and two authors independently assessed the eligibility of trials, extracted data and assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was frequency of defecation. Secondary endpoints included faecal incontinence, disimpaction, need for additional therapies and adverse events. For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) using a fixed-effect model. For dichotomous outcomes we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI using a fixed-effect model. The Chi2 and I2 statistics were used to assess statistical heterogeneity. A random-effects model was used in situations of unexplained heterogeneity. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary and secondary outcomes using the GRADE criteria. Main results Twenty-five RCTs (2310 participants) were included in the review. Fourteen studies were judged to be at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding, incomplete outcome data and selective reporting. Meta-analysis of two studies (101 patients) comparing polyethylene glycol (PEG) with placebo showed a significantly increased number of stools per week with PEG (MD 2.61 stools per week, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.08). Common adverse events in the placebo-controlled studies included flatulence, abdominal pain, nausea, diarrhoea and headache. Participants receiving high dose PEG (0.7 g/kg) had significantly more stools per week than low dose PEG (0.3 g/kg) participants (1 study, 90 participants, MD 1.30, 95% 0.76 to 1.84). Meta-analysis of 6 studies with 465 participants comparing PEG with lactulose showed a significantly greater number of stools per week with PEG (MD 0.70 , 95% CI 0.10 to 1.31), although follow-up was short. Patients who received PEG were significantly less likely to require additional laxative therapies. Eighteen per cent (27/154) of PEG patients required additional therapies compared to 31% (47/150) of lactulose patients (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.83). No serious adverse events were reported with either agent. Common adverse events in these studies included diarrhoea, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting and pruritis ani. Meta-analysis of 3 studies with 211 participants comparing PEG with milk of magnesia showed that the stools per week were significantly greater with PEG (MD 0.69, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.89). However, the magnitude of this difference was quite small and may not be clinically significant. One child was noted to be allergic to PEG, but there were no other serious adverse events reported. One study found a significant difference in stools per week favouring milk of magnesia over lactulose (MD -1.51, 95% CI -2.63 to -0.39, 50 patients), Meta-analysis of 2 studies with 287 patients comparing liquid paraffin (mineral oil) with lactulose revealed a relatively large statistically significant difference in the number of stools per week favouring liquid paraffin (MD 4.94 , 95% CI 4.28 to 5.61). No serious adverse events were reported. Adverse events included abdominal pain, distention and watery stools. No statistically significant differences in the number of stools per week were found between PEG and enemas (1 study, 90 patients, MD 1.00, 95% CI -1.58 to 3.58), dietary fibre mix and lactulose (1 study, 125 patients, P = 0.481), senna and lactulose (1 study, 21 patients, P > 0.05), lactitol and lactulose (1 study, 51 patients, MD -0.80, 95% CI -2.63 to 1.03), hydrolyzed guar gum and lactulose (1 study, 61 patients, MD 1.00, 95% CI -1.80 to 3.80), PEG and flixweed (1 study, 109 patients, MD 0.00, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.33), PEG and dietary fibre (1 study, 83 patients, MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.64 to 1.04), and PEG and liquid paraffin (2 studies, 261 patients, MD 0.35, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.95). Authors' conclusions The pooled analyses suggest that PEG preparations may be superior to placebo, lactulose and milk of magnesia for childhood constipation. GRADE analyses indicated that the overall quality of the evidence for the primary outcome (number of stools per week) was low or very low due to sparse data, inconsistency (heterogeneity), and high risk of bias in the studies in the pooled analyses. Thus, the results of the pooled analyses should be interpreted with caution because of quality and methodological concerns, as well as clinical heterogeneity, and short follow-up. There is also evidence suggesting the efficacy of liquid paraffin (mineral oil). There is no evidence to demonstrate the superiority of lactulose when compared to the other agents studied, although there is a lack of placebo controlled studies. Further research is needed to investigate the long term use of PEG for childhood constipation, as well as the role of liquid paraffin. The optimal dose of PEG also warrants further investigation

Sample-size estimation is not reported in 24% of randomised controlled trials of inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review

Background Sample-size estimation is an important factor in designing a clinical trial. A recent study found that 65% of Cochrane systematic reviews had imprecise results. Objective This study set out to review the whole body of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) randomised controlled trials systematically in order to identify the reporting of sample-size estimation. Methods We conducted a comprehensive hand search of the Cochrane Library and Cochrane IBD Specialized Trials Register. We extracted information on relevant features and the results of the included studies. We produced descriptive statistics for our results. Results A total of 242 randomised controlled trials were included from 44 Cochrane systematic reviews. About 25% of the studies failed to report on sample-size estimation. Of those that did report on sample-size estimation, 33% failed to recruit their target sample size. Conclusions Around half of the randomised controlled trials in IBD either do not report sample-size estimation or reach their recruitment target with the level of detail in reporting being limited

Probiotics to prevent infantile colic

Background Infantile colic is typically defined as full‐force crying for at least three hours per day, on at least three days per week, for at least three weeks. Infantile colic affects a large number of infants and their families worldwide. Its symptoms are broad and general, and while not indicative of disease, may represent a serious underlying condition in a small percentage of infants who may need a medical assessment. Probiotics are live microorganisms that alter the microflora of the host and provide beneficial health effects. The most common probiotics used are of Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium and Streptococcus. There is growing evidence to suggest that intestinal flora in colicky infants differ from those in healthy infants, and it is suggested that probiotics can redress this balance and provide a healthier intestinal microbiota landscape. The low cost and easy availability of probiotics makes them a potential prophylactic solution to reduce the incidence and prevalence of infantile colic. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy and safety of prophylactic probiotics in preventing or reducing severity of infantile colic. Search methods In January 2018 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, 10 other databases and two trials registers. In addition, we handsearched the abstracts of relevant meetings, searched reference lists, ran citation searches of included studies, and contacted authors and experts in the field, including the manufacturers of probiotics, to identify unpublished trials. Selection criteria Randomised control trials (RCTs) of newborn infants less than one month of age without the diagnosis of infantile colic at recruitment. We included any probiotic, alone or in combination with a prebiotic (also known as synbiotics), versus no intervention, another intervention(s) or placebo, where the focus of the study was the effect of the intervention on infantile colic. Data collection and analysis We used standard methodological procedures of Cochrane. Main results Our search yielded 3284 records, and of these, we selected 21 reports for full‐text review. Six studies with 1886 participants met our inclusion criteria, comparing probiotics with placebo. Two studies examined Lactobacillus reuteri DSM, two examined multi‐strain probiotics, one examined Lactobacillus rhamnosus, and one examined Lactobacillus paracasei and Bifidobacterium animalis. Two studies began probiotics during pregnancy and continued administering them to the baby after birth. We considered the risk of bias for randomisation as low for all six trials; for allocation concealment as low in two studies and unclear in four others. All studies were blinded, and at low risk of attrition and reporting bias. A random‐effects meta‐analysis of three studies (1148 participants) found no difference between the groups in relation to occurrence of new cases of colic: risk ratio (RR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 1.19; low‐certainty evidence; I2 = 72%. A random‐effects meta‐analysis of all six studies (1851 participants) found no difference between the groups in relation to serious adverse effects (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.21; low‐certainty evidence; I2 not calculable (only four serious events for one comparison, two in each group: meconium plug obstruction, patent ductus arteriosus and neonatal hepatitis). A random‐effects meta‐analysis of three studies (707 participants) found a mean difference (MD) of –32.57 minutes per day (95% CI –55.60 to –9.54; low‐certainty evidence; I2 = 93%) in crying time at study end in favour of probiotics. A subgroup analysis of the most studied agent, Lactobacillus reuteri, showed a reduction of 44.26 minutes in daily crying with a random‐effects model (95% CI –66.6 to –21.9; I2 = 92%), in favour of probiotics. Authors' conclusions There is no clear evidence that probiotics are more effective than placebo at preventing infantile colic; however, daily crying time appeared to reduce with probiotic use compared to placebo. There were no clear differences in adverse effects. We are limited in our ability to draw conclusions by the certainty of the evidence, which we assessed as being low across all three outcomes, meaning that we are not confident that these results would not change with the addition of further researc

Inverted appendix mistaken for a polyp during colonoscopy and leading to intussusception

AbstractA spectrum of appendiceal diseases, ranging from simple mucous distension to acute perforated appendicitis, are seen in patients with CF. We report a 6 year old boy with CF and recurrent periumbilical pain. During colonoscopy, a fleshy pedunculated mass at the junction of the ascending colon and caecum was mistaken for a polyp and excised. However, histopathological examination suggested it was a segment of inverted appendix. The remnant of the inverted appendix was subsequently found to be associated with an intussusception

Racecadotril for acute diarrhoea in children: systematic review and meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE Racecadotril is an antisecretory agent that can prevent fluid/electrolyte depletion from the bowel as a result of acute diarrhoea, without affecting intestinal motility. An up-to-date systematic review is indicated to summarise the evidence on Racecadotril for the treatment of acute diarrhoea in children. DESIGN A Cochrane format systematic review of Randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Data extraction and assessment of methodological quality were performed independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. PATIENTS Children with acute diarrhoea, as defined by the primary studies. INTERVENTIONS RCTs comparing racecadotril to placebo or other interventions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURS Duration of illness, stool output/volume and adverse events. RESULTS Seven RCTs were included. Five comparing racecadotril with placebo or no intervention, one with pectin / caolin and one with loperamide. Moderate to high risk of bias was present in all studies. There was no significant difference in efficacy or adverse events between racecadotril to loperamide. Meta-analysis of 3 studies with 642 participants showed significantly shorter duration of symptoms with racecadotril compared to placebo (Mean Difference (MD) -53.48 hours, 95% CI -65.64 to -41.33,). Meta-analysis of 5 studies with 949 participants showed no significant difference in adverse events between racecadotril and placebo (Risk Ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.34). CONCLUSIONS There is some evidence that racecadotril is more effective than placebo or no intervention in reducing the duration of illness and stool output in children with acute diarrhoea. However, the overall quality of the evidence is limited due to sparse data, heterogeneity and risk of bias. Racecadotril appears safe and well tolerate