Background. The high prevalence of delirium among postoperative patients has increased morbidity and mortality. The kind of drug that can effectively reduce the incidence of delirium has become the focus of discussion in recent years. However, a consensus in this respect has yet to be reached. Methods. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were retrieved from the PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Embase databases from their inception through October 12, 2018. We included RCTs of pharmacological prevention for postoperative delirium in adults (at least 18 years), and the Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate the methodological quality of trials. The primary outcomes were the risk ratios (RRs) of incidence of postoperative delirium, and the secondary outcomes were the RRs of mortality and adverse events in the intervention and control groups. Results. Thirty-eight trials, which comprised 20302 patients and 18 different drugs, were included in the analysis. Of the 38 studies, 17 were rated as low risk with respect to methodological quality. Dexmedetomidine administration (RR 0.58, 95%CI 0.44-0.76, P<0.01) was associated with a significantly lower incidence of postoperative delirium than the control conditions. However, the findings from the studies with a low risk of bias did not show a significant difference in this beneficial effect (RR 0.64, 95%CI 0.39-1.04, P=0.07). The antipsychotic drugs olanzapine (RR 0.44, 95%CI 0.30- 0.65, P<0.01) and risperidone (RR 0.42, 95%CI 0.19-0.92, P=0.03) had promising effects, but there was a lack of sufficient evidence to obtain a definitive conclusion. The beneficial effect of other drugs, including haloperidol, methylprednisolone, dexamethasone, gabapentin, ketamine, cyproheptadine, donepezil, hypertonic saline, melatonin, nimodipine, ondansetron, pregabalin, rivastigmine, TJ-54, and tryptophan, was not proven on the basis of present evidence. Conclusion. Among the pharmacological prophylactic measures for postoperative delirium, dexmedetomidine, olanzapine, and risperidone showed higher efficacy than other drugs. However, more high-quality evidence is needed to confirm these results.

Background Antibiotic‐resistant bacteria, especially multidrug‐resistant strains, play a key role in impeding critical patients from survival and recovery. The effectiveness of the empiric use of antibiotics in the circling manner in intensive care units (ICUs) has not been analyzed in detail and remains controversial. Therefore, this systematic review and meta‐analysis were conducted to evaluate antibiotic‐cycling effect on the incidence of antibiotic‐resistant bacteria. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science for studies focusing on whether a cycling strategy of empiric use of antibiotics could curb the prevalence of antibiotic‐resistant bacteria in ICUs. The major outcomes were risk ratios (RRs) of antibiotic‐resistant infections or colonization per 1,000 patient days before and after the implementation of antibiotic cycling. A random‐effects model was adopted to estimate results in consideration of clinical heterogeneity among studies. The registration number of the meta‐analysis is CRD42018094464. Results Twelve studies, involving 2,261 episodes of resistant infections or colonization and 160,129 patient days, were included in the final analysis. Based on the available evidence, the antibiotic‐cycling strategy did not reduce the overall incidence of infections or colonization with resistant bacteria (RR = 0.823, 95% CI 0.655–1.035, p = .095). In subgroup analyses, the cycling strategy cut down the incidence of resistant bacteria more significantly than baseline period (p = .028) but showed no difference in comparison with mixing strategy (p = .758). Linking Evidence to Action Although the cycling strategy performed better than relatively free usage of antibiotics in the baseline period on reducing resistant bacteria, the cycling strategy did not show advantage when compared with the mixing strategy in subgroup analyses. In addition, these viewpoints still need more evidence to confirm.

Four undescribed sulfoxide-containing derivatives, sinkiangenoxides A and B, (2Z, 4E)-sinkiangenoxide C, and (2E, 4E)-sinkiangenoxide C (1 – 4), and one known compound, 1-(methylthio)propyl (E)-1-propenyl disulfide (5), were isolated from the resin of Ferula sinkiangensis. Their structures were determined based on spectroscopic methods, including IR, UV, HRESIMS, NMR, and CD analysis. Compounds 2 – 4 showed moderate cytotoxic activities against four human cancer cell lines with IC₅₀ values ranging from 15.0 to 40.3 µM. Sinkiangenoxide B (2) was shown to induce apoptosis in HepG2 cells. In addition, compound 5 effectively attenuated lipopolysaccharide-induced nitric oxide release and TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6, and IL-10 expression. Received: 20 September 2020 Accepted after revision: 19 April 2021 Article published online: 20 May 2021 © 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

Objectives. To evaluate the efficacy of safflower yellow in the acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Methods. In a prospective, randomized, controlled trial, 127 patients who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled and were randomly divided into two groups. The control group included 64 patients treated according to the global strategy for diagnosis, management, and prevention of COPD (www.goldcopd.org, updated 2011). The intervention group included 63 patients who received intravenous infusions of safflower yellow (100 mg of safflower yellow dissolved in 250 ml 0.9% saline) once daily for 14 consecutive days in addition to standard diagnosis and treatment. The difference in the average length of the hospital stay between the two groups of patients was determined. The follow-up period was 28 days; the differences in symptoms, clinical indicators, and 28-day mortality in the two groups were compared. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS 22.0 software to determine whether there were statistically significant differences (P <0.05) between groups. Results. There were no statistically significant differences between the intervention group and the control group in changes in secondary indicators. There were no statistically significant differences in the 28-day mortality or in the survival curves of the two groups (P=0.496 and P=0.075, respectively). Safflower yellow treatment of AECOPD may relieve the patient’s clinical symptoms, such as dyspnoea, shorten the average length of hospital stay (P=0.006, respectively), and decrease the duration of mechanical ventilation. Conclusion. Safflower yellow in the treatment of AECOPD has a degree of clinical value. This trial is registered under the identifier ChiCTR-IPR-17014176.