Corticosteroid Group Research Articles

Comparison of autologous platelet concentrates and topical steroids on oral lichen planus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundOral lichen planus is a chronic and potentially malignant disorder of oral mucosa. Corticosteroids are used as first-line therapy for oral lichen planus patients; however, they have many side effects. Platelet concentrates (platelet-rich plasma and platelet-rich fibrin) are autologous bioactive materials. This systematic review investigated the effects of autologous platelet concentrates compared to topical steroids in treating symptomatic oral lichen planus patients.Materials and methodsA systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane for randomized controlled trials. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and meta-analysis guidelines were observed for article selection. For the pooling of studies, meta-analysis using Standardized Mean Differences by random effects model was carried out to estimate summary effect sizes for the treatment of oral lichen planus.ResultsA total of six studies, incorporating 109 oral lichen planus patients, were involved. Both treatment modalities showed a statistically significant improvement in the outcome parameters (lesion size, pain score, Thongprasom score) from the baseline to the end of treatment and further to the follow-up visits. There was no significant difference in the pooled estimate SMD of pain decline in patients of the two groups (SMD = 0.17 (95% CI: -0.47 to 0.81); I2 = 63.6%). The SMD of Thongprasom score in patients receiving autologous platelet concentrates was lower than the corticosteroid groups, with no significant effect size (SMD= -2.88 (95% CI: -5.51 to -0.25); I2 = 91.7%). Therefore, there was no statistically significant difference between the autologous platelet concentrates and topical steroids regarding pain and clinical score.ConclusionAutologous platelet concentrates, and topical steroids decreased the size of lesions, Thongprasom scale, and pain in oral lichen planus patients, but the difference between the two treatments was not statistically significant. Thus, autologous platelet concentrates could be considered as an alternative treatment to topical steroids.

The efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib as an add-on therapy to corticosteroids for patients with severe checkpoint inhibitor pneumonitis.

e24121 Background: Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved survival of patients with malignancies, they also bring forth the immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Checkpoint inhibitor pneumonitis (CIP) stands out as a prominent complication following ICI therapy, while a substantial proportion of CIP cases present with severe manifestations, often leading to life-threatening outcomes. The management of severe and refractory CIP is challenging. This study was aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib as an add-on therapy to corticosteroids for patients with severe CIP. Methods: In this investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 2 trial, cancer patients with CTCAE grade (G) 3 or G4 CIP after ICIs therapy were enrolled. CIP patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio (randomized block method) to corticosteroids administration (the initial dosage was more than prednisone 1mg/kg/d or equivalent) or corticosteroids with add-on ruxolitinib administration (5mg twice a day for 2 weeks, followed by 5mg once a day for 2 weeks). The primary end point was the proportion of patients with a prednisone daily dosage of no more than 10mg and improvement to G1 CIP at week 8. Results: From April 2023 to Jan 2024, 19 patients were enrolled. There were 17 cases of G3 CIP and two cases of G4 CIP. Eleven cases were assigned to corticosteroids group (C group), and 8 cases were assigned to corticosteroids with add-on ruxolitinib administration group (R group). Fourteen patients completed 8 weeks of follow-up. Five cases (5/6, 83.3%) in the R group and three cases (3/8, 37.5%) in the C group improved to G1 CIP and received ≤prednisone 10mg daily at week 8. One patient in the R group and three cases in the C group failed to taper to 10mg/d prednisone or had G2-3 CIP. Two patients in the C group died from CIP. Two cases in R group and three cases in C group were still under follow-up. The G3 or higher treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in three patients, including one case of aspiration pneumonia in C group and two cases of COVID-19 (one in each group). Conclusions: Corticosteroids with add-on ruxolitinib administration could improve clinical responsiveness for severe CIP patients. The safety profile was controllable and favorable. Ruxolitinib could provide a valuable promising therapeutic option for cancer patients with severe CIP. Clinical trial information: NCT05899725 .

Effectiveness of 5% Dextrose Water (D/W) versus Corticosteroid Injection for Pain Management of Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction

Background: Corticosteroid injections have been a cornerstone in the management of sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD)-related pain. Recently, alternative approaches to pain management have garnered attention, particularly the use of 5% dextrose water (D/W) injections, which are believed to promote tissue healing and regeneration. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of 5% dextrose water (D/W) compared to corticosteroid injections for pain management in patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD). Methods: This experimental study was conducted at Chaudhary Muhammad Akram Teaching and Research Hospital, Lahore, from October 2023 to May 2024. A total of 120 participants aged 18-65 years with clinically diagnosed SIJD were randomly assigned to two groups. Group A (N=60) received three weekly injections of 5% D/W solution, while Group B (N=60) received corticosteroid injections administered weekly over six weeks. Participants were excluded if they were pregnant, breastfeeding, had a history of allergy to the treatment components, or had received SIJ injections within the last three months. Pain intensity, functional disability, and quality of life were assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and a standardized quality of life questionnaire, respectively. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 25, with within-group comparisons made using the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test and between-group comparisons using the Mann-Whitney U Test. Results: Significant improvements were observed in both groups. The VAS scores in the dextrose water group decreased from 5.28 ± 1.71 to 2.58 ± 0.94 (p < 0.001) and in the corticosteroid group from 5.57 ± 1.85 to 3.15 ± 1.33 (p < 0.001). ODI scores improved from 34.27 ± 1.26 to 17.02 ± 3.15 in the dextrose water group (p < 0.001) and from 34.17 ± 1.12 to 19.95 ± 6.11 in the corticosteroid group (p < 0.001). Quality of life scores also showed significant enhancement, improving from 14.43 ± 1.79 to 7.64 ± 0.99 in the dextrose water group (p < 0.001) and from 14.57 ± 1.85 to 8.49 ± 1.98 in the corticosteroid group (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Both 5% dextrose water and corticosteroid injections significantly reduced pain and improved function and quality of life in patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction. While corticosteroid injections demonstrated a slightly greater benefit, 5% dextrose water injections are a promising alternative with fewer potential side effects. Further research is recommended to explore long-term outcomes and compare these treatments with other emerging therapies.

In-hospital survival of critically ill COVID-19 patients treated with glucocorticoids: a multicenter real-world data study

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a major challenge to healthcare systems globally. Millions of people have been infected, and millions of deaths have been reported worldwide. Glucocorticoids have attracted worldwide attention for their potential efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19. Various glucocorticoids with different dosages and treatment durations have been studied in patients with different severities, with a suitable dosage and treatment duration not yet defined. This study aimed to investigate whether in-hospital survival differs between critically ill patients treated with low-dose glucocorticoids, high-dose glucocorticoids or no glucocorticoids. All critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit of the Charité Hospital—Universitätsmedizin Berlin between February 2020 and December 2021 with COVID-19 pneumonia receiving supplemental oxygen were eligible to participate in this multicenter real-world data study. Patients were retrospectively assigned to one of three groups: the high corticosteroid dose (HighC) group (receiving 6 mg parenteral dexamethasone or an equivalent corticosteroid dosage for ten days), the low corticosteroid dose (LowC) group (receiving less than 6 mg parenteral dexamethasone or an equivalent corticosteroid dosage for ten days), or the no corticosteroid (NoC) group. Overall survival and risk effects were compared among groups within the total observation period, as well as at 35 days after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. Adjusted multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to compare the risk of death between the treatment groups. Out of 1561 critically ill COVID-19 patients, 1014 were included in the baseline analysis. In the survival study, 1009 patients were assigned to the NoC (n = 346), HighC (n = 552), or LowC group (n = 111). The baseline characteristics were balanced between groups, except for age, BMI, APACHE II score, SOFA and SAPS II. While the 35-day survival did not show any differences, a landmark analysis of the patients surviving beyond 35 days revealed differences between groups. The restricted mean survival time was 112 days in the LowC group [95% CI: 97 – 128], 133 days in the HighC group [95% CI: 124 – 141] and 144 days in the NoC group [95% CI: 121 – 167]. The multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazard analysis indicated that, regardless of age, sex, health status or invasive oxygenation, a low-dose treatment increased the hazard of death of critically ill COVID-19 patients by a factor of 2.09 ([95% CI: 0.99, 4.4], p = 0.05) and a high-dose corticosteroid treatment increased the risk by a factor of 1.07 ([95% CI: 0.53, 2.15], p = 0.85) compared to no treatment with glucocorticoids. The analysis reveals that corticosteroid treatment does not influence the survival of critically ill COVID-19 patients in the intensive care unit within 35 days. Our evaluations further suggest that regardless of ventilation status, the decision-making process for administering corticosteroid therapy should account for the individual severity of the illness.

Local ozone injection compared to local glucocorticoid injection in carpal tunnel syndrome: A randomized controlled trial.

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of local ozone (O3) injection versus corticosteroid injection in the treatment of mild to moderate carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). This double-blind randomized controlled trial was performed on 42 patients (9 males, 33 females; mean age: 46.7±2.1 years; range, 18 to 70 years) with mild to moderate CTS between May 2021 and June 2021. The corticosteroid group (n=21) was injected with 40 mg triamcinolone, and in the O3 group B (n=21), 4 mL of a 10 mcg/mL oxygen (O2)-O3 mixture was injected. Symptom severity and functional impairments were assessed using a Visual Analog Scale and Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. Electrodiagnostic and ultrasonographic parameters were obtained at baseline and eight weeks after the procedure. The O2-O3 solution improved pain and Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire score after eight weeks (p<0.001); however, the change was nonsignificant compared to the corticosteroid group (p>0.05). Sensory nerve and compound muscle action potential latencies were not significantly changed eight weeks after O2-O3 injection (p>0.05), while both were significantly decreased in the steroid injection group (p<0.001). Volar bulging and median nerve cross-section surface area were not improved after O2-O3 injection, while the improvement was significant in the corticosteroid arm (p=0.02). Symptoms in patients with mild to moderate CTS may be alleviated by local O2-O3 injection; however, electrodiagnostic and ultrasonographic indices may be unchanged. Corticosteroid local injection may alleviate patient symptoms along with electrodiagnostic and ultrasonographic parameters.

Effect of prophylactic corticosteroids on postoperative neurocognitive dysfunction in the adult population: An updated systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Postoperative neurocognitive dysfunction (PNCD) commonly occurs after surgery and prolongs hospital stays. Both direct noxious stimuli to the central nervous system and systemic inflammation have been implicated. Due to their potent anti-inflammatory effects, corticosteroids have been utilised to attenuate the incidence and severity of PNCD. This systematic review and meta-analysis strived to evaluate the prophylactic role of perioperative corticosteroids for PNCD. A search was run in pre-defined databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the role of corticosteroids in preventing PNCD. The incidence of PNCD within 1 month was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the use of antipsychotic medications for the treatment, postoperative infection, and hospital length of stay. The results are exhibited as odds ratio (OR) and the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Fifteen RCTs comprising 15,398 patients were included. The incidence of PNCD was significantly lower in the corticosteroid group than in the control group, with a pooled OR of 0.75 (95% CI 0.58, 0.96; P = 0.02; I2 = 66%). Trial sequential analysis showed the clinical benefit of corticosteroids in preventing PNCD; however, the requisite information size is still inadequate. The sub-group analysis supported the prophylactic effect of corticosteroids on delirium prevention but not on delayed neurocognitive recovery. Our meta-analysis revealed statistically significant protective effects of corticosteroids on the incidence of PNCD. However, further studies are still needed to confirm the protective role of this commonly used and relatively safe strategy for preventing PNCD.

Comparison of Platelet-Rich Plasma and Corticosteroid Injections for Chronic Plantar Fasciitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Plantar fasciitis is a common and debilitating foot condition, with varying treatment options and inconsistent outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess and compare the effectiveness of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections and corticosteroid injections in treating persistent plantar fasciitis. In this study, a total of 70 patients suffering from chronic plantar fasciitis were randomly divided into two groups, i.e., one receiving PRP injections (n=35) and the other receiving corticosteroid injections (n=35). The visual analog scale (VAS) was used to assess pain outcomes, while the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score was used to assess functional status. Patients were assessed before the injection and then followed up at 15 days, one month, three months, and six months after the injection. The baseline VAS and AOFAS scores were similar between the two groups. However, the PRP group showed significantly greater improvements in VAS and AOFAS scores compared to the corticosteroid group at the one-month, three-month, and six-month follow-ups (p<0.05). The PRP group had a higher proportion of patients with mild or moderate pain and better functional outcomes at later time points. Autologous PRP injections are superior to corticosteroid injections in terms of long-term pain alleviation and functional improvement for patients suffering from chronic plantar fasciitis. Platelet-rich plasma should be regarded as a feasible therapeutic choice for this condition, especially in individuals who have not shown improvement with conservative treatment.

Abstract PO1-22-08: Ductal Lavage versus Oral Corticosteroids in Patients with Idiopathic Granulomatous Mastitis: A Multicenter, Open-label, Randomized, Controlled, Non-inferiority Study

Abstract Background: Idiopathic granulomatous mastitis (IGM) is an inflammatory breast disease characterized by the presence of mass, erythema and fistula. Various treatments have been proposed, including steroids, surgery, immunosuppressants, and observation alone. However, most of the reported studies are single-center, retrospective, single-arm with limited sample sizes, leaving the optimal treatment strategy unknown. In a previous single-arm study, we reported the efficacy and safety of ductal lavage as a novel treatment. This presentation presents the results of a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled, non-inferiority trial that compares the efficacy and safety of ductal lavage with oral corticosteroids as the first-line treatment for IGM patients. Methods: Eligible IGM patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either ductal lavage or oral corticosteroids, stratified by M-score status. The M-score quantitatively evaluates IGM symptom severity as reported in our previous studies. Ductal lavage involved the intraductal infusion of lidocaine, triamcinolone acetonide, and ceftriaxone with saline, a total 5 times within 2 weeks. Oral corticosteroids were administered using prednisone or methylprednisolone at an initial dose of 20-40mg per day, decreased by 5mg every 2 weeks, and then maintained at 20mg per day for at least 1 month. The primary outcome was the rate of complete Clinical Response (cCR), which was defined as achieving M-score≤1 during any follow-up visit. Secondary outcomes included median time to first cCR, treatment failure, relapse, adverse events, and protocol compliance rate. If the lower limit of 95%CI of the absolute difference between ductal lavage and oral corticosteroids was greater than -15%, the non-inferiority was met. This trial was approved by the ethical committee of Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03724903). Results: Recruitment for this trial began in March 2019 and follow-up ended in May 2023 at 3 hospitals in China. In the intention-to-treat set (N=140), 69 patients were randomly assigned to the ductal lavage group and 71 patients to the oral corticosteroids group. The cCR rates after treatment were 85.51% (95% CI 77.20 ~ 93.81%) and 87.32% (95% CI 79.59 ~ 95.06%) in the ductal lavage and oral corticosteroids groups, respectively. The rate difference was -1.82% (95% CI -13.17 ~ 9.54%), not exceeding the non-inferiority margin (Non-inferiority P=0.011). In the per-protocol set (N=111), the cCR rate difference was -5.32%(ductal lavage: 92.86% vs. oral corticosteroids: 98.18%),with a 95%CI of -12.94% to 2.29%,also not exceeding the non-inferiority margin(Non-inferiority P=0.006).No significant differences were observed between groups in median time to first cCR (34.0 vs. 32.5 days, P= 0.878), treatment failure rate (14.49% vs. 11.27%, P=0.569), or relapse rate (10.14% vs. 4.23%, P=0.302).In the safety analysis set (N=129), the most frequently reported adverse events ( &amp;gt;15%) in the ductal lavage group were irregular menstruation (46.27%), while in the oral corticosteroids group, they were Cushingoid (79.03%), epigastric pain (17.74%), and arthralgia (16.13%). Conclusions: Ductal lavage demonstrates non-inferiority to oral corticosteroids in terms of efficacy as a first-line treatment for IGM patients. Furthermore, ductal lavage exhibits a significantly favorable adverse events profile. Primary endpoint in ITT and PP set *P value for non-inferiority comparison. Secondary endpoint in PP set §P value calculated by chi-square test. Adverse event in safety set No adverse event exceeding Grade3 have been recorded. Citation Format: Kai Chen, Xiaolin Chen, Shunrong Li, Liling Zhu, Jian Zhang, Tingting Hu, Hui Huang, Heng Huang, Lili Chen, Qiaozhen Xiao, Linhong Su. Ductal Lavage versus Oral Corticosteroids in Patients with Idiopathic Granulomatous Mastitis: A Multicenter, Open-label, Randomized, Controlled, Non-inferiority Study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO1-22-08.

Platelet-rich Plasma versus Corticosteroid Injection for the Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis – A Prospective Randomised Controlled Study

Abstract Introduction: Lateral epicondylitis, commonly known as tennis elbow, is one of the most common chronic disabling painful conditions that affect the forearm’s common extensor tendons. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus corticosteroid injection in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. Aims: The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of PRP versus corticosteroid injection in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis, focusing on the early response. Settings and Design: This was a prospective randomised controlled study. Materials and Methods: This study was a prospective randomised control trial of 100 patients, clinically diagnosed with lateral epicondylitis in Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences Hospital, Hubli. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) using computer-generated random numbers to two groups. Group A received corticosteroid injection. Group B received PRP injection. Outcome assessment was done using the Oxford Elbow Score (OES), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Patient-rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) and Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (DASH). All patients were followed up at regular intervals of 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 3 months and 6 months post-injection. Statistical Analysis Used: Using SPSS Statistics version 25 software, statistical analysis was done. Results: Pre–injection, the mean OES, VAS, PRTEE and DASH scores were similar in both the groups with insignificant P value. The mean pre-injection OES, VAS, PRTEE and DASH scores in the corticosteroid group were 11.22, 7.88, 75.950 and 69.364, whereas in the PRP group, it was 10.66, 7.96, 76.170 and 69.466, with P = 0.165, 0.322, 0.834 and 0.869, respectively. At the end of 6 months in the corticosteroid group, the mean score of OES increased from 11.22 ± 1.71 to 38.94 ± 5.17, VAS decreased from 7.88 ± 0.385 to 1.74 ± 1.24, PRTEE decreased from 75.95 ± 4.86 to 24.3 ± 12 and DASH decreased from 69.36 ± 2.90 to 23.31 ± 11.5, with a significant P &lt; 0.005. At the end of 6 months in the PRP group, the mean scores of OES increased from 10.66 ± 2.07 to 45.38 ± 1.41, VAS decreased from 7.96 ± 0.45 to 0.06 ± 0.31, PRTEE decreased from 76.1 ± 5.04 to 7.47 ± 3.16 and DASH decreased from 69.47 ± 3.44 to 7.78 ± 2.65, with a significant P &lt; 0.005. Conclusion: We concluded that patients treated with PRP had significantly reduced pain, increased functional activity, less recurrence and without requirement of any further intervention, outperforming corticosteroid injection effect at the end of 6 months follow up.

Corticosteroid monotherapy versus combined cytarabine continuous rate infusion and corticosteroid therapy in dogs with meningoencephalitis of unknown origin: A blinded, randomized, controlled trial.

Treatment options available for meningoencephalitis of unknown origin (MUO) in dogs are suboptimal, and currently, no single treatment protocol appears to be superior. Compare neurological deterioration rates at 7 days between dogs with MUO treated with corticosteroids alone or combined with cytosine arabinoside (CA) continuous rate infusion (CRI) and compare clinical deterioration and survival at 30 and 100 days. Sixty-nine dogs with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) features or both compatible with MUO. Parallel, blinded, randomized controlled trial. Simple randomization into 2 treatment groups: 4 mg/kg/day prednisolone (or dexamethasone equivalent) for 2 days or 200 mg/m2 CA CRI over 8 hours plus 2 mg/kg/day prednisolone. Blinding of the treatment protocol was carried out using reversible redaction of clinical records, and treatment failure was defined as deterioration of neurological assessment or death. Using intention-to-treat analysis, proportions failing treatment at 7, 30, and 100 days were compared using Fisher's exact test. All-cause mortality at 100 days was compared using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Thirty-five dogs were allocated to corticosteroid only, and 34 dogs were allocated to combined CA CRI and corticosteroid. Proportions failing treatment at 7, 30, and 100 days were 7/35 (20%), 9/35 (26%), and 15/35 (43%) in the corticosteroid-only group and 8/34 (24%), 11/34 (32%), and 23/34 (68%) in the corticosteroid and CA CRI group. All-cause mortality at 100 days was not significantly different between groups (P = .62). Clinically relevant treatment-related adverse effects were not observed. We foundno difference in outcome between corticosteroid monotherapy and combined cytarabine CRI and corticosteroid therapy at 7, 30, and 100 days after diagnosis in dogs with MUO.

Equivalence of single and standard doses of antenatal corticosteroids for late preterm neonatal outcomes: insights from a secondary analysis

BackgroundThe recent paradigm shift of treating individuals at risk of late preterm birth with antenatal corticosteroids warrants an assessment of the effect of single dosage. ObjectiveTo compare outcomes of neonates born in the late preterm period (34.0-36.6 weeks) following a single dose of antenatal corticosteroids versus placebo. Study designWe performed a secondary analysis of the Antenatal Late Preterm Steroids (ALPS) trial (Gyamfi-Bannerman C. et al.). All individuals enrolled in the parent trial who received only a single dose of either antenatal corticosteroids or placebo and delivered within 24 hours were included. Primary outcome was a composite of respiratory support at 72 hr., including continuous positive airway pressure or high flow nasal cannula ≥ 2 h, oxygen with an inspired fraction of ≥ 30% for ≥ 4 h, or mechanical ventilation. ResultsOf the 2,831 individuals in the parent trial, 1,083 (38.3%) met inclusion criteria; of them, 539 (49.8%) received a single dose of antenatal corticosteroids and 544 (50.2%) a single placebo dose. The placebo and antenatal corticosteroids groups had similar demographic and clinical characteristics. There was no difference in the rate of the primary respiratory outcome (aRR 1.12, 95% CI 0.85-1.47) or in the rate of respiratory distress syndrome (aRR 1.47, 95% CI 0.95-2.26) between those who received a single antenatal corticosteroids dose or placebo. An exploratory stratification by randomization-to-delivery intervals of 12-hour increments also showed no association with lower primary respiratory outcome rates. ConclusionIn individuals with late preterm birth pregnancies who received antenatal corticosteroids and delivered before a second dose, there were no differences in neonatal respiratory morbidities compared to placebo.

Efficacy of oral corticosteroids for acute preschool wheeze: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

Oral corticosteroids are commonly used for acute preschool wheeze, although there is conflicting evidence of their benefit. We assessed the clinical efficacy of oral corticosteroids by means of a systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. In this systematic review with IPD meta-analysis, we systematically searched eight databases (PubMed, Ovid Embase, CINAHLplus, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, EudraCT, EU Clinical Trials Register, WHO Clinical Trials Registry) for randomised clinical trials published from Jan 1, 1994, to June 30, 2020, comparing oral corticosteroids with placebo in children aged 12 to 71 months with acute preschool wheeze in any setting based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes framework. We contacted principal investigators of eligible studies to obtain deidentified individual patient data. The primary outcome was change in wheezing severity score (WSS). A key secondary outcome length of hospital stay. We also calculated a pooled estimate of six commonly reported adverse events in the follow-up period of IPD datasets. One-stage and two-stage meta-analyses employing a random-effects model were used. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020193958. We identified 16 102 studies published between Jan 1, 1994, and June 30, 2020, from which there were 12 eligible trials after deduplication and screening. We obtained individual data from seven trials comprising 2172 children, with 1728 children in the eligible IPD age range; 853 (49·4%) received oral corticosteroids (544 [63·8%] male and 309 [36·2%] female) and 875 (50·6%) received placebo (583 [66·6%] male and 292 [33·4%] female). Compared with placebo, a greater change in WSS at 4 h was seen in the oral corticosteroids group (mean difference -0·31 [95% CI -0·38 to -0·24]; p=0·011) but not 12 h (-0·02 [-0·17 to 0·14]; p=0·68), with low heterogeneity between studies (I2=0%; τ2<0·001). Length of hospital stay was significantly reduced in the oral corticosteroids group (-3·18 h [-4·43 to -1·93]; p=0·0021; I2=0%; τ2<0·001). Subgroup analyses showed that this reduction was greatest in those with a history of wheezing or asthma (-4·54 h [-5·57 to -3·52]; pinteraction=0·0007). Adverse events were infrequently reported (four of seven datasets), but oral corticosteroids were associated with an increased risk of vomiting (odds ratio 2·27 [95% CI 0·87 to 5·88]; τ2<0·001). Most datasets (six of seven) had a low risk of bias. Oral corticosteroids reduce WSS at 4 h and length of hospital stay in children with acute preschool wheeze. In those with a history of previous wheeze or asthma, oral corticosteroids provide a potentially clinically relevant effect on length of hospital stay. Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research.

A clinical study on the risk and safety profiles of NSAIDs used for osteoporotic fractures in Chinese patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Purpose: To investigate the risk and safety profile of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for osteoporotic fractures in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). &#x0D; Methods: 298 RA patients admitted to The First People's Hospital of Huzhou, Huzhou, China from August 2020 to September 2022, were investigated. Patients were assigned to groups based on drugs used viz: control group received anti-rheumatic drugs other than NSAIDs; corticosteroid group received dexamethasone, disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) groups received sulfasalazine, NSAID group received either diclofenac or ibuprofen etc. Each group of patients received the respective treatment frequently for at least 3 years. The primary outcome in this study was the incidence of osteoporotic fracture resulting from fragile bone and deterioration of bone mass. &#x0D; Results: The incidence of osteoporotic fracture was highest in NSAID group (11.58 %) when compared to 5.44, 4.96, and 2.36 % in the corticosteroid, DMARD and control groups, respectively (p &lt; 0.05). This shows that users of NSAIDs had a 5-fold higher risk of osteoporotic fracture than patients in control group (OR = 1.26 (95 % CI: 1.22 - 1.81)) and 2-fold possibility of osteoporotic fracture when compared to corticosteroid users ((OR = 1.46 (95 % CI: 1.57 - 2.32)) and DMARD users (1.83 (95 % CI: 1.26 - 1.67)). &#x0D; Conclusion: Rheumatoid arthritis patients on NSAIDs such as celecoxib, diclofenac, ibuprofen, indomethacin, and oxaprozin are at risk of developing osteoporotic fracture. Therefore, NSAIDs must be used with proper counseling in RA patients to minimize the risk of osteoporotic fracture. In future, the study duration will need to be extended to determine the long-term effects and potential changes in bone properties.

Efficacy and safety of low-dose corticosteroids combined with leflunomide for progressive IgA nephropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and objectiveThe effectiveness of immunosuppressive and corticosteroid treatments for Immunoglobulin A (IgA) nephropathy (IgAN) remains thoroughly evaluated. We undertook a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of low-dose corticosteroids plus leflunomide for progressive IgA nephropathy.MethodsEligible studies were obtained from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. We also searched the references of the included studies. Our protocol followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Eligibility criteria were defined using a PICOS framework.ResultsOur study included three articles presenting 342 patient cases. Findings revealed that low-dose corticosteroids combined with the leflunomide group were effective in relieving urine protein excretion (UPE) [mean difference (MD) = -0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.41 to -0.30, P < 0.00001] compared with the full-dose corticosteroids group. Regarding serum creatinine (SCr), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), complete remission rate, and overall response rate, there was no difference between the groups (p > 0.05). Regarding safety, low-dose corticosteroids combined with leflunomide significantly reduced the risk of serious adverse events [odds ratio (OR): 0.11, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.91, P = 0.04]. Besides, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in the incidence of respiratory infection, abnormal liver function, diarrhea, herpes zoster, alopecia, pruritus, insomnia, pneumonia, diabetes, and urinary tract infection (P > 0.05).ConclusionsLow-dose corticosteroids combined with leflunomide are a safe and effective treatment for progressive IgA nephropathy.Trial registrationThe PROSPERO registration number is CRD42022361883.

A Comparative Study of Intra-Articular Knee Injection of Leukocyte-Poor Platelet-Rich Plasma Compared to Corticosteroids and Local Anesthetics in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis

Background: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common reason for orthopedic secondary care referral. And it is one of the main causes of disability in adults worldwide. It is estimated to affect between 10 to 25% of patients over the age of 60. Intra-articular corticosteroid injection (IA CS) and physical therapy were the two choices in an attempt to provide symptomatic management or deferred surgery. There is a growing trend is intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (IA PRP) injection to reduce pain and improve function in OA patients. PRP is divided into two types: leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP) and leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma (LR-PRP). It was shown that LR-PRP increases pro-inflammatory factors and also decreases anti-catabolic mediators, and LP-PRP has the opposite aspect.&#x0D; Methods: In our research 40 patients were divided into two equal groups, IA corticosteroid and leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP) 40 cc of blood from the basilic vein of the upper limb is used with two step centrifugation. The final samples were 4 millilitres product injected intra-articular. group two (corticosteroid (CS)) received an intra-articular injection of triamcinolone acetate (Kenalog) 40 mg/ml along with 4 ml of lidocaine 0.02% (Abureyhan Co.) for a total of 5 ml. The needle used is a 22-gauge pencil-point Quincke needle (Dr. Japan Co, Ltd), which is performed with the Sonosite Edge II ultrasound guide and in an anterior-lateral manner in the knee joint. Pain was assessed on a visual analogue scale (VAS range 0-10 points) before, one week, one month, two month and 3 months after the operation. The WOMAC questionnaire was also filled before injection and three months following injection and other variables were examined.&#x0D; Results: There were no significant differences between the groups across all the baseline parameters including age, sex, body mass index and comorbidities including high blood pressure, diabetes and smoking. Both injection groups were effective in reducing patients' pain from one week to three months after injection. The level of pain in the first week after injection was significantly lower in the corticosteroid group than in the PRP group. In the first month and the third month after the injection, the pain reduction according to mean scores of VAS was the same in both groups.&#x0D; Conclusion: In short, one injection of PRP can reduce the pain of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee as much as corticosteroids during a three-month treatment process. Considering the possible side effects of corticosteroids, this alternative treatment can be considered with further investigation.

Effect of Corticosteroids on Long-Term Humoral and Memory T-Cell Responses in Follow-Up Visit of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19

Corticosteroids have beneficial effects in improving outcomes in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 by suppressing excessive immune responses. However, the effect of corticosteroids on the humoral and T-cell responses of survivors of COVID-19 1 year after infection remains uncertain, as it relates to the extent of immediate, antigen-specific defense provided by protective memory. What is the effect of corticosteroids on long-term humoral and T-cell immune responses? In this retrospective cohort study conducted at a single center, we analyzed data from a cohort who had survived COVID-19 to compare the 1-year seropositivity and titer changes in neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) and SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. Additionally, we evaluated the magnitude and rate of SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell response in individuals who received corticosteroids during hospitalization and those who did not. Our findings indicated that corticosteroids do not statistically influence the kinetics or seropositive rate of NAbs against the Wuhan strain of SARS-CoV-2 from 6months to 1 year. However, subgroup analysis revealed a numerical increase of NAbs titers, from 20.0 to 28.2, in categories where long-term (> 15days) and high-dose (> 560mg) corticosteroids were administered. Similarly, corticosteroids showed no significant effect on nucleoprotein and receptor-binding domain IgG at 1 year, except for spike protein IgG (β, 0.08; 95%CI, 0.04-0.12), which demonstrated a delayed decline of titers. Regarding T-cell immunity, corticosteroids did not affect the rate or magnitude of T-cell responses significantly. However, functional assessment of memory Tcells revealed higher interferon-γ responses in CD4 (β, 0.61; 95%CI, 0.10-1.12) and CD8 (β, 0.63; 95%CI, 0.11-1.15) memory Tcells in the corticosteroids group at 1 year. Based on our findings, short-term and low-dose corticosteroid therapy during hospitalization does not appear to have a significant effect on long-term humoral kinetics or the magnitude and rate of memory T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 antigens. However, the potential harmful effects of long-term and high-dose corticosteroid use on memory immune responses require further investigation.

Time elapsed from definitive diagnosis to surgery for osteonecrosis of the femoral head: a nationwide observational study in Japan

ObjectivesThis study documents the time elapsed from the diagnosis of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) to surgery, exploring the factors that influence ONFH severity.DesignRetrospective observational study of a nationwide...

Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Injections versus Steroid Injections in the Management of Upper and Lower Extremity Orthopedic Conditions: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Although corticosteroid injections are an effective treatment for musculoskeletal pathologies, they may not be suitable for all patients. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare clinical outcomes between patients who received NSAID and corticosteroid injections for various orthopedic conditions. Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched, and meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model for outcomes presented in three or more studies. Other studies were qualitatively analyzed. A total of 28 articles with 2113 patients were included. A meta-analysis of five studies in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome demonstrated that there was no significant difference in the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) between subacromial NSAID injections and corticosteroid injections at 1 month [weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.244; 95% CI, -1.232 to 0.745; I2, 94.5%]. For patients with knee osteoarthritis, a meta-analysis of three studies demonstrated that there was no significant difference between intraarticular NSAID injections and corticosteroid injections in pain VAS at 1 month (WMD 0.754; 95% CI, -0.413 to 1.921; I2, 90.2%) and 3 months (WMD-0.089; 95% CI, -0.345 to 0.166; I2, 0%). A review of the studies assessing pain outcomes for hip osteoarthritis, adhesive capsulitis, and plantar fasciitis showed no significant differences between the NSAID and corticosteroid groups. NSAID injections may be safe and effective alternatives to steroid injections, especially in shoulder impingement syndrome and knee osteoarthritis.

Perioperative corticosteroids for reducing postoperative complications following esophagectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundThis updated systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of perioperative corticosteroid administration versus placebo for esophageal cancer patients following scheduled esophagectomy.MethodsWe searched databases through June 30, 2023. We included articles on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing perioperative corticosteroid administration with placebo in esophageal cancer patients with esophagectomy. The outcomes were the death rate during hospitalization, length of hospital stay, and short-term complications. Risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CIs) for each estimated effect size were applied for dichotomous outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) and corresponding 95% CIs for each estimated effect size were applied for continuous outcomes. We used GRADE to evaluate the quality of each of the outcome and the level of recommendations.ResultsNine RCTs with 508 participants were included in this study. Severe outcomes, including the length of hospital stay, leakage, mortality during the hospitalization period in the corticosteroid group was comparable to that in the control group, but positive effects of corticosteroid administration were observed on the length of intensive care unit stay (MD -3.1, 95% CI − 5.43 to − 0.77), cardiovascular disorders (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21–0.94) and other general complications (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.29–0.85).ConclusionsPeri-operative intravenous corticosteroid administration may reduce cardiovascular disorders, other general complications and the length of ICU stay without carrying severe outcomes. More high quality RCTs are warranted to further investigate the effects of corticosteroids on postoperative mortality and complications for esophageal cancer patients with esophagectomy.Systematic review registrationCochrane, registration number: 196.

The effectiveness of glucocorticoid treatment in post-COVID-19 pulmonary involvement

RationalePersistent respiratory symptoms following Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) are associated with residual radiological changes in lung parenchyma, with a risk of development into lung fibrosis, and with impaired pulmonary function. Previous studies hinted at the possible efficacy of corticosteroids (CS) in facilitating the resolution of post-COVID residual changes in the lungs, but the available data is limited.AimTo evaluate the effects of CS treatment in post-COVID respiratory syndrome patients.Patients and methodsPost-COVID patients were recruited into a prospective single-center observational study and scheduled for an initial (V1) and follow-up visit (V2) at the Department of Respiratory Medicine and Tuberculosis, University Hospital Olomouc, comprising of pulmonary function testing, chest x-ray, and complex clinical examination. The decision to administer CS or maintain watchful waiting (WW) was in line with Czech national guidelines.ResultsThe study involved 2729 COVID-19 survivors (45.7% male; mean age: 54.6). From 2026 patients with complete V1 data, 131 patients were indicated for CS therapy. These patients showed significantly worse radiological and functional impairment at V1. Mean initial dose was 27.6 mg (SD ± 10,64), and the mean duration of CS therapy was 13.3 weeks (SD ± 10,06). Following therapy, significantly better improvement of static lung volumes and transfer factor for carbon monoxide (DLCO), and significantly better rates of good or complete radiological and subjective improvement were observed in the CS group compared to controls with available follow-up data (n = 894).ConclusionBetter improvement of pulmonary function, radiological findings and subjective symptoms were observed in patients CS compared to watchful waiting. Our findings suggest that glucocorticoid therapy could benefit selected patients with persistent dyspnea, significant radiological changes, and decreased DLCO.