Search

BackgroundIn recent years, severe pain after perianal surgery has seriously affected the prognosis of hospitalized patients. How to maximize the improvement of postoperative pain and perioperative comfort becomes particularly important.MethodsThis study was a double-blind randomized controlled trial (Registration No.: ChiCTR2100048760, Registration Date: 16 July 2021, Link: www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=130226), and patients were randomly divided into two groups: one group underwent postoperative 20 mL bilateral pudendal nerve block with 0.5% ropivacaine (P group), and the other group underwent postoperative 20 mL bilateral pudendal nerve block with 0.5% ropivacaine + 8 mg dexamethasone (PD group). The primary outcome was the incidence of moderate to severe pain at the first postoperative dressing change. Secondary outcomes included Quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) score at 3 days after surgery, sleep quality, pain score at 3 days after surgery, and incidence of adverse events.ResultsIn the main outcome indicators, the incidence was 41.7% in the P group and 24.2% in the PD group (p = 0.01). The QoR-15 score and sleep quality in PD group were better than those in P group 2 days before surgery. The incidence of postoperative urinary retention was significantly decreased in PD group (p = 0.01).ConclusionLocal anesthesia with dexamethasone combined with pudendal nerve block after perianal surgery can reduce the incidence of moderate to severe pain during the first dressing change. This may be one of the approaches to multimodal analgesia after perianal surgery.Clinical Trial Registrationhttps://www.chictr.org.cn/, identifier ChiCTR2100048760.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound global impact, although the majority of recently infected cases have presented with mild to moderate symptoms. Previous clinical studies have demonstrated that Shufeng Jiedu (SFJD) capsule, a Chinese herbal patent medicine, effectively alleviates symptoms associated with the common cold, H1N1 influenza, and COVID-19. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of SFJD capsules in managing symptoms of mild to moderate COVID-19 infection.Methods: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted from May to December 2022 at two hospitals in China. Mild and moderate COVID-19-infected patients presenting respiratory symptoms within 3 days from onset were randomly assigned to either the SFJD or placebo groups in a 1:1 ratio. Individuals received SFJD capsules or a placebo three times daily for five consecutive days. Participants were followed up for more than 14 days after their RT-PCR nucleoid acid test for SARS-CoV-2 turned negative. The primary outcome measure was time to alleviate COVID-19 symptoms from baseline until the end of follow-up.Results: A total of 478 participants were screened; ultimately, 407 completed the trial after randomization (SFJD, n = 203; placebo, n = 204). No statistically significant difference in baseline parameters was observed between the two groups. The median time to alleviate all symptoms was 7 days in the SFJD group compared to 8 days in the placebo group (p = 0.037). Notably, the SFJD group significantly attenuated fever/chills (p = 0.04) and headache (p = 0.016) compared to the placebo group. Furthermore, the median time taken to reach normal body temperature within 24 h was reduced by 7 hours in the SFJD group compared to the placebo group (p = 0.033). No deaths or instances of serious or critical conditions occurred during this trial period; moreover, no serious adverse events were reported.Conclusion: The trial was conducted in a unique controlled hospital setting, and the 5-day treatment with SFJD capsules resulted in a 1-day reduction in overall symptoms, particularly headache and fever/chills, among COVID-19-infected participants with mild or moderate symptoms. Compared to placebo, SFJD capsules were found to be safe with fewer side effects. SFJD capsules could potentially serve as an effective treatment for alleviating mild to moderate symptoms of COVID-19.Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.isrctn.com/, identifier ISRCTN14236594.

Aims:This study aimed to synthesize the evidence of the comparative effectiveness and safety of Ophiocordyceps sinensis (OS) preparations combined with renin–angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) for diabetic kidney disease (DKD).Methods:Eight databases were searched from their inception to May 2023. Systematic reviews (SRs) of OS preparations combined with RASi for DKD were identified. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the included SRs and additional searching were performed for data pooling. Cochrane risk-of-bias 2 (RoB 2) tool and AMSTAR 2 were used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs and SRs, respectively. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to compare the add-on effect and safety of OS preparations for DKD. The certainty of evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.Results:Fourteen SRs were included, whose methodological quality was assessed as high (1/14) or critically low (13/14). After combining additional searching, 157 RCTs were included, involving 13,143 participants. The quality of the RCTs showed some concerns (155/157) or high risk (2/157). Jinshuibao capsules and tablets, Bailing capsules and tablets, and Zhiling capsules were evaluated. Compared to RASi, adding either of the OS capsular preparations resulted in a decreased 24-h urinary total protein levels. OS preparations ranked differently in each outcome. Jinshuibao capsules plus RASi were beneficial in reducing urinary protein, serum creatinine, serum urea nitrogen, and blood glucose levels, with moderate-certainty evidence. No serious adverse events were observed after adding OS to RASi.Conclusion:Combining OS capsular preparations with RASi appeared to be associated with decreased urinary total protein levels in DKD patients. Further high-quality studies are needed to confirm.Systematic Review Registration:INPASY202350066.

Conclusion: SMS used alone or combined with WM may have potential effectiveness on symptom alleviation, ECG recovery rate, myocardial injury markers, and cardiac function, but the effectiveness is uncertain due to the low quality and absence of placebo-controlled trials. The exact efficacy of SMS for VMC needs to be confirmed by high-quality double-blind RCTs in the future.