Ornidazole and Secnidazole in the Treatment of Symptomatic Intestinal Amoebiasis in Childhood

Toppare, Mete F.; Kitapci, Füsun; Senses, Dursun Alí; Yalçınkaya, Fatoş; Kaya, İlyas; Dilmen, U

doi:10.1177/004947559402400423

Cited by 6 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eight trials did not state the study setting. One trial treated most participants as outpatients but treated a few with severe symptoms in the hospital (Toppare 1994). In another trial, patients were initially hospitalized for one day, then were followed up as outpatients (Guevara 1980).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Six trials explicitly stated that stool bacterial culture was done before enrolment; five trials included only those found to be negative for pathogenic bacteria (Toppare 1994; Karabay 1999; Rossignol 2001; Rossignol 2007; Savas‐Erdeve 2009), and one trial analysed those found to be positive for Shigella separately from those positive for E histolytica (Nnochiri 1967). The remaining trials did not examine or mention concomitant infection with other intestinal pathogens or bacteria.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Seven trials followed participants only until the end of the treatment period (Kapadia 1968; Batra 1972; Pudjiadi 1973; Prasad 1985; Chunge 1989; Asrani 1995; Shah 2016). Duration of follow‐up was less than 15 days and ranged from 7 to 14 days in 10 trials (Huggins 1982; Sitepu 1982; Toppare 1994; Mohammed 1998; Padilla 2000; Rossignol 2001; Davila 2002; Rossignol 2007; Savas‐Erdeve 2009; Siddiqui 2015). Seventeen trials had a duration of follow‐up of about four weeks, and two of about three weeks.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nine trials presented the duration of time from start of treatment until resolution of diarrhoea and other clinical symptoms but measured this in a variety of ways: range in hours (Batra 1972), number of days (Naoemar 1973; Pudjiadi 1973; Karabay 1999), mean duration in days and standard deviation (Mansour‐Ghanaei 2003), median and range in days (Toppare 1994; Savas‐Erdeve 2009), median time in days (Rossignol 2001), and survival analysis of time from first dose to passage of last unformed stools (Rossignol 2007). Two trials reported the duration of time from start of treatment to disappearance of E histolytica from stools (Naoemar 1973; Pudjiadi 1973).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eight trials assessed clinical failure 1 to 14 days after end of treatment (Kapadia 1968; Batra 1972; Panggabean 1980; Sitepu 1982; Toppare 1994; Savas‐Erdeve 2009; Siddiqui 2015; Shah 2016). Kapadia 1968 showed chlorhydroxyquinoline to be probably more effective than diiodohydroxyquinoline in reducing clinical failure (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.53; 100 participants, 1 trial).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Antiamoebic drugs for treating amoebic colitis

Gonzales

Dans

Sio‐Aguilar

2019

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Infection with the protozoan Entamoeba histolytica is common in low‐ and middle‐income countries, and up to 100,000 people with severe disease die every year. Adequate therapy for amoebic colitis is necessary to reduce illness, prevent development of complicated disease and extraintestinal spread, and decrease transmission. Objectives To evaluate antiamoebic drugs for treating amoebic colitis. Search methods We searched the available literature up to 22 March 2018. We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, m RCT, and conference proceedings. We contacted individual researchers, organizations, and pharmaceutical companies, and we checked reference lists. Selection criteria Randomized controlled trials of antiamoebic drugs given alone or in combination, compared with placebo or another antiamoebic drug, for treating adults and children with a diagnosis of amoebic colitis. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and methodological quality of trials and extracted and analysed the data. We calculated clinical and parasitological failure rates and rates of relapse and adverse events as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using a random‐effects model. We determined statistical heterogeneity and explored possible sources of heterogeneity using subgroup analyses. We carried out sensitivity analysis by using trial quality to assess the robustness of reported results. Main results In total, 41 trials (4999 participants) met the inclusion criteria of this review. In this update, we added four trials to the 37 trials included in the first published review version. Thirty trials were published over 20 years ago. Only one trial used adequate methods of randomization and allocation concealment, was blinded, and analysed all randomized participants. Only one trial used an E histolytica stool antigen test, and two trials used amoebic culture. Tinidazole may be more effective than metronidazole for reducing clinical failure (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.51; 477 participants, eight trials; low‐certainty evidence) and is probably associated with fewer adverse events (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.92; 477 participants, 8 trials; moderate‐certainty evidence). Compared with metronidazole, combination therapy may result in fewer parasitological failures (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.86; 720 participants, 3 trials; low‐certainty evidence), but we are uncertain which combination is more effective than another. Evidence is insufficient to allow conclusions regarding the efficacy of other antiamoebic drugs. Authors' conclusions Compared with metronidazole, tinidazole may be more effective in reducing clinical failur...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%