Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorAscioglu, Sibel
dc.contributor.authorLeblebicioglu, Hakan
dc.contributor.authorVahaboglu, Haluk
dc.contributor.authorChan, K. Arnold
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T14:40:04Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T14:40:04Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifier.issn0305-7453
dc.identifier.issn1460-2091
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkr136
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12712/17169
dc.descriptionLeblebicioglu, Hakan/0000-0002-6033-8543; Ascioglu, Sibel/0000-0002-6052-029X; Chan, Kinwei/0000-0001-8161-1986; VAHABOGLU, Haluk/0000-0001-8217-1767en_US
dc.descriptionWOS: 000290587800004en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed: 21482564en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever (CCHF) is a potentially fatal tick-borne infection. The virus is widely distributed around the world and reports of sporadic cases and outbreaks have recently increased significantly. Some authors have proposed that ribavirin improves survival in CCHF and this view appears to be widely accepted. Methods: We evaluated the efficacy of ribavirin in reducing mortality by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies that compared the outcomes of CCHF patients who were treated with ribavirin with those of patients that were not treated. The main endpoint we assessed was survival. We also evaluated secondary endpoints, i.e. adverse events, length of stay in the hospital, time taken for laboratory values to return to normal and requirement for blood products. A pooled estimate of the relative risks for survival from each study was obtained by using random effects models. Results: One randomized controlled trial and seven observational studies met our inclusion criteria. Most observational studies suffered from different types of bias due to inappropriate selection of controls. Compilation of data from all included studies showed that ribavirin did not improve survival in CCHF (relative risk 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.97-1.16). Analysis of secondary endpoints did not suggest a clinically significant beneficial effect either. Conclusions: Our systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that the available data in the literature are inadequate to support a claim of efficacy of ribavirin in CCHF. We believe a real uncertainty exists over the benefit of ribavirin in the treatment of CCHF, which necessitates the urgent conduct of a randomized placebo-controlled trial.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherOxford Univ Pressen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1093/jac/dkr136en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjecthaemorrhagic feveren_US
dc.subjectantiviral therapyen_US
dc.subjectmortalityen_US
dc.titleRibavirin for patients with Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever: a systematic review and meta-analysisen_US
dc.typereviewen_US
dc.contributor.departmentOMÜen_US
dc.identifier.volume66en_US
dc.identifier.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.startpage1215en_US
dc.identifier.endpage1222en_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryDiğeren_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster