Title of article :
Mesalazine for People with Diverticular Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
Author/Authors :
Iannone, Andrea Section of Gastroenterology - Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation - University of Bari, Italy , Ruospo, Marinella Diaverum Medical Scientifc Ofce, Lund, Sweden , Wong, Germaine Sydney School of Public Health - University of Sydney, Australia , Barone, Michele Section of Gastroenterology - Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation - University of Bari, Italy , Principi, Mariabeatrice Section of Gastroenterology - Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation - University of Bari, Italy , Leo, Alfredo Di , Strippoli, Giovanni F. M Diaverum Medical Scientifc Ofce, Lund, Sweden
Pages :
12
From page :
1
To page :
12
Abstract :
Background Diverticular disease treatment is limited to fibres, antibiotics, and surgery. There is conflicting evidence on mesalazine benefits and harms. Aim We systematically reviewed current evidence on benefits and harms of mesalazine versus all other treatments in people with diverticular disease. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published to July 2018. We estimated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (disease remission/recurrence, acute diverticulitis in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease, need for surgery/hospitalization, all-cause/disease-related mortality, adverse events), mean differences (MD) or standardized MD (SMD) for continuous outcomes (quality of life, symptoms score, time to recurrence/remission), and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. We quantified heterogeneity by Chi2 and I2 tests. We performed subgroup analyses by disease subtype, comparator, follow-up duration, mesalazine dose, and mode of administration. Results We identified 13 randomized trials (n=3028 participants). There was a higher likelihood of disease remission with mesalazine than controls in acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (1 trial, 81 participants, RR=2.67, 95%CI=1.05-6.79), but not in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (1 trial, 123 participants, RR=1.04, 95%CI=0.81-1.34). There was a lower likelihood of disease recurrence with mesalazine than controls in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (2 trials, 216 participants, RR=0.52, 95%CI=0.28-0.97), but not in acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (7 trials, 2196 participants, RR=0.90, 95%CI=0.61-1.33). There was no difference in the likelihood of developing acute diverticulitis in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease between the two groups (3 trials, 484 participants, RR=0.26, 95%CI=0.06-1.20). There was a higher global symptoms score reduction with mesalazine than controls in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (2 trials, 326 participants, SMD=-1.01, 95%CI=-1.51,-0.52) and acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (2 trials, 153 participants, SMD=-0.56, 95%CI=-0.88,-0.24). Conclusions Mesalazine may reduce recurrences in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease. There is uncertainty on the effect of mesalazine in achieving diverticular disease remission. Mesalazine may not prevent acute diverticulitis in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease.
Keywords :
Mesalazine , Diverticular Disease , Randomized Controlled Trials
Journal title :
Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Serial Year :
2018
Full Text URL :
Record number :
2610776
Link To Document :
بازگشت