Double-dummy Trial Research Articles

Antihypertensive and cardiovascular effects of combined blockade of renin-angiotensin system with ACE inhibitor and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker in hypertensive patients: A 24-week randomized controlled double-dummy trial

Background.In this study the effects of 24 weeks losartan and ramipril treatment, both alone and in combination, on blood pressure and left ventricular mass (LVM) and function, have been evaluated in hypertensives.Methods.57 hypertensives with stage 1 and 2 essential hypertension were included. After 4 weeks run in, a randomized double-blind, 3 arm, double dummy, independent trial was used. All patients were randomly allocated to 3 treatment arms consisting of losartan (50 mg/daily), ramipril (5 mg/daily), and combined (losartan 50 mg/ramipril 5 mg/daily) for 24 weeks. LVM, LVM/h2.7 and other echocardiographic measurements, BUN, creatinine and clearance and potassium were determined after run in and 24 weeks.Results.All groups were comparable for gender, age, BMI, BP and LVM. The prevalence of baseline left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) was not significantly different among 3 groups. At the end of treatment, a significant (p<0.05) reduction in SBP, DBP, MBP, LVM and LVM/h2.7 were observed in all groups. The absolute and percent reduction in LVM/h2.7 were significantly higher in combined than losartan or ramipril groups and also in hypertensives with LVH. No significant change in absolute and percent reduction of SBP, DBP and MBP were found.Conclusions.These data indicate an additional cardioprotective effect of dual blockade of RAS in hypertensive patients with and without left ventricular hypertrophy.

Clinical and Bacteriological Efficacy in Treatment of Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Bronchitis with Cefditoren-Pivoxil versus Cefuroxime-Axetil

A randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial was performed comparing 200 mg of cefditoren-pivoxil twice daily for 5 days versus standard cefuroxime-axetil treatment (250 mg twice daily for 10 days) of Anthonisen type I or II acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis. The modified intention-to-treat population included 541 patients. Patients were assessed during therapy, at the end of therapy (visit 3; primary evaluation time point), and at follow-up. Clinical success was obtained in 79.9% of the 264 patients included in the cefditoren-pivoxil group and in 82.7% of the 277 patients in the cefuroxime-axetil group (treatment difference, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -2.8, -9.7 to 3.6%). Treatment clinical effects were more clearly seen in sputum signs (decreasing volume and purulence from approximately 80% to approximately 10% of the patients). At the end of treatment, exploratory analysis of the per-pathogen bacteriological response showed 72.8% (of 103 isolates) in the cefditoren-pivoxil arm versus 67.0% (of 94 isolates) in the cefuroxime-axetil group (treatment difference; 95% CI: 5.8, -7.0 to 18.6%). Globally, the per-pathogen bacteriological response correlated well with clinical success: 83.5% of 164 baseline isolates from patients with a clinical success were eradicated or presumably eradicated, in contrast to only 3% of 33 isolates from patients with a clinical failure. Clinical success in patients infected with Haemophilus influenzae, the most frequent isolate, was 84% (of 50) and 82.5% (of 40) (treatment difference; 95% CI: 1.5, -14 to 17%) in the cefditoren-pivoxil versus the cefuroxime-axetil group. Although this study does not prove that either drug is better than a placebo, cefditoren-pivoxil and the standard 10-day cefuroxime-axetil course had similar point estimates of success in acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis.

A Randomized, Multicenter, Double Blind, Double Dummy Trial of Single Dose Azithromycin Versus High Dose Amoxicillin for Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Otitis Media

A Randomized, Multicenter, Double Blind, Double Dummy Trial of Single Dose Azithromycin Versus High Dose Amoxicillin for Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Otitis Media

Treatment of Patients With Persistent Heartburn Symptoms: A Double-Blind, Randomized Trial

Common treatment practices in patients who continue to be symptomatic on proton pump inhibitor once-daily treatment include either increasing the dosage or the use of supplemental medication. This trial's purpose was to compare 2 therapeutic strategies, increasing the proton pump inhibitor dosage to twice daily versus switching to another proton pump inhibitor, in patients with persistent heartburn while receiving standard-dose proton pump inhibitor therapy. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial included patients with persistent heartburn symptoms while receiving therapy with lansoprazole 30 mg once daily. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment for 8 weeks with either single-dose esomeprazole (40 mg once daily) (n = 138) or lansoprazole 30 mg twice daily (n = 144). The primary efficacy variable was the percentage of heartburn-free days from day 8 to the end of treatment. Single-dose esomeprazole was at least as effective as twice-daily lansoprazole for the primary end point of percentage of heartburn-free days during the study period (54.4% and 57.5%, respectively). Symptom scores improved from baseline in similar numbers of patients for heartburn (83.3% of patients in each group), acid regurgitation (76.8% vs 72.9%, P = .58), and epigastric pain (67.4% vs 61.1%, P = .32), and rescue antacid use was also similar (0.4 tablets/day vs 0.5 tablets/day, P = .50). Switching patients with persistent heartburn on a standard-dose proton pump inhibitor to a different proton pump inhibitor was as effective as increasing the proton pump inhibitor dosage to twice daily for controlling heartburn symptoms.

Antihypertensive and Cardiovascular Effects of Combined Blockade of Renin-Angiotensin System with ACE Inhibitor and Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blocker in Hypertensive Patients: A 24-Week Randomized Controlled Double-Dummy Trial

Antihypertensive and Cardiovascular Effects of Combined Blockade of Renin-Angiotensin System with ACE Inhibitor and Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blocker in Hypertensive Patients: A 24-Week Randomized Controlled Double-Dummy Trial

A Randomized, Multicenter, Double Blind, Double Dummy Trial of Single Dose Azithromycin Versus High Dose Amoxicillin for Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Otitis Media

A Randomized, Multicenter, Double Blind, Double Dummy Trial of Single Dose Azithromycin Versus High Dose Amoxicillin for Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Otitis Media

Treating acute rhinosinusitis: Comparing efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate nasal spray, amoxicillin, and placebo

Intranasal corticosteroids used with antibiotics are known to improve rhinosinusitis symptoms compared with antibiotic therapy alone. However, the efficacy of intranasal corticosteroid monotherapy for acute, uncomplicated rhinosinusitis is not established. To evaluate efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate nasal spray (MFNS) versus amoxicillin and placebo in patients with acute, uncomplicated rhinosinusitis. In this double-blind, double-dummy trial, subjects (> or =12 years; N = 981) were randomized to MFNS 200 microg once daily or twice daily for 15 days, amoxicillin 500 mg 3 times daily for 10 days, or respective placebo. Follow-up was 14 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean am/pm major symptom score over the treatment phase. Secondary efficacy endpoints included total symptom score. Safety assessments included disease recurrence during follow-up and adverse event monitoring. Mometasone furoate nasal spray 200 microg twice daily was significantly superior to placebo (P < .001) and amoxicillin (P = .002) at improving major symptom score. Starting on day 2, MFNS 200 microg twice daily improved total symptom score throughout treatment versus amoxicillin (P = .012) and placebo (P < .001). Global response to treatment was significantly greater with MFNS 200 microg twice daily versus amoxicillin (P = .013) and placebo (P = .001). Although significantly superior to placebo, MFNS 200 microg once daily was not superior to amoxicillin for the primary or secondary efficacy endpoints. All treatments were well tolerated with a similar incidence of adverse events. In patients with acute, uncomplicated rhinosinusitis, MFNS 200 microg twice daily produced significant symptom improvements versus amoxicillin and placebo, without predisposing the patient to disease recurrence or bacterial infection.

Efficacy of Bupropion and Nortriptyline for Smoking Cessation Among People at Risk for or With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

The observations that smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are at increased risk of depression and that nicotine may have antidepressant effects and regulate mood provide a rationale for the use of antidepressant drugs for smoking cessation in patients with COPD. No clinical trial has studied the efficacy of bupropion hydrochloride and nortriptyline hydrochloride for smoking cessation in this patient population, to our knowledge. In a placebo-controlled double-dummy randomized trial, 255 adults at risk for COPD or with COPD were prescribed sustained-release bupropion (bupropion SR) (150 mg twice daily) or nortriptyline (75 mg once daily) for 12 weeks. All patients received smoking cessation counseling. The main outcome measure was prolonged abstinence from smoking from week 4 to week 26 after the target quit date. The use of bupropion SR and nortriptyline resulted in higher prolonged abstinence rates compared with placebo, although only the difference between bupropion SR and placebo was statistically significant (differences with placebo, 13.1% [95% confidence interval, 1.2%-25.1%] for bupropion SR and 10.2% [95% confidence interval, -1.7% to 22.2%] for nortriptyline). In patients with COPD, bupropion SR and nortriptyline seem efficacious in achieving prolonged abstinence (differences with placebo, 18.9% [95% confidence interval, 3.6%-34.2%] for bupropion SR and 12.9% [95% confidence interval, -0.8% to 26.4%] for nortriptyline). In participants at risk for COPD, no statistically significant differences with placebo in prolonged abstinence rates were found. Bupropion SR treatment is an efficacious aid to smoking cessation in patients with COPD. Nortriptyline treatment seems to be a useful alternative.

Efficacy and Safety of Heparinase I versus Protamine in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting with and without Cardiopulmonary Bypass

Hemodynamic protamine reactions with heparin reversal during cardiac surgery are common and associated with adverse outcomes. As an alternative to protamine, the authors examined heparinase I reversal of heparin after aortocoronary bypass graft surgery. In a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial, 167 on- and off-pump aortocoronary bypass graft surgery patients received either heparinase I (maximum 35 microg/kg) or protamine (maximum 650 mg) for heparin reversal, monitored by activated clotting time values and clinical assessment. Hemodynamic parameters were recorded electronically; safety evaluation was to 30 days postoperatively. Noninferiority was predefined as 400 ml or less median 12-h chest tube drainage from intensive care unit arrival for heparinase I patients, after risk adjustment. Hemodynamic instability was defined as systemic hypotension (> or = 30 mmHg decrease) and/or pulmonary hypertension (> or = 40 mmHg with an increase > or = 10 mmHg) within 30 min of heparin reversal initiation. Patient enrollment was terminated on advisement of the Data Safety Monitoring Board. Although heparinase I was noninferior for 12-h chest tube drainage, protamine had a superior safety profile. Overall, heparinase I subjects had longer hospital stays (P = 0.04), were more likely to experience a serious adverse event (P = 0.01), and were less likely to avoid transfusion (P = 0.006). A composite morbidity score was not different (P = 0.24), and similar rates of hemodynamic instability were observed between groups. Findings were consistent in analyses stratified by on- and off-pump surgery. Heparinase I reverses heparin anticoagulation after aortocoronary bypass graft surgery but is not equivalent to protamine because of its inferior safety profile.

Efficacy and Safety of a Novel, Single-dose Azithromycin Microsphere Formulation Versus 10 Days of Levofloxacin for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Sinusitis in Adults

To compare the efficacy and safety of a single 2.0-g dose of a novel azithromycin microsphere formulation with that of 10 days of levofloxacin, 500 mg/d, when used to treat adults with uncomplicated acute bacterial maxillary sinusitis (ABS). An international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial. Eligible outpatients > or =18 years of age with clinical and radiographic evidence of ABS underwent maxillary sinus aspiration before randomization. Primary endpoint was clinical efficacy at the test-of-cure visit (day 17-24). Clinical success rates were 94.5% (242/256) in azithromycin-microspheres-treated patients and 92.8% (233/251) in the levofloxacin group. In patients with documented Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, or Moraxella catarrhalis, clinical cure rates were 97.3% (36/37), 96.3% (26/27), and 100% (8/8), respectively, for the azithromycin group and 92.3% (36/39), 100% (30/30), and 90.9% (10/11), respectively, for the levofloxacin group. Single-dose azithromycin microspheres provided clinical and bacteriologic efficacy and safety comparable to 10 days of levofloxacin. A novel microsphere formulation of azithromycin given as a single dose was safe and effective for the treatment of ABS.

The effect of montelukast and different doses of budesonide on IgE serum levels and clinical parameters in children with newly diagnosed asthma

Background Since IgE is considered to play a crucial role in allergic immune responses, the reduction of free IgE level has been an attractive target in the treatment of allergic diseases. The present study was conducted to determine the effects of a 6-month treatment with different doses of inhaled budesonide and montelukast sodium in children with newly diagnosed atopic asthma. Methods In this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial, 51 children with newly diagnosed asthma and sensitivity to house-dust mites were randomly allocated to receive budesonide (in two different doses 400 or 800 mcg) or montelukast for 6 months. The primary end point was the level of serum total and specific IgE before and after treatment. The secondary end points were clinical parameters and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1). Results After 6 months of treatment, a high dose of inhaled corticosteroid and montelukast, significantly decreased levels of total and specific IgE. Medium dose of inhaled corticosteroid had no effect on total and specific IgE serum level. Clinical score and FEV1 significantly improved after 6 months of treatment with medium ( P=0.002) and high dose ( P=0.001) of inhaled budesonide and montelukast ( P=0.002). There were no differences between groups in changes of all clinical parameters after treatment. Conclusion Only high doses of inhaled corticosteroids and montelukast decreased the serum IgE levels. Perhaps long-term treatment with montelukast will be beneficial to asthma patients by decreasing IgE levels.

Prospective Parallel Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Clomiphene Citrate and Metformin as the First-Line Treatment for Ovulation Induction in Nonobese Anovulatory Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Although metformin has been shown to be effective in the treatment of anovulation in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), clomiphene citrate (CC) is still considered to be the first-line drug to induce ovulation in these patients. The goal of this study was to compare the effectiveness of metformin and CC administration as a first-line treatment in anovulatory women with PCOS. We describe a prospective parallel randomized, double-blind, double-dummy controlled clinical trial. The study was conducted at the University "Magna Graecia" of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy. One hundred nonobese primary infertile anovulatory women with PCOS participated. We administered metformin cloridrate (850 mg twice daily) plus placebo (group A) or placebo plus CC (150 mg for 5 d from the third day of a progesterone withdrawal bleeding) (group B) for 6 months each. The main outcome measures were ovulation, pregnancy, abortion, and live-birth rates. The subjects of groups A (n = 45) and B (n = 47) were studied for a total of 205 and 221 cycles, respectively. The ovulation rate was not statistically different between either treatment group (62.9 vs. 67.0%, P = 0.38), whereas the pregnancy rate was significantly higher in group A than group B (15.1 vs. 7.2%, P = 0.009). The difference found between groups A and B regarding the abortion rate was significant (9.7 vs. 37.5%, P = 0.045), whereas a positive trend was observed for the live-birth rate (83.9 vs. 56.3%, P = 0.07). The cumulative pregnancy rate was significantly higher in group A than group B (68.9 vs. 34.0%, P < 0.001). Six-month metformin administration is significantly more effective than six-cycle CC treatment in improving fertility in anovulatory nonobese PCOS women.

Relationship of Incorrect Dosing of Fibrinolytic Therapy and Clinical Outcomes

Incorrect dosing of alteplase has been associated with worse clinical outcomes in patients. However, patients at high risk of adverse events are more prone to dosing errors, thus confounding this relationship. To determine if the association between incorrect dosing of alteplase and adverse outcomes is related to cause and effect or to confounding. Observational analysis in May 2004 of a double-blind, double-dummy trial of 16,949 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who were enrolled in the Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic (ASSENT-2) trial and were assigned to either a bolus of tenecteplase (with alteplase placebo bolus plus infusion) or a bolus of alteplase (with tenecteplase placebo plus infusion). Thirty-day mortality, in-hospital stroke, and major bleeding associated with incorrect dosing of active alteplase compared with placebo alteplase. Incorrect dosing occurred in 4.9% of patients who received active alteplase and in 4.6% of patients who received alteplase placebo. Patients receiving incorrect doses of alteplase or alteplase placebo were more likely to be older, female, black, shorter, have lower body weight and systolic blood pressure, and have a higher Killip class at presentation. Thirty-day mortality was higher in patients who received an overdose (9.8%) or underdose (19.5%) of alteplase compared with those who received a correct dose (5.4%). The same pattern was present in patients who received an alteplase placebo (10.0% for overdose, 23.5% for underdose, and 5.4% for correct dose). Similar patterns were seen for in-hospital intracranial hemorrhage and major bleeding. The higher rates of adverse outcomes with incorrect dosing were largely accounted for by adjusting for baseline characteristics. The relationship between incorrect dosing and patient outcome in ASSENT-2 is primarily due to confounding factors rather than incorrect dosing itself. These data highlight the need for caution when ascribing a causal relationship to associations between incorrect dosing and adverse outcomes.

Transforming growth factor β1 and additional renoprotective effect of combination ACE inhibitor and angiotensin II receptor blocker in hypertensive subjects with minor renal abnormalities: a 24-week randomized controlled trial

To verify the benefit of renin-angiotensin system blockade in hypertension, the effects of 24 weeks' losartan and ramipril treatment, both alone and in combination, on urinary albumin excretion (UAE) and circulating transforming growth factor beta1 (TGF beta1) have been evaluated in hypertensive subjects with minor renal abnormalities. Fifty-one patients with stage 1 and 2 essential hypertension and with UAE > or = 20 mg/24 h but with maintained renal function have been included. After a 4-week run-in with placebo administration, a randomized double-blind, three-arm double-dummy trial was used. All the hypertensives (HT) were allocated randomly to three treatment arms (17 patients for each group) and they were single-matched for age, gender, body mass index (BMI), systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Active treatment consisted of losartan (50 mg/day), ramipril (5 mg/day) and combined (losartan 50 mg/day plus ramipril 5 mg/day) for 24 weeks. Hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg/day was added in HT patients with uncontrolled blood pressure (> or = 140/90 mmHg) during the active treatment period. In all patients UAE, by immunonephelometric assay; circulating TGF beta1 by a solid-phase specific sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); and blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine and creatinine clearance and potassium, by routine laboratory methods, were determined after placebo treatment and 24 weeks follow-up. The three treatment groups were comparable for gender, age, BMI, blood pressure, UAE and renal function measurements. During the active treatment period it was necessary to add hydrochlorothiazide in five patients--two each of the losartan and ramipril groups and one of the combined group. At the end of treatment, significant (P < 0.05) reductions in systolic, diastolic and mean blood pressure, UAE and TGF beta1 levels were observed in all the groups. No change in renal function measurements were observed. The absolute and percentage reduction in UAE and TGF beta1 were significantly higher in the combined group than in the losartan or ramipril groups. No significant changes in absolute and percentage reduction of systolic, diastolic and mean blood pressure were found. All treatment regimens were well tolerated with few and transient side-effects. These data indicate an additional renoprotective effect of dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) in hypertensive patients with minor renal abnormalities. In addition, the contemporaneus and marked decrease in TGF beta1 and UAE levels in hypertensives treated with combined therapy might indicate the presence of a subset of subjects who may benefit from complete RAS blockade.

A Randomized, Multicenter, Double Blind, Double Dummy Trial of Single Dose Azithromycin Versus High Dose Amoxicillin for Treatment of Uncomplicated Acute Otitis Media

High dose amoxicillin is recommended for the initial treatment of children with acute otitis media (AOM), particularly patients at risk for having drug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae. Single dose azithromycin (30 mg/kg) is considered an alternative agent for the treatment of AOM. To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of single dose azithromycin with that of high dose amoxicillin among children with uncomplicated AOM. This was a double blind, double dummy, multinational, clinical trial in which children (6-30 months of age) with AOM were randomized to treatment with single dose azithromycin (30 mg/kg) or high dose amoxicillin (90 mg/kg/d, in 2 divided doses) for 10 days. Tympanocentesis was performed at baseline and clinical responses were assessed at days 12-14 (end of therapy) and at days 25-28 (end of study). The study enrolled 313 patients, and 83% of the patients were < or =2 years of age. A total of 158 patients in the azithromycin group and 154 in the amoxicillin group were considered clinical modified intent-to-treat patients. A middle ear pathogen was detected for 212 patients (68%). Haemophilus influenzae was the most common pathogen (isolated for 96 patients), followed by S. pneumoniae (92 patients), Moraxella catarrhalis (23 patients) and Streptococcus pyogenes (23 patients). beta-Lactamase production was observed for 17% of H. influenzae isolates and 100% of M. catarrhalis isolates. Thirty-five (38%) S. pneumoniae isolates were penicillin-nonsusceptible and 24 (26%) isolates were macrolide-resistant. At the end of therapy, clinical success rates for azithromycin and amoxicillin were comparable for all patients (84 and 84%, respectively) and for children < or =2 years of age (82 and 82%, respectively). At the end of therapy and end of study, clinical efficacies among all microbiologic modified intent-to-treat evaluable subjects were comparable for patients treated with azithromycin (80%) and patients treated with amoxicillin (83%). The rates of treatment-related adverse events for azithromycin and amoxicillin were 20% and 29%, respectively (P = 0.064). Diarrhea was more common in the amoxicillin group than in the azithromycin group (17.5 and 8.2%, respectively) (P = 0.017). Compliance, defined as completion of > or =80% of the study medication, was higher in the azithromycin group (100%) than in the amoxicillin group (90%) (P = 0.001). In this study, single dose azithromycin was as effective as high dose amoxicillin for the treatment of children with AOM, whereas rates of adverse events were lower and compliance improved with the simplified single dose regimen.

Randomized double-blind, double-dummy crossover clinical trial of oral tramadol versus rectal tramadol administration in opioid-naive cancer patients with pain

Tramadol is commonly used as second step drug of the analgesic ladder. In circumstances where the oral route is unavailable, rectal administration of opioids might be a simple alternative. The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic activity and tolerability of tramadol by oral and rectal administration in a double-blind, double-dummy crossover trial. The study included 60 cancer patients with cancer pain no longer responsive to non-opioid drugs. Each patient initially received oral tramadol 50 mg (drops), followed by tramadol sustained release 100 mg orally, and placebo rectally, or tramadol 100 mg rectally and placebo orally, twice a day, in a randomized sequence, on each of 3 days. Patients were allowed to take 50 mg of oral tramadol by drops as needed (four doses per day, to a maximum of 400 mg/day, including the basal dose given by the oral or rectal route). Pain intensity and relief and symptom scores were recorded every day and at the end of each phase of the crossover. The mean age of the patients was 66.1 years (SD 13.5 years); 36 were female, and 44 completed both periods. Patients dropped out due to adverse effects (15 patients) and refusal (1 patient). No differences in the use of rescue dose of oral tramadol were observed between the groups. No differences in pain intensity and relief scores, or in other symptoms between the two treatments were observed. No differences in treatment efficacy as judged by the clinician (P=0.73), in patient compliance (P=0.35), or in patient satisfaction regarding treatment (P<0.35) were found. No differences in adverse effects were found between the two treatments (25.5%, 13 patients, and 20.4%, 11 patients, with oral and rectal treatment, respectively). The proportion of preferences favored oral administration for both physicians (P=0.0002) and patients (P=0.002). Rectal administration of tramadol appears a reliable, noninvasive alternative method of pain control for patients no longer responsive to non-opioid analgesics, unable to take oral tramadol.

Preemptive rofecoxib and dexamethasone for prevention of pain and trismus following third molar surgery

Objective The goal of this preliminary randomized prospective clinical trial was to compare the analgesic efficacy and the reduction in trismus of preoperative rofecoxib, intraoperative dexamethasone, and both rofecoxib and dexamethasone following third molar extraction surgery. Study design Thirty-five subjects requiring surgical removal of at least 1 partial bony impacted mandibular third molar were invited to participate in this double-blind and double-dummy placebo-controlled clinical trial. Subjects were randomly assigned into 1 of 4 treatment groups: (1) placebo po preoperatively and placebo IV intraoperatively; (2) rofecoxib 50 mg po preoperatively and placebo IV intraoperatively; (3) placebo po preoperatively and dexamethasone10 mg IV intraoperatively; and (4) rofecoxib 50 mg po preoperatively and dexamethasone 10 mg IV intraoperatively. Subjects completed a diary assessing postoperative pain onset and intensity using categorical and visual analogue scales. Interincisal opening was assessed 1, 2, 3, and 7 days postoperatively using a Therabite ruler. Results This randomized controlled clinical trial enrolled 35 subjects. Two subjects did not meet the inclusion criteria and 4 did not return completed diaries. The mean age of the remaining 29 subjects (11 males, 18 females) was 22.8 years (+/- 0.6 year). The active treatments tended to delay the need for initial pain medication. When compared to other active treatments and to placebo, the combination of preoperative rofecoxib and intraoperative dexamethasone significantly reduced initial pain intensity ( P < .05). Baseline interincisal opening was 52.6 mm (+/- 6.2). The greatest decrease in interincisal opening was 43.3% for the placebo group at 24 hours. Preoperative rofecoxib alone showed a decrease in interincisal opening of 42.3% ( P = ns) at 24 hours. Intraoperative dexamethasone alone showed a decrease in the interincisal opening of 24.1% of baseline ( P < .05 vs placebo). The group receiving the combination of rofecoxib and dexamethasone showed a decrease in interincisal opening of 23.7% of baseline ( P < .05 vs placebo). Conclusions The results of this trial indicate that the use of intraoperative dexamethasone is an effective therapeutic strategy for limiting trismus following surgical removal of impacted third molars. The combination of preoperative rofecoxib 50 mg and intraoperative dexamethasone 10 mg was most effective in minimizing pain and trismus following third molar surgery.

Postoperative maintenance of Crohn’s disease remission with 6-mercaptopurine, mesalamine, or placebo: A 2-year trial

No therapy has been shown to reliably prevent the evolution of postoperative recurrence of Crohn's disease. The aim of the current trial was to compare 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) and mesalamine with placebo for the prevention of clinical, endoscopic, and radiographic recurrence of Crohn's disease after resection and ileocolic anastomosis. Five centers randomized 131 patients to receive 6-MP (50 mg), mesalamine (3 g), or placebo daily in a double-blind, double-dummy trial. Patients had clinical assessments at 7 weeks and then every 3 months; colonoscopy at 6, 12, and 24 months; and small bowel series at 12 and 24 months. End points were clinical, endoscopic, and radiographic recurrence rates at 24 months. Clinical recurrence rates (intent to treat) by life-table analysis at 24 months were 50% (95% confidence interval [CI], 34%-68%), 58% (95% CI, 41%-75%), and 77% (95% CI, 61%-91%) in patients receiving 6-MP, mesalamine, and placebo, respectively. Endoscopic recurrence rates were 43% (95% CI, 28%-63%), 63% (95% CI, 47%-79%), and 64% (95% CI, 46%-81%), and radiographic recurrence rates were 33% (95% CI, 19%-54%), 46% (95% CI, 29%-66%), and 49% (95% CI, 30%-72%), respectively. 6-MP was more effective than placebo ( P < 0.05) at preventing clinical and endoscopic recurrence over 2 years. Patient withdrawals resulted in 69% of the study population evaluable for the clinical recurrence end point. 6-MP, 50 mg daily, was more effective than placebo at preventing postoperative recurrence of Crohn's disease and should be considered as a maintenance therapy after ileocolic resection.

Combined corticosteroid and long acting beta-agonist in one inhaler for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Long-acting beta-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids have both been recommended in guidelines for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Their co-administration in a combined inhaler is intended to facilitate adherence to medication regimens, and to improve efficacy. To assess the efficacy of combined inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta-agonist preparations, compared to placebo or the individual components, in the treatment of adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We searched the Cochrane Airways Group chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) trials register. Date of last search April 2004. Studies were included if they were randomised and double-blind. Studies could compare a combined inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonist preparation with either component preparation or placebo. Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcome was exacerbations. Six randomised trials with 4118 participants were included. Two different combination preparations (fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol) were used. Combination treatment was more effective than placebo for mean exacerbation rates, quality of life and lung function. No trials were found comparing the combination of drugs in a single inhaler with the same drugs both given in separate inhalers. Exacerbations: Fluticasone/salmeterol did not significantly reduce exacerbations compared with either of its component treatments in one large study. There was no significant difference when budesonide/formoterol was compared with budesonide. Budesonide/formoterol was more effective than formoterol in reducing exacerbations (Rate ratio: 0.78 [0.68 to 0.90], two studies). A pooled analysis of both combination therapies indicated that exacerbations were less frequent when compared with either placebo or long-acting beta-agonist (versus placebo Rate ratio: 0.76 [0.68, 0.84], three studies, versus beta-agonist, Rate ratio: 0.85 [0.77, 0.95], three studies), but not when compared with steroid. The clinical impact of this effect depends on the frequency of exacerbations experienced by patients. One full exacerbation was prevented for every two to four years of treatment in the type of patients included in the trials. Quality of Life: There were conflicting findings in quality of life and symptoms when fluticasone/salmeterol was compared with inhaled steroids alone (three studies). There was no significant difference between fluticasone/salmeterol and long-acting beta-agonist in quality of life scores (three studies). Budesonide/formoterol improved symptoms when compared with budesonide but not with formoterol. There were conflicting findings in quality of life scores when budesonide/formoterol was compared with component inhaled corticosteroid or beta-agonist. These may be accounted for by different study design. Lung Function: Treatment with either combination led to small, significant differences in lung function compared with component steroid medication. Fluticasone/salmeterol led to small improvements in FEV1 compared with salmeterol, but budesonide/formoterol treatment did not increase FEV1 significantly when compared with formoterol. Compared with placebo, combination therapy led to clinically meaningful differences in quality of life, symptoms and exacerbations. However, there were conflicting results when the different combination therapies were compared with the mono-components alone. In order to draw firmer conclusions about the effects of combination therapy in a single inhaler more data are necessary, including the assessment of the comparative effects with separate administration of the two drugs in double-dummy trials.

Budesonida inalatória em crianças com asma aguda

To investigate the efficacy of a single dose of inhaled budesonide as compared to oral prednisone in patients with acute asthma. Randomized double-blind, double-dummy and placebo-controlled clinical trial. Forty-nine children aged 2 to 7 years with acute asthma were randomized in three groups after receiving nebulized salbutamol (0.15 mg/kg). Group I received placebo both as tablets and nebulization, group II was treated with a single dose of oral prednisone (1 mg/kg) and inhaled placebo, and group III received a single dose of placebo tablet and nebulized budesonide (2 mg). Patients were evaluated in terms of symptom score and transcutaneous hemoglobin saturation. Nebulized salbutamol was repeated in case of increasing symptom score or lower saturation. Progressive clinical improvement was observed in all three groups. However, a significant increase in hemoglobin saturation was observed after 2 hours with prednisone, 4 hours with budesonide, and 24 hours with placebo. A combination of single-dose nebulized budesonide and salbutamol may be as effective as oral prednisone to improve symptom severity, but the latter increases hemoglobin saturation in exacerbation of asthma.