Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Tratamiento de reemplazo de enzimas pancreáticas para pacientes con fibrosis quística

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008227.pub2Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 13 octubre 2014see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Fibrosis quística y enfermedades genéticas

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2014 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Usha Rani Somaraju

    Correspondencia a: Department of Biochemistry, Malla Reddy Medical College for Women, Hyderabad, India

    [email protected]

  • Arturo Solis‐Moya

    Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Nacional de Niños, San José, Costa Rica

Contributions of authors

Protocol stage: Paramita Cifelli and Robyn Huggins partly drafted the protocol with significant contributions from Alan Smyth.

Review stage: Usha Rani Somaraju and Arturo Solis Moya both selected trials for inclusion in the review, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Usha Rani Somaraju drafted the review with comments from Arturo Solis Moya. Usha Rani Somaraju is guarantor of the review.

Declarations of interest

None of the authors has any interests to declare.

Acknowledgements

Nikki Jahnke and Tracey Remmington have both given considerable advice and support in the drafting of the protocol. Nikki Jahnke also extended considerable support for the development of the review.

The current review team would like to thank the authors who worked on the protocol for this review ‐ Paramita Cifelli, Robyn Huggins and Alan Smyth. They would also like to thank Dhruv Rastogi for his contribution to the early stages of the full review.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2020 Aug 06

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

Review

Usha Rani R Somaraju, Arturo Solis-Moya

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008227.pub4

2016 Nov 23

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

Review

Usha Rani Somaraju, Arturo Solis‐Moya

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008227.pub3

2014 Oct 13

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

Review

Usha Rani Somaraju, Arturo Solis‐Moya

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008227.pub2

2010 Jan 20

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy for people with cystic fibrosis

Protocol

Paramita Cifelli, Robyn Huggins, Alan R Smyth, Dhruv Rastogi

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008227

Keywords

MeSH

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Forest plot of comparison: 2 ECM versus ECT, outcome: 2.2 Stool frequency [number/day].
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Forest plot of comparison: 2 ECM versus ECT, outcome: 2.2 Stool frequency [number/day].

Forest plot of comparison: 2 ECM versus ECT, outcome: 2.3 Abdominal pain [% days].
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Forest plot of comparison: 2 ECM versus ECT, outcome: 2.3 Abdominal pain [% days].

Forest plot of comparison: 2 ECM versus ECT, outcome: 2.4 FFE [g/day].
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Forest plot of comparison: 2 ECM versus ECT, outcome: 2.4 FFE [g/day].

Comparison 1 ECM versus NECT + adjuvant cimetidine, Outcome 1 Change in weight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 ECM versus NECT + adjuvant cimetidine, Outcome 1 Change in weight.

Comparison 1 ECM versus NECT + adjuvant cimetidine, Outcome 2 Stool frequency.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 ECM versus NECT + adjuvant cimetidine, Outcome 2 Stool frequency.

Comparison 1 ECM versus NECT + adjuvant cimetidine, Outcome 3 Abdominal pain.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 ECM versus NECT + adjuvant cimetidine, Outcome 3 Abdominal pain.

Comparison 1 ECM versus NECT + adjuvant cimetidine, Outcome 4 FFE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 ECM versus NECT + adjuvant cimetidine, Outcome 4 FFE.

Comparison 2 ECM versus ECT, Outcome 1 Change in weight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 ECM versus ECT, Outcome 1 Change in weight.

Comparison 2 ECM versus ECT, Outcome 2 Stool frequency.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 ECM versus ECT, Outcome 2 Stool frequency.

Comparison 2 ECM versus ECT, Outcome 3 Abdominal pain.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 ECM versus ECT, Outcome 3 Abdominal pain.

Comparison 2 ECM versus ECT, Outcome 4 FFE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 ECM versus ECT, Outcome 4 FFE.

Comparison 3 ECM versus ECMM, Outcome 1 FFE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 ECM versus ECMM, Outcome 1 FFE.

Comparison 4 Creon® versus Pancrease®, Outcome 1 Co‐efficient of fat absorption.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Creon® versus Pancrease®, Outcome 1 Co‐efficient of fat absorption.

Comparison 5 ECM versus TPE, Outcome 1 FFE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 ECM versus TPE, Outcome 1 FFE.

Table 1. Glossary of terms

Term/abbreviation

Definition

BMI

body mass index

CF

cystic fibrosis

CFA

coefficient of fat absorption

chyme

the semi‐fluid mass of partly digested food expelled by the stomach into the duodenum

DIOS

distal intestinal obstruction syndrome

ECM

enteric coated microspheres

FFE

faecal fat excretion

hyperuricaemia

an excess of uric acid in the blood

hyperuricosuria

the presence of excessive amounts of uric acid in the urine

Ileocecum

the combined ileum (end of the small intestine) and cecum (start of the large intestine)

NECM

non‐enteric coated microspheres

PERT

pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy

PI

pancreatic insufficiency

porcine

relating to or suggesting swine (pigs)

RCT

randomised controlled trial

steatorrhoea

loss of fat in the stools

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Glossary of terms
Comparison 1. ECM versus NECT + adjuvant cimetidine

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Change in weight Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 At 1 month

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Stool frequency Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 At 1 month

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Abdominal pain Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 At 1 month

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 FFE Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4.1 At 1 month

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. ECM versus NECT + adjuvant cimetidine
Comparison 2. ECM versus ECT

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Change in weight Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 At 1 month

2

82

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.32 [‐0.03, 0.67]

2 Stool frequency Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 At 1 month

2

82

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.58 [‐0.85, ‐0.30]

3 Abdominal pain Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

3.1 At 1 month

2

82

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐7.96 [‐12.97, ‐2.94]

4 FFE Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

4.1 At 1 month

2

66

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐11.79 [‐17.42, ‐6.15]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. ECM versus ECT
Comparison 3. ECM versus ECMM

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 FFE Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 At 1 month

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 3. ECM versus ECMM
Comparison 4. Creon® versus Pancrease®

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Co‐efficient of fat absorption Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 At 1 month

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 4. Creon® versus Pancrease®
Comparison 5. ECM versus TPE

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 FFE Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 At 1 month

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 5. ECM versus TPE