Objective To systematically evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of capecitabine plus docetaxel in the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer where anthracycline has failed as a treatment. Methods We electronically searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library (2008, issue 4), and CBM to Sept. 2008. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs about capecitabine plus docetaxel combination therapy in anthracycline-pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer were identified. Study selection and analyses were undertaken according to the Cochrane Handbook, and RevMan 5.0 was applied for statistical analyses. The following was studied: total survival time, the development time of disease, reaction rate, the mid-survival time, adverse events and quality of life. Results Three RCTs involving 672 patients with metastatic breast cancer were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that the overall survival (MD=3.00, 95%CI 1.64 to 4.36), disease time to progression (MD=1.85, 95%CI 1.15 to 2.55), and the response rate (RR=1.29, 95%CI 1.09 to 1.52) were superior in the combination arm to the docetaxel alone arm. Conclusion The current evidence available shows that the combination of capecitabine and docetaxel may significantly improve the short-term efficacy comparing with docetaxel alone. However, adverse events and long-term efficacy are not clear; more high-quality RCTs should be conducted.
Objective To assess the anesthetic efficacy of articaine versus lidocaine for irreversible pulpitis. Methods We electronically searched PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2009), CNKI, VIP and CBM. The search was updated to December 2009. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were indentified about articaine and lidocaine for irreversible pulpitis. Study selection and meta-analysis were conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews. And RevMan5.0 was applied for statistical analysis in success rate. Results Nine trials involving 985 pulpitis patients were included. Meta-analysis indicated that, both the anesthetic success rate (RR=1.33, 95%CI 1.23 to1.44) and maxillary anesthetic success rate (RR=1.65, 95%CI 1.38 to 1.98) of articaine were superior to that of lidocaine, but there was no statistical significance in mandibular anesthetic success rate between two groups (RR=1.28, 95%CI 0.97 to 1.69). Conclusion The current evidence shows that articaine is superior to lidocaine in anesthetic efficacy, and is good at maxillary anesthesia.