首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Frontiers in Neurology >Comparison Between Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel Infusion and Subthalamic Nucleus Deep-Brain Stimulation for Advanced Parkinsons Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
【2h】

Comparison Between Levodopa-Carbidopa Intestinal Gel Infusion and Subthalamic Nucleus Deep-Brain Stimulation for Advanced Parkinsons Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

机译:左旋多巴-卡比多巴肠道凝胶输注和丘脑下核深部脑刺激治疗晚期帕金森氏病的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

>Background: Currently, some advanced treatments such as Levodopa-Carbidopa intestinal gel infusion (LCIG), deep-brain stimulation (DBS), and subcutaneous apomorphine infusion have become alternative strategies for advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). However, which treatment is better for individual patients remains unclear. This review aims to compare therapeutic effects of motor and/or non-motor symptoms of advanced PD patients between LCIG and DBS.>Methods: We manually searched electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) and reference lists of included articles published until April 04, 2019 using related terms, without language restriction. We included case-controlled cohort studies and randomized-controlled trials, which directly compared differences between LCIG and DBS. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS), proposed by the Cochrane Collaboration, was utilized to assess the quality of the included studies. Two investigators independently extracted data from each trial. Pooled standard-mean differences (SMDs) and relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by meta-analysis. Outcomes were grouped according to the part III and part IV of the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) and adverse events. We also descriptively reviewed some data, which were unavailable for statistical analysis.>Results: This review included five cohort trials of 257 patients for meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between LCIG and subthalamic nucleus deep-brain stimulation (STN-DBS) on UPDRS-III and adverse events comparisons: UPDRS-III (pooled SMDs = 0.200, 95% CI: −0.126–0.527, P = 0.230), total adverse events (pooled RRs = 1.279, 95% CI: 0.983–1.664, P = 0.067), serious adverse events (pooled RRs = 1.539, 95% CI: 0.664–3.566, P = 0.315). Notably, the improvement of UPDRS-IV was more significant in STN-DBS groups: pooled SMDs = 0.857, 95% CI: 0.130–1.584, P = 0.021. However, the heterogeneity was moderate for UPDRS-IV (I2 = 73.8%).>Conclusion: LCIG has comparable effects to STN-DBS on motor function for advanced PD, with acceptable tolerability. More large, well-designed trials are needed to assess the comparability of LCIG and STN-DBS in the future.
机译:>背景:目前,一些先进的治疗方法,如左旋多巴-卡比多巴肠凝胶输注(LCIG),深脑刺激(DBS)和皮下阿扑吗啡输注已成为晚期帕金森病(PD)的替代策略。但是,哪种治疗对个别患者更好仍不清楚。本文旨在比较LCIG和DBS对晚期PD患者的运动和/或非运动症状的治疗效果。>方法:我们手动搜索了电子数据库(PubMed,Embase,Cochrane库)和参考文献列表截止到2019年4月04日使用相关术语发表的包括文章,没有语言限制。我们纳入了病例对照队列研究和随机对照试验,它们直接比较了LCIG和DBS之间的差异。 Cochrane协作组织提出的纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)用于评估纳入研究的质量。两名研究者从每个试验中独立提取数据。通过荟萃分析计算合并标准均值差异(SMD)和相对风险(RRs)和95%置信区间(CIs)。结果根据帕金森病统一评分表(UPDRS)的第三部分和第四部分以及不良事件进行分组。我们还描述性地回顾了一些数据,这些数据无法进行统计分析。>结果:该评价包括对257例患者进行的5项队列研究的荟萃分析。在UPDRS-III和不良事件比较中,LCIG和丘脑底核深脑刺激(STN-DBS)之间无显着差异:UPDRS-III(合并SMD = 0.200,95%CI:-0.126-0.527,P = 0.230) ,总不良事件(合并的RR = 1.279,95%CI:0.983-1.664,P = 0.067),严重的不良事件(合并的RR = 1.539,95%CI:0.664-3.566,P = 0.315)。值得注意的是,在STN-DBS组中,UPDRS-IV的改善更为显着:合并SMD = 0.857,95%CI:0.130-1.584,P = 0.021。但是,UPDRS-IV的异质性中等(I 2 = 73.8%)。>结论: LCIG在晚期PD的运动功能方面与STN-DBS相当,可接受的公差。需要进行更大型,设计良好的试验,以评估未来LCIG和STN-DBS的可比性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号