4.6 Review

Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Medical Therapies to Prevent Recurrence of Post-Operative Crohn's Disease

期刊

JOURNAL OF CROHNS & COLITIS
卷 13, 期 6, 页码 693-701

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjy216

关键词

Anti-TNF-alpha; Crohn's disease; recurrence; prophylaxis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Aims Surgery is an important treatment for Crohn's disease [CD], but recurrence occurs in up to 80% of individuals post-operatively. The efficacy of several drugs to prevent post-operative recurrence has been studied in previous meta-analyses, but a number of randomized controlled trials [RCTs] have recently been published. We therefore performed an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis to investigate this issue. Methods We performed a comprehensive literature search through to July 2018 to identify RCTs investigating the endoscopic and clinical recurrence of CD at 12 months post-operatively. We performed a random-effects network meta-analysis to produce a pooled relative risk [RR] with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]. We ranked the treatments according to their P-score. Results We included 10 RCTs, containing 751 patients, in our primary analysis of endoscopic recurrence of CD at 12 months. Anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF]- therapies were significantly better than placebo, either alone [P-score 0.98, RR 0.13; 95% CI 0.04-0.39] or in combination with 5-aminosalicylates [5-ASAs] [P-score 0.81, RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.12-0.75], or 5-nitroimidazoles [P-score 0.75, RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.23-0.69]. Combination therapy with a thiopurine and 5-nitroimidazole was also more effective than placebo [P-score 0.59, RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.40-0.80], as was thiopurine monotherapy [P-score 0.31, RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.74-0.94]. However, neither 5-nitroimidazoles nor 5-ASAs alone were superior to placebo. Conclusions In network meta-analysis, anti-TNF- therapies alone, or in combination, appear to be the best medications for preventing endoscopic post-operative recurrence of CD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据