PubMed · 1810663
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
F G Emmings. 1991. Calling for double-blind controls.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1810663/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Preliminary data have shown that colchicine may be considered for the prevention of the postpericardiotomy syndrome (PPS). The COlchicine for the Prevention of Post-pericardiotomy Syndrome (COPPS) study is a multicenter, double blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial that will enroll 360 patients after cardiac surgery. The primary end point will be the PSS rate at 12 months. The study will be the first large randomized placebo-controlled trial in this area, and will provide important evidence regarding the possible benefit of colchicine for the primary prevention of the PPS.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: Gout is one of the most common rheumatic diseases worldwide. Colchicine is regarded as beneficial in the treatment of acute gout, but has a high frequency of gastrointestinal adverse events. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of colchicine for relief of the signs and symptoms of acute gouty arthritis, compared to placebo and other treatment interventions. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following electronic databases to March 2006: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 1, 2006), MEDLINE (from 1966), EMBASE (from 1980), CINAHL (from 1982), AMED (from 1985), Web of Science (from 1945) and Current Controlled Trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials evaluating symptom relief and adverse outcomes of colchicine therapy in acute gout were considered for this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently screened search results for inclusion, collected the data in a standardized form and assessed the methodological quality of the trial using validated criteria. Results for continuous outcome measures were expressed as weighted mean differences. Dichotomous outcome measures were pooled using relative risk. The number needed to treat was calculated for significant outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: One RCT (N=43) comparing colchicine to placebo for the treatment of acute gout was included in this review. The results favour the use of colchicine over placebo with an absolute reduction of 34% for pain and a 30% reduction in clinical symptoms such as tenderness on palpation, swelling, redness, and pain. The number needed to treat (NNT) with colchicine versus placebo to reduce pain was 3 and the NNT to reduce clinical symptoms was 2. All participants treated with colchicine experienced gastrointestinal side effects (diarrhea and/or vomiting) and the number needed to harm (NNH) with colchicine versus placebo was 1. No studies comparing colchicine to NSAIDs or other treatments such as corticosteroids or ACTH were identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Colchicine is an effective treatment for the reduction of pain and clinical symptoms in patients experiencing acute attacks of gout, although in the regimen studied its low benefit to toxicity ratio limits its usefulness. It should be used as a second line therapy when NSAIDs or corticosteroids are contraindicated or ineffective. More evidence is needed to compare the efficacy of colchicine to that of NSAIDs or corticosteroids, the current first line therapy for acute gout.