Search

Increasingly the management of TMJ pathology is becoming a subspecialist interest. The number of patients having TMJ joint replacement had steadily increased over the last decade and there is now NICE guidance on this matter. Whilst the evidence of the management of TMJ disease is limited and there are few randomised controlled trials, the incidence of TMJ pathology has not changed and there is a requirement for guidance on the management. Whilst previously patients with TMJ pain were managed surgically, this is changing, and the vast bulk of initial management is non-surgical/medical. This paper will review the literature on TMD and provide guidance for management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Repurposing hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) as antiviral agents is a re-emerging topic with the advent of new viral epidemics. To summarize evidence from human clinical studies for using HCQ or CQ as antiviral agents for any viral infection. PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science for published studies without time or language restrictions; Cochrane Clinical Trial Registry and Chinese Clinical Trials Registry for trials registered after 2015; MedRxiv for preprints within the last 12 months. Study eligibility criteria were interventional and prospective observational studies (with or without a control group). Participants were adults and children with a confirmed viral infection. Interventions included the use of CQ or HCQ as antiviral agent in one or more groups of the study. Two authors independently screened abstracts, and all authors agreed on eligible studies. A meta-analysis was planned if studies were available which were similar in terms of participants, intervention, comparator and outcomes. Nineteen studies (including two preprints) were eligible (HIV 8, HCV 2, dengue 2, chikungunya 1, COVID-19 6). Nine and ten studies assessed CQ and HCQ respectively. Benefits of either drug for viral load suppression in HIV are inconsistent. CQ is ineffective in curing dengue (high-certainty evidence) and may have little or no benefit in curing chikungunya (low-certainty evidence). The evidence for COVID-19 infection is rapidly evolving but at this stage we are unsure whether either CQ or HCQ has any benefit in clearing viraemia (very-low-certainty evidence). Using HCQ or CQ for HIV/HCV infections is now clinically irrelevant as other effective antivirals are available for viral load suppression (HIV) and cure (HCV). There is no benefit of CQ in dengue, and the same conclusion is likely for chikungunya. More evidence is needed to confirm whether either HCQ or CQ is beneficial in COVID-19 infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To evaluate the evidence for use of different formulations of amphotericin B (AmB), minimum effective dose for each formulation and its comparative efficacy against other drugs in achieving definitive cure of visceral leishmaniasis. Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis included following data sources: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL. Controlled prospective clinical trials (randomized or nonrandomized, including dose-ranging studies) conducted between 1996 and 2017 with at least one treatment group receiving AmB were included (published data only). The primary outcome was definitive cure at 6 months. Adverse events and mortality were assessed as secondary outcomes. The PROSPERO registration number for this review is CRD42017067488. Results Thirty-one studies (26 from India) that enrolled 6903 patients into 84 study groups met the selection criteria. In India, liposomal AmB was not inferior to AmB deoxycholate (relative risk 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96–1.03, two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 514 participants, high-quality evidence), and a single dose of the earlier formulation as low as 3.75 mg/kg achieved a cure rate of over 89% (95% CI 70.6–97.2). AmB deoxycholate was as effective as miltefosine (relative risk 0.99, 95% CI 0.95–1.03, two trials, 523 participants, high-quality evidence) and may be better than paromomycin (relative risk 1.04, 95% CI 1.02–1.07, one trial, 667 participants, low-quality evidence) in achieving definitive cure. Conclusions AmB is an efficacious drug in the Indian subcontinent. Further evidence is needed from prospective clinical trials in other endemic geographical regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]