Back to Authors

Millán-Alanís, Juan Manuel

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5583-2582

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Citations 4

Benefits and Harms of Levothyroxine/L-Triiodothyronine Versus Levothyroxine Monotherapy for Adult Patients with Hypothyroidism: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Millán-Alanís, Juan Manuel , González‐González, José Gerardo , Flores-Rodríguez, Andrea , Ospina, Naykky Singh , Moreno‐Peña, Pablo J. , Brito, Juan P. , Gonzalez‐Velazquez, Camilo , Rodríguez‐Gutiérrez, René , Moreno-Peña, Pablo J, González-Velázquez, Camilo , Rodríguez-Gutiérrez, René , González-González, José Gerardo , Singh Ospina, Naykky , Brito, Juan P , Maraka, Spyridoula

Thyroid® | August 3, 2021 | Volume: 31 | Issue: 11 | Pages: 1613-1625

10.1089/thy.2021.0270 Get It

Background: Combined therapy with levothyroxine (LT4)/L-triiodothyronine (LT3) has garnered attention among clinicians and patients as a potential treatment alternative to LT4 monotherapy. The objective of this study was to compare the benefits and harms of LT4/LT3 combined therapy and LT4 monotherapy for patients with hypothyroidism. Methods: A systematic search in MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed by a librarian from inception date until September 2020. Randomized clinical trials and quasiexperimental studies comparing combined therapy (LT4/LT3) versus monotherapy (LT4) for adult patients with hypothyroidism were considered for inclusion. Independent data extraction was performed by paired reviewers. A meta-analysis comparing standardized mean differences of the effect of each therapy was performed on clinical outcomes and patient preferences. Proportions of adverse events and reactions were assessed narratively. Results: A total of 1398 references were retrieved, from which 18 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Results supported by evidence at low-to-moderate certainty evidence did not display a difference in treatment effect between therapies on clinical status, quality of life, psychological distress, depressive symptoms, and fatigue; all measured with standardized questionnaires. Furthermore, meta-analysis of patient preferences revealed higher proportions of choice for combined therapy (43%) when compared with monotherapy (23%) or having no preference (30%). When evaluating treatment adverse events or adverse reactions, similar proportions were observed between treatment groups; meta-analysis was not possible. Conclusions: The available evidence at low-to-moderate certainty demonstrates that there is no difference in clinical outcomes between LT4/LT3 combined therapy and LT4 monotherapy for treating hypothyroidism in adults, except for a higher proportion of patient preferring combined therapy. Adverse events and reactions appear to be similar across both groups, however, this observation is only narrative. These results could inform shared decision-making conversations between patients with hypothyroidism and their clinicians. PROSPERO Registration ID: CRD42020202658.
Effect of Normal Saline Injections on Lateral Epicondylitis Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials
Acosta‐Olivo, Carlos , Millán-Alanís, Juan Manuel , Álvarez‐Villalobos, Neri Alejandro , Vílchez‐Cavazos, Félix , Peña‐Martínez, Víctor M. , Simental‐Mendía, Mario , Alvarez-Villalobos, Neri, Álvarez-Villalobos, Neri A , Simental‐Mendía, Luis E.

The American Journal of Sports Medicine | February 11, 2020 | Volume: 48 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 3094-3102

10.1177/0363546519899644 Get It

Background: Lateral epicondylitis, or tennis elbow, is a painful degenerative disorder that commonly occurs in adults between 40 and 60 years of age. Normal saline (NS) injections have been used as placebo through a large number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focused on the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. Purpose: This meta-analysis of RCTs aimed to assess the therapeutic effect of NS injections on lateral epicondylitis symptoms and compare results with established minimal clinically important difference criteria. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for clinical trials reporting pain and joint function with the visual analog scale, Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand in patients with lateral epicondylitis. The meta-analysis was conducted with a random effects model and generic inverse variance method. Heterogeneity was tested with the I 2 statistic index. Results: A total of 15 RCTs included in this meta-analysis revealed a significant improvement in pain (mean difference, 3.61 cm [95% CI, 2.29-4.92 cm]; P < .00001; I 2 = 88%; visual analog scale) and function (mean difference, 25.65 [95% CI, 13.30-37.99]; P < .0001; I 2 = 82%; Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation / Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) after NS injection (≥6 months). Conclusion: NS injections yielded a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in pain and functional outcomes in patients with lateral epicondylitis. New research should focus on better methods to diminish the potential confounders that could lead to this effect because NS injections could mask the real effect of an active therapeutic intervention in RCT. Registration: CRD42019127547 (PROSPERO).
A systematic review of pharmacological therapies and their effectiveness on health-related quality of life outcomes in patients with juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus
Cintrón, Dahima , Millán-Alanís, Juan Manuel , Álvarez-Villalobos, N, Rodríguez‐Gutiérrez, René , Álvarez‐Villalobos, Neri Alejandro , Cintrón, D , Álvarez-Villalobos, Neri A , Vilá, Luis M.

Lupus | February 7, 2020 | Volume: 29 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 303-310

10.1177/0961203320904145 Get It

Juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (JSLE) presents with an aggressive course and high morbidity associated with disease and treatment. JSLE patients have a poorer health-related quality of life (HRQoL) when compared with age-matched patients with other rheumatologic disorders. We aim to summarize the impact of current pharmacological therapies on the HRQoL of JSLE patients. Search strategies were developed across seven databases. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing interventions to standard therapy, placebo or pre-post cohort comparisons for more than 4 weeks were included. The outcome included self-reported scales compared at baseline and a therapeutic time point. Risk of bias was evaluated by using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Newcastle–Ottawa quality assessment scale. A total of 2812 articles were narrowed down to 309 for full-text screening. Four RCTs and one prospective cohort study, with a total of 634 JSLE patients, met the inclusion criteria. Four of the studies had a controlled intervention plus standard therapy compared with standard therapy alone or placebo. Multiple indices were used to evaluate HRQoL. These included the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory, Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire, Simple Measure of Impact of Lupus Erythematosus in Youngsters tool, Kids Fatigue Severity Scale and Child Depression Inventory. A single study reported a significant improvement while remaining studies reported no difference or failed to report the statistical analysis. Although HRQoL is significantly impaired in JSLE, evidence regarding its improvement is limited due to the small number of eligible studies, heterogeneity in scales, and HRQoL domains. A universal HRQoL questionnaire for JSLE needs to be established and used in both the research and clinical setting. All studies should adhere to reporting guidelines.
Comparison of the Clinical Effectiveness of Single Versus Multiple Injections of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Vílchez‐Cavazos, Félix , Millán-Alanís, Juan Manuel , Blázquez-Saldaña, Jaime , Álvarez‐Villalobos, Neri Alejandro , Peña‐Martínez, Víctor M. , Acosta‐Olivo, Carlos , Simental‐Mendía, Mario , Alvarez-Villalobos, Neri, Álvarez-Villalobos, Neri A

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine | December 16, 2019 | Volume: 7 | Issue: 12 | Pages: No page available

10.1177/2325967119887116 Get It

Background: Reports have concluded that platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an effective and safe biological approach in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, no consensus has been established regarding the number of injections required to observe a therapeutic effect. Purpose: To compare the clinical effectiveness reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of single versus multiple PRP injections in the treatment of knee OA. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted for RCTs published between 1970 and 2019 that compared the effect of single versus multiple PRP injections on pain and functionality in patients with knee OA. Searched databases included MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. A data extraction form was designed to obtain bibliographic information of the study as well as patient, intervention, comparison, and outcomes of interest data. A random-effects model was used to pool quantitative data from the primary outcomes. Results: We included 5 clinical trials with a low-moderate risk of bias that reported data for 301 patients. Meta-analysis showed that, at 6 months after the intervention, single and multiple (double or triple) injections had similar pain improvement, with no significant differences (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.61 [95% CI, −1.09 to 2.31]; I 2 = 97%; P = .48). A significant improvement in knee functionality was observed in favor of multiple injections (SMD, 2.29 [95% CI, 0.45-4.12]; I 2 = 97%; P = .01). Subanalysis showed that the significant improvement was only evident for the results of single versus triple injections (SMD, 3.12 [95% CI, 0.64-5.60]; I 2 = 97%; P = .01). Conclusion: According to our results, a single injection was as effective as multiple PRP injections in pain improvement; however, multiple injections seemed more effective in joint functionality than a single injection at 6 months. We consider that the available evidence is still insufficient, and future research on this specific topic is needed to confirm our results.