Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

鎌状赤血球病患者における下腿潰瘍を治療するための介入

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Appendices

Appendix 1. Glossary of medical terms.

Terms

Definition

Source

Hb SS

An abnormal hemoglobin resulting from the substitution of valine for glutamic acid at position 6 of the beta chain of the globin moiety. The heterozygous state results in sickle cell trait, the homozygous in sickle cell anemia.

Nattional Library of Medicine; Mesh home page.

Hb SC

One of the sickle cell disorders characterized by the presence of both hemoglobin S and hemoglobin C. It is similar to, but less severe than sickle cell anemia.

Nattional Library of Medicine; Mesh home page.

L‐carnitine

A derivative of the amino acid lysine , required for the transport of fatty acids into mitochondria for oxidation.

Bender 2009 

Solcoseryl®

 

 

 DuoDerm

Solcoseryl® is a tissue metabolism activator, chemically and biologically standardized and deproteinised, non antigenic and apyrogenic hemodialized extract form the blood of healthy young calf. Solcoseryl® contains a large amount of natural low molecular substances ‐ glycolipides, nucleosides, nucleotides, amino acids, oligopeptides, irreplaceable micro elements, electrolytes.

 

Duoderm (Granuflex®, Convatec, Uxbridge, UK, marketed as DuoDerm® in the USA) A hydrocolloid dressing containing colloids and elastomeric and adhesive components.

 

 http://www.drugspro.org/

 

 

O'Meara 2000

RGD peptide matrix

Arginine‐glycine‐aspartic acid (RGD). RGD peptide matrix is designed to act as a temporary, topical synthetic extracellular matrix that substitutes for the damaged natural matrix and provides support for cell ingrowth into the ulcer site. This synthetic matrix consists of an RGD‐containing peptide complexed with sodium hyaluronate in a sterile, non preserved viscous gel.

Arginine‐glycine–aspartic acid (RGD) peptide matrix (Argidene Gel®, formerly Telio‐Derm Gel®, Telios Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA, USA) The peptide matrix contains the
arginine‐glycine‐aspartic acid amino acid sequence, by which cells in vivo become attached to extracellular matrix macromolecules via surface integrin receptors. The matrix is a sterile non‐preserved clear viscous gel, formulated in phosphate‐buffered saline and dispensed from a single‐use syringe container. The functional ingredient of RGD peptide matrix is a complex formed by the combination of a synthetic 18 amino acid peptide and sodium hyaluronate. It also contains added unconjugated sodium hyaluronate as a viscosity‐increasing agent, and therefore does not require preparation from patient samples.

Wethers 1994

O'Meara 2000

Isoxsuprine

ß‐Adrenergic receptor stimulants drug.

http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov

Oral zinc sulphate

A salt of zinc used as a supplement for treating zinc deficiency

Bender 2009

 

Arginine butyrate

The butyric acid salt of the amino acid arginine.

http://www.cancer.gov/drugdictionary

Haemoglobinopathy

Any of a group of inherited diseases, such as thalassaemia and sickle‐cell disease , in which there is an abnormality in the production of haemoglobin.

Martin 2011

Priapism

Persistent and usually painful erection of the penis that requires urgent decompression; occasionally, however, it can be painless, in which case its treatment is less urgent.

Martin 2011

Pulmonary hypertension

Condition in which there is raised blood pressure within the blood vessels supplying the lungs (the pulmonary artery blood pressure is normally much lower than the pressure within the aorta and its branches).

Martin 2011

Nitric oxide

An important member of the group of gaseous mediators, which – together with amine mediators (e.g. adrenaline, noradrenaline, histamine, acetylcholine) and lipid mediators (e.g. prostaglandins) – produce many physiological responses

Martin 2011

Endothelium

The single layer of cells that lines the heart, blood vessels, and lymphatic vessels.

Martin 2011

Antithrombin III

Coagulation inhibitory protein

Santen 2004

Appendix 2. Bias definition

Bias (Porta 2008)

Definition

Bias in the presentation

of data

Error due to irregularities produced bi digit preference, incomplete data,

poor techniques of measurement, technically poor laboratory procedures,

or intentional attempts to mislead.

Selection bias

Distortions that result from procedures used to select subjects and from factors that

influence participation in the study.

Reporting bias

Selective revealing or suppression of information.

Design bias

The difference between a true value and that obtained as a result

of faulty design of a study.

Appendix 3. Outcome definitions as described by the RCTs' author

Trials

Assessment of ulcer healing

Change in ulcer size (surface area or volume)

Complete closure

Baum 1987

"Ulcer was measured in two dimensions and photographs taken for determination of ulcer" as described by Serjeant 1970.

La Grenade 1993

It was analysed from the measured long and short dimensions of the ulcer, arbitrarily assuming and elliptical shape.

It was expressed as in real changes and percentage changes in area.

McMahon 2010

"During the weekly clinical visits, the ulcer was traced on acetate film and photographed. All ulcer areas were then calculated by computerized planimetry, using the IMAGEJ software (NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA)".

NA

Complete closure of the ulcer (to an area of 0 cm2).

Serjeant 1977

"The ulcer periphery was defined on the photograph, cut out, weighed, and the area of the ulcer calculated from the weight/area ratio of the photographic paper".

Default: "defined as less than 4 months satisfactorily attendance at the trial".

No change: "variation of less than 1 cm2 in ulcer area during the 6‐month period".

Healed ulcers "expressed as a proportion of those ulcers likely to heal on the basis of small size (8 cm2).

Serjeant 1997

"Ulcer size was measured by area (measured in square centimeters), computing an assumed ellipse from long and short axis measurements. When more than one ulcer was present, the average area calculated for that patient was used in the analysis".

Period: 12 weeks.

"(1) absolute change in area (change in ulcer area over treatment period divided by number of weeks on treatment) x 12 and (2) percentage change in area (absolute change in area + area at start of treatment)".

Wethers 1994

"Changes in percent ulcer closure occurring between study commencement and endpoint".

Appendix 4. Unit of randomisation versus unit of analysis

Study

Unit of randomisation

Unit of analysis

 Baum 1987

 participants

ulcer 

 La Grenade 1993

 ulcer

 ulcer

 McMahon 2010

 participants

 ulcer

 Serjeant 1977

 participants

ulcer

 Serjeant 1997

 participants

participants 

 Wethers 1994

participants

participants

Appendix 5. LILACS search strategy

Key words

sickle cell disease
leg ulcer

((Pt ENSAYO CONTROLADO ALEATORIO OR Pt ENSAYO CLINICO CONTROLADO OR Mh ENSAYOS CONTROLADOS ALEATORIOS OR Mh DISTRIBUCIÓN ALEATORIA OR Mh METODO DOBLE CIEGO OR Mh METODO SIMPLECIEGO OR Pt ESTUDIO MULTICÉNTRICO) or ((tw ensaio or tw ensayo or tw trial) and (tw azar or tw acaso or tw placebo or tw control$ or tw aleat$ or tw random$ or (tw duplo and tw cego) or (tw doble and tw ciego) or (tw double and tw blind)) and tw clinic$)) AND NOT ((Ct ANIMALES OR Mh ANIMALES OR Ct CONEJOS OR Ct RATÓN OR MH Ratas OR MH Primates OR MH Perros OR MH Conejos OR MH Porcinos) AND NOT (Ct HUMANO AND Ct ANIMALES)) [Palabras] and sickle [Palabras del resumen] and ulcer [Palabras] (Strategy results:10)

Appendix 6. African Index Medicus (AIM) search strategy

Key words

sickle cell disease
leg ulcer
wound

Search result: 0 references.

Appendix 7. ISI Web of Knowledge

Key words

sickle
leg ulcer
Search result: 47 references.

original image
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Flowchart of last search of the Group's Trials Register: 25 May 2012.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Flowchart of last search of the Group's Trials Register: 25 May 2012.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias domain presented as percentages across all included studies
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias domain presented as percentages across all included studies

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias domain for each included study
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 4

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias domain for each included study

Comparison 1 L‐carnitine versus placebo, Outcome 1 Change in ulcer size (surface area or volume).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 L‐carnitine versus placebo, Outcome 1 Change in ulcer size (surface area or volume).

Comparison 2 RGD peptide matrix versus placebo, Outcome 1 Incidence of complete closure.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 RGD peptide matrix versus placebo, Outcome 1 Incidence of complete closure.

Comparison 2 RGD peptide matrix versus placebo, Outcome 2 Change in size of ulcers healed.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 RGD peptide matrix versus placebo, Outcome 2 Change in size of ulcers healed.

Comparison 2 RGD peptide matrix versus placebo, Outcome 3 Adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 RGD peptide matrix versus placebo, Outcome 3 Adverse events.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Isoxuprine compared to placebo for leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease

Isoxuprine compared to placebo for leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease

Patient or population: patients with leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease
Settings:
Intervention: Isoxuprine
Comparison: placebo

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of Participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

placebo

Isoxuprine

Incidence of complete closure
Follow‐up: 6 months

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

54 ulcers
(1 study; Serjeant 1977)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

This trial shows inconsistency between units of randomisation (30 participants) and unit of analysis (54 ulcers).

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 Sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding: unclear. Incomplete outcome data and selective report.
2 Underpowered for this outcome.
3 Few ulcers (N= 54) and healed ulcers (N = 11).

CI: confidence interval

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Isoxuprine compared to placebo for leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease
Summary of findings 2. Arginine butyrate plus standard local care compared to standard local care for sickle cell in people with sickle cell disease

arginine butyrate plus standard local care compared to standard local care for sickle cell in people with sickle cell disease

Patient or population: sickle cell in people with sickle cell disease
Settings:
Intervention: arginine butyrate plus standard local care
Comparison: standard local care

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of Participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

standard local care

arginine butyrate plus standard local care

Complete healing
Follow‐up: 12 weeks

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

23 participants

62 ulcers
(1 study; McMahon 2010)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

This trial shows inconsistency between units of randomisation (23 participants) and unit of analysis (62 ulcers).

Change in ulcer size
Follow‐up: 12 weeks

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

(1 study; McMahon 2010)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

This trial shows inconsistency between units of randomisation (23 participants) and unit of analysis (62 ulcers).

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 Unclear allocation concealment
2 Underpowered for this outcome.
3 Few participants (23 participants; 62 ulcers) and events (N = 13 complete closure).

CI: confidence interval

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 2. Arginine butyrate plus standard local care compared to standard local care for sickle cell in people with sickle cell disease
Summary of findings 3. L‐carnitine compared to placebo for leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease

L‐carnitine compared to placebo for leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease

Patient or population: leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease
Settings:
Intervention: L‐carnitine
Comparison: placebo

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of Participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

placebo

L‐carnitine

Change in ulcer size
Follow‐up: 12 weeks

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

15
(1 study; Serjeant 1997)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

Mean difference: ‐3.90 (95% CI ‐13.44 to 5.64).

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 Random sequence generation: unclear.
2 Underpowered for this outcome.
3 Few participants (N = 15). Blinding levels were not described.

CI: confidence interval

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 3. L‐carnitine compared to placebo for leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease
Summary of findings 4. RGD peptide matrix compared to placebo for leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease

RGD peptide matrix compared to placebo for leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease

Patient or population: patients with leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease
Settings:
Intervention: RGD peptide matrix
Comparison: placebo

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of Participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

placebo

RGD peptide matrix

Complete closure
Follow‐up: 10 weeks

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

55
(1 study; Wethers 1994)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

Risk ratio: 0.40 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.04).

Change in size ulcers healed
cm2
Follow‐up: 10 weeks

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

55
(1 study; Wethers 1994)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

Mean difference: 6.60 (95% CI 5.51 to 7.69).

Total adverse events
Follow‐up: 10 weeks

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

55
(1 study; Wethers 1994)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

Risk ratio: 0.76 (95 CI 0.50 to 1.17).

Related study treatment adverse events
Follow‐up: 10 weeks

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

33
(1 study; Wethers 1994)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low1,2,3

Risk Ratio: 1.41 (95% CI 0.27 to 7.38).

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 Sequence generation and allocation concealment: unclear
2 Underpowered to address this outcome
3 Few participants (N = 55) and events (N = 14)

CI: confidence interval

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings 4. RGD peptide matrix compared to placebo for leg ulcer in people with sickle cell disease
Comparison 1. L‐carnitine versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Change in ulcer size (surface area or volume) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 All randomised patients

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. L‐carnitine versus placebo
Comparison 2. RGD peptide matrix versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Incidence of complete closure Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Change in size of ulcers healed Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Adverse events Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 Total

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Related study treatment

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. RGD peptide matrix versus placebo