4.5 Article

Increasing the dose of prednisolone during viral infections reduces the risk of relapse in nephrotic syndrome: a randomised controlled trial

期刊

ARCHIVES OF DISEASE IN CHILDHOOD
卷 93, 期 3, 页码 226-228

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/adc.2007.116079

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Relapses of nelphrotic syndrome are often a; triggered by viral upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), possibly mediated by cytokine release. Objective: To test, in a randomised double-blind placelbo-controlled crossover trial, the hypothesis that a small short-term increase in the dose of prednisolone will reduce the release of cytokines and thereby reduce the risk of relapse. Methods: Sequential patients receiving low-dose (< 0.6 mg/kg) prednisolone on alternate days as maintenance therapy were recruited. At the first sign of a presumed viral URTI, all children were examined and randomly allocated to take medicine A or B (containing either prednisolone (5 mg) or placebo) in the first viral URTI, and vice versa in the second. If the criteria for diagnosis of a viral URTI were met, the new medicine was prescribed on alternate days for 1 week at the same dose as that of the prednisolone being taken by the patient on an alternate-day basis. A freshly voided urine sample was tested each morning. The presence of 3+ proteinuria for 3 consecutive days was diagnostic of relapse. Results: 48 patients were recruited, and 40 completed the trial (29 male; 11 female). Age at entry ranged from 1.5 to 13.2 (median 5.3) years. The relapse rate after viral URTI was 19/40 (48%) in the placebo group and 7/40 (18%) in the prednisolone group (p = 0.014; two-sided probability using Fisher's exact test). Conclusion: Prescribing prednisolone daily for 7 consecutive days at the same dose as that taken by the patient on an alternate-day basis at the onset of a presumed viral URTI significantly reduces the risk of relapse in children with steroid-dependent nephrotic syndrome.

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

4.5
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