Cochrane Db Syst Rev
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Jan 2004
Review Meta AnalysisIntrauterine insemination versus fallopian tube sperm perfusion for non tubal infertility.
Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) together with intrauterine insemination (IUI) is commonly offered to couples with infertility factors not involving the fallopian tubes. Intrauterine insemination gained its popularity because it is simple, non-invasive and cost-effective technique. Another simple non invasive method was introduced called fallopian tube sperm perfusion (FSP). This technique was developed to ensure the presence of higher sperm densities in the fallopian tubes at the time of ovulation than standard IUI provides. Fallopian tube sperm perfusion is based on pressure injection of 4 ml of sperm suspension with attempt of sealing of the cervix to prevent semen reflux. The IUI technique on the other hand is based on intrauterine injection of 0.5 ml of sperm suspension without flushing the tubes. A number of randomised controlled trials have been published comparing the efficacy of FSP with standard IUI. There were considerable variations in the results. The aim of this review was to determine whether outcomes differ between FSP and IUI in improving the probability of conception. ⋯ FSP may be more effective for non-tubal subfertility, but the significant heterogeneity should be taken into account. As a result no advice based on the meta-analysis could be given for the treatment of non-tubal subfertility. Subgroup analysis, which did not show evidence of statistical heterogeneity, suggested that couples with unexplained infertility may benefit from FSP over IUI in terms of higher pregnancy rates. FSP may therefore be advised in couples with unexplained subfertility. Results suggested the possibility of differential effectiveness of FSP depending on catheter choice.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Jan 2004
Review Meta AnalysisPlatinum containing regimens for metastatic breast cancer.
Studies have reported high tumour response rates for platinum-containing regimens in the treatment of women with metastatic breast cancer. ⋯ In view of the significant excess toxicity, lack of progression or survival benefit and the availability of less toxic active agents it is difficult to justify the use of platinum-containing regimens, particularly as first line treatment for women with metastatic breast cancer in routine clinical practice. Ongoing trials are examining the possibility of synergy between platins and trastuzamab, a monoclonal antibody treatment. No randomised trials containing oxalplatin were identified for the present review.
-
Cochrane Db Syst Rev · Jan 2004
Review Meta AnalysisChinese herbal medicines for type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Traditional Chinese herbal medicines have been used for a long time to treat diabetes, and many controlled trials have been done to investigate their efficacy. ⋯ Some herbal medicines show hypoglycaemic effects in type 2 diabetes. However, these findings should be carefully interpreted due to the low methodological quality, small sample size, and limited number of trials. In the light of some positive findings, some herbal medicines deserve further examination in high-quality trials.
-
For centuries, there has been controversy around whether being upright (sitting, birthing stools, chairs, squatting) or lying down have advantages for women delivering their babies. ⋯ The tentative findings of this review suggest several possible benefits for upright posture, with the possibility of increased risk of blood loss greater than 500 ml. Women should be encouraged to give birth in the position they find most comfortable. Until such time as the benefits and risks of various delivery positions are estimated with greater certainty, when methodologically stringent trials' data are available, women should be allowed to make informed choices about the birth positions in which they might wish to assume for delivery of their babies.
-
Hepatitis C virus may cause liver inflammation and fibrosis. It is not known whether glucocorticosteroids are beneficial or harmful for patients with hepatitis C infection. ⋯ There is insufficient evidence neither to confirm nor exclude both beneficial and harmful effects of glucocorticosteroids for chronic hepatitis C with or without autoimmune disorders. This Review is not able to rule out potential serious adverse effects of glucocorticosteroids. Therefore, this Review cannot establish whether glucocorticosteroids treatment can be safely administrated for indications requiring glucocorticosteroids without analysing for hepatitis C virus. The effect of glucocorticosteroids for acute hepatitis C has not been examined in randomised trials.