Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Glucocorticosteroides para lactantes con atresia biliar posterior a la portoenterostomía de Kasai

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008735.pub3Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 14 mayo 2018see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Hepatobiliar

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2018 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

  • Athanasios Tyraskis

    Department of Paediatric Surgery, King's College Hospital, London, UK

  • Christopher Parsons

    Specialist Neonatal and Paediatric Surgery, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK

  • Mark Davenport

    Correspondencia a: Department of Paediatric Surgery, King's College Hospital, London, UK

    [email protected]

Contributions of authors

AT prepared the updated protocol part of the review and the review.
PC prepared the updated protocol part of the review and the review.
MD prepared the updated protocol part of the review and the review.
All authors approved the final review version.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • None, Other.

External sources

  • None, Other.

Declarations of interest

Athanasios Tyraskis has nothing to declare.
Christopher Parsons has nothing to declare.
Mark Davenport is the author of a randomised controlled trial on the use of prednisolone after the Kasai portoenterostomy (Davenport 2007).

Acknowledgements

Peer reviewers: A Floreani, Italy; Masato Shinkai, Japan.
Contact editor: Luit Penninga, Denmark.
Sign‐off editor: Christian Gluud, Denmark.

Cochrane Review Group funding acknowledgement: The Danish State is the largest single funder of the Cochrane Hepato‐Biliary Group through its investment in The Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this protocol are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Danish State or The Copenhagen Trial Unit.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2018 May 14

Glucocorticosteroids for infants with biliary atresia following Kasai portoenterostomy

Review

Athanasios Tyraskis, Christopher Parsons, Mark Davenport

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008735.pub3

2016 Aug 11

Glucocorticosteroids for infants with biliary atresia following Kasai portoenterostomy

Protocol

Athanasios Tyraskis, Christopher Parsons, Mark Davenport

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008735.pub2

2010 Oct 06

Glucocorticosteroids for infants with biliary atresia following Kasai portoenterostomy

Protocol

Christopher Parsons, Mark Davenport

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008735

Differences between protocol and review

The protocol part of this review is a major update. The original protocol was first published in 2010 (Parsons 2010). The changes have been made to focus on the study outcomes as well as the methods of executing the study and analysing the data. Specifically, the primary and secondary outcomes have been rearranged with a focus on harm. Furthermore, we included significantly more detail regarding the statistical analysis and the methodology of Trial Sequential Analysis.
New lead review protocol author.

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.

Study flow diagram
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

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

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

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

Trial Sequential Analysis of no clearance of jaundice by six months post Kasai portoenterostomy
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 4

Trial Sequential Analysis of no clearance of jaundice by six months post Kasai portoenterostomy

Trial Sequentil Analysis for all‐cause mortality or liver transplantation at two years
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 5

Trial Sequentil Analysis for all‐cause mortality or liver transplantation at two years

Trial Sequential Analysis of no clearance of jaundice at six months in the subgroup of infants who were less than 70 days old at the time of Kasai portoenterostomy
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 6

Trial Sequential Analysis of no clearance of jaundice at six months in the subgroup of infants who were less than 70 days old at the time of Kasai portoenterostomy

Comparison 1 Primary outcomes, Outcome 1 All‐cause mortality.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Primary outcomes, Outcome 1 All‐cause mortality.

Comparison 1 Primary outcomes, Outcome 2 Serious adverse event.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Primary outcomes, Outcome 2 Serious adverse event.

Comparison 2 Secondary outcomes, Outcome 1 Infants who did not clear jaundice at six months.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Secondary outcomes, Outcome 1 Infants who did not clear jaundice at six months.

Comparison 2 Secondary outcomes, Outcome 2 All‐cause mortality or liver transplantation at two years.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Secondary outcomes, Outcome 2 All‐cause mortality or liver transplantation at two years.

Comparison 2 Secondary outcomes, Outcome 4 Subgroup analysis of infants operated on at age of < 70 days who did not clear their jaundice by six months post KPE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Secondary outcomes, Outcome 4 Subgroup analysis of infants operated on at age of < 70 days who did not clear their jaundice by six months post KPE.

Comparison 2 Secondary outcomes, Outcome 5 Subgroup analysis of infants operated on at age of > 69 days who did not clear their jaundice by six months post KPE.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Secondary outcomes, Outcome 5 Subgroup analysis of infants operated on at age of > 69 days who did not clear their jaundice by six months post KPE.

Glucocorticosteroids for infants with biliary atresia following Kasai portoenterostomy

Patient or population: infants with biliary atresia

Settings: hospitals

Intervention: glucocorticosteroids

Comparison: placebo

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Risk Ratio
(95% CI)

Number (no) of infants
(no of RCTs)

Certainty of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Placebo

Glucocorticosteroids

All‐cause mortality

six months after Kasai portoenterostomy

19 per 1000

19 per 1000
(3 to 131)

1.00

(0.14 to 6.90)

104 placebo

107 treatment
(2 RCTs, Bezerra 2014; Davenport 2007)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

Serious adverse event,

two years follow‐up

800 per 1000

814 per 1000
(708 to 977)

1.02

(0.87 to 1.20)

70 placebo

70 treatment
(1 RCT, Bezerra 2014)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low2

A significantly higher proportion of the treatment group had their first serious adverse event in the first 30 days after their Kasai portoenterostomy.

Health‐related quality of life

There are no data for this outcome in the included trials.

Infants who did not clear jaundice at six months

514 per 1000

452 per 1000
(303 to 529)

0.89

(0.67 to 1.17)

107 placebo

104 treatment
(2 RCTs, Bezerra 2014; Davenport 2007)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

The required information size for significance for the Trial Sequential Analysis was 540. The number of infants included in this meta‐analysis was 211, corresponding to 39.1% of the required information size.

All‐cause mortality or liver transplantation at two years

402 per 1000

404 per 1000
(291 to 562)

1.00 (0.72 to 1.39)

107 placebo

104 treatment
(2 RCTs, Bezerra 2014; Davenport 2007)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

The required information size for significance for the Trial Sequential Analysis was 1774. The number of infants included in this meta‐analysis was 211, corresponding to 11.9% of the required information size.

Subgroup analysis of infants operated on at less than 70 days of age who did not clear their jaundice by six months after Kasai portoenterostomy

516 per 1000

381 per 1000
(210 to 423)

0.75 (0.55 to 1.11)

64 placebo

63 treatment
(2 RCTs, Bezerra 2014; Davenport 2007)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1

The required information size for significance for the Trial Sequential Analysis was 538. The number of infants included in this meta‐analysis was 127, corresponding to 23.6% of the required information size.

*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).
CI: confidence interval. RCT: randomised clinical trial.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence

  • High certainty: this research provides a very good indication of the likely effect; the likelihood that the effect will be substantially different is low.

  • Moderate certainty: this research provides a good indication of the likely effect; the likelihood that the effect will be substantially different is moderate.

  • Low certainty: this research provides some indication of the likely effect; however, the likelihood that it will be substantially different is high.

  • Very low certainty: this research does not provide a reliable indication of the likely effect; the likelihood that the effect will be substantially different is very high.

1 Downgraded two levels due to imprecision of the evidence: Trial Sequential Analysis determined that the sample size was insufficient to detect a difference between the two groups.

2 Downgraded one level due to imprecision of the evidence and another level due to inconsistency of the evidence: there was heterogeneity between the trials and there were inconsistent assessments of what constituted a significant adverse event. Trial Sequential Analysis determined that the sample size was insufficient to detect a difference between the two groups.

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Primary outcomes

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 All‐cause mortality Show forest plot

2

211

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.0 [0.14, 6.90]

2 Serious adverse event Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Primary outcomes
Comparison 2. Secondary outcomes

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Infants who did not clear jaundice at six months Show forest plot

2

211

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.67, 1.17]

2 All‐cause mortality or liver transplantation at two years Show forest plot

2

211

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.72, 1.39]

3 Non‐serious adverse events

0

0

Risk Difference (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Subgroup analysis of infants operated on at age of < 70 days who did not clear their jaundice by six months post KPE Show forest plot

2

127

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.77 [0.46, 1.29]

5 Subgroup analysis of infants operated on at age of > 69 days who did not clear their jaundice by six months post KPE Show forest plot

2

84

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.09 [0.74, 1.62]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. Secondary outcomes