-
Contact Dermatitis Oct 2022Hand eczema is a common inflammatory condition of the skin that has been linked to hand hygiene. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the risks of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Hand eczema is a common inflammatory condition of the skin that has been linked to hand hygiene. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the risks of hand eczema associated with hand hygiene, including frequency of hand washing, wet work and use of alcohol hand rub. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library was performed for cohort, case-control or cross-sectional studies that analysed the association between hand hygiene and risk of hand eczema. Results of individual studies were presented in respective forest plots and pooled summary relative risks were estimated using a random-effects model. Forty-five studies were included in the analysis. Hand washing at least 8-10 times daily significantly increased risk of hand eczema (relative risk [RR] 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.35-1.68; p < 0.001). The risk was related to hand washing frequency, with higher pooled RR of 1.66 (95% CI: 1.51-1.83; p < 0.001) with increased hand washing at least 15-20 times daily. However, use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer was not significantly associated with risk of hand eczema. Given the widespread implementation of hand hygiene practices during the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a pertinent need to understand skin care habits specific to the hands to avoid a greater incidence of hand eczema.
Topics: COVID-19; Cross-Sectional Studies; Dermatitis, Allergic Contact; Eczema; Hand Disinfection; Hand Hygiene; Humans; Pandemics
PubMed: 35460528
DOI: 10.1111/cod.14133 -
Journal of the European Academy of... Jun 2023The nipple is the focal point of the human breast and serves important physiological, sexual, and aesthetic purposes. It can be affected by atopic, irritant, and... (Review)
Review
The nipple is the focal point of the human breast and serves important physiological, sexual, and aesthetic purposes. It can be affected by atopic, irritant, and allergic contact eczema, which often reduce the patient's quality of life. The objective of this article is to discuss the different types of nipple eczema and highlight relevant differential diagnoses and treatment options. A systematic search of PubMed was conducted to identify and critically appraise the existing literature on the topic. All articles on nipple eczema were considered eligible, regardless of publication date, language or study design. A final of 33 manuscripts on nipple eczema remained. The scarce literature and the limited number of high-quality manuscripts impedes provision of structured data on nipple eczema. To securely reach the educative value of this manuscript, the systematic review was combined with a manual databank search and selected manual search of textbooks. The differential diagnosis of nipple eczema encompasses among others nipple psoriasis, nipple candidiasis and Paget's disease. In case of diagnostic uncertainty, swabs or biopsies are indicated. Treatment of nipple eczema needs to rapidly control the signs and symptoms of the disease, since it can have a negative effect on quality of life and can lead to premature arrest of breastfeeding. The key treatment step is starting with topical corticosteroids or calcineurin inhibitors, both of which are considered safe during lactation. Avoidance of provoking factors, such as repetitive friction, chemical agents, or allergens, can help. The use of nipple protection devices can be proposed for nursing women and sometimes adjusting of latch/suck positioning during breastfeeding is needed. Furthermore, patients should be advised to moisturize the nipple intensively and to switch to emollient wash products. Warm water compresses, black tea compresses or commercially available tannin containing topicals can provide comfort.
Topics: Female; Humans; Nipples; Quality of Life; Eczema; Lactation; Dermatitis, Allergic Contact; Psoriasis
PubMed: 36695082
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.18920 -
Journal of Wound Care Dec 2021Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are rare and severe skin and mucosal reactions that are associated with high mortality. Despite the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are rare and severe skin and mucosal reactions that are associated with high mortality. Despite the severity, an evidence-based treatment protocol for SJS/TEN is still lacking.
METHOD
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the PubMed database was searched using the following terms: [Stevens-Johnson syndrome] OR [toxic epidermal necrolysis] AND [therapy] OR [treatment] over a 20-year period (1999-2019) in the German and English language. All clinical studies reporting on the treatment of SJS/TEN were included, and epidemiological and diagnostic aspects of treatment were analysed. A meta-analysis was conducted on all comparative clinical studies that met the inclusion criteria.
RESULTS
A total of 88 studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting outcomes in 2647 patients. Treatment was either supportive or used systemic corticosteroid, intravenous immunoglobulin, plasmapheresis, cyclosporine, thalidomide or cyclophosphamide therapy. The meta-analysis included 16 (18%) studies, reporting outcomes in 976 (37%) patients. Systemic glucocorticoids showed a survival benefit for SJS/TEN patients in all analyses compared with other forms of treatment. Cyclosporine treatment also showed promising results, despite being used in a small cohort of patients. No beneficial effects on mortality could be demonstrated for intravenous immunoglobulins.
CONCLUSION
Glucocorticoids and cyclosporine may be tentatively recommended as the most promising immunomodulatory therapies for SJS/TEN, but these results should be investigated in future prospective controlled trials.
Topics: Cohort Studies; Cyclosporine; Humans; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Retrospective Studies; Skin; Stevens-Johnson Syndrome
PubMed: 34881995
DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2021.30.12.1012 -
JAMA Dermatology Apr 2023Antibiotics are an important risk for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN), which are the most severe types of drug hypersensitivity... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Antibiotics are an important risk for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN), which are the most severe types of drug hypersensitivity reaction with a mortality rate up to 50%. To our knowledge, no global systematic review has described antibiotic-associated SJS/TEN.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the prevalence of antibiotics associated with SJS/TEN worldwide.
DATA SOURCES
The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for experimental and observational studies that described SJS/TEN risks since database inception to February 22, 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
Included studies adequately described SJS/TEN origins and specified the antibiotics associated with SJS/TEN.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers (E.Y.L. and C.K.) independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model was performed in the studies that described patient-level associations. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore the heterogeneity. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist, and the certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Prevalence of antibiotic-associated SJS/TEN was presented as pooled proportions with 95% CIs.
RESULTS
Among the 64 studies included in the systematic review, there were 38 studies that described patient-level associations; the meta-analysis included these 38 studies with 2917 patients to determine the prevalence of single antibiotics associated with SJS/TEN. The pooled proportion of antibiotics associated with SJS/TEN was 28% (95% CI, 24%-33%), with moderate certainty of evidence. Among antibiotic-associated SJS/TEN, the sulfonamide class was associated with 32% (95% CI, 22%-44%) of cases, followed by penicillins (22%; 95% CI, 17%-28%), cephalosporins (11%; 95% CI, 6%-17%), fluoroquinolones (4%; 95% CI, 1%-7%), and macrolides (2%; 95% CI, 1%-5%). There was a statistically significant heterogeneity in the meta-analysis, which could be partially explained in the subgroup analysis by continents. The overall risk of bias was low using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for case series.
CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis of all case series, antibiotics were associated with more than one-quarter of SJS/TEN cases described worldwide, and sulfonamide antibiotics remained the most important association. These findings highlight the importance of antibiotic stewardship, clinician education and awareness, and weighing the risk-benefit assessment of antibiotic choice and duration.
Topics: Humans; Stevens-Johnson Syndrome; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Prevalence; Sulfanilamide; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36790777
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.6378 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), and SJS/TEN overlap syndrome are rare, severe cutaneous adverse reactions usually triggered by... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), and SJS/TEN overlap syndrome are rare, severe cutaneous adverse reactions usually triggered by medications. In addition to tertiary-level supportive care, various systemic therapies have been used including glucocorticoids, intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIGs), cyclosporin, N-acetylcysteine, thalidomide, infliximab, etanercept, and plasmapheresis. There is an unmet need to understand the efficacy of these interventions.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of systemic therapies (medicines delivered orally, intramuscularly, or intravenously) for the treatment of SJS, TEN, and SJS/TEN overlap syndrome.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to March 2021: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We also searched five clinical trial registers, the reference lists of all included studies and of key review articles, and a number of drug manufacturer websites. We searched for errata or retractions of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational comparative studies of participants of any age with a clinical diagnosis of SJS, TEN, or SJS/TEN overlap syndrome. We included all systemic therapies studied to date and permitted comparisons between each therapy, as well as between therapy and placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures as specified by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were SJS/TEN-specific mortality and adverse effects leading to discontinuation of SJS/TEN therapy. Secondary outcomes included time to complete re-epithelialisation, intensive care unit length of stay, total hospital length of stay, illness sequelae, and other adverse effects attributed to systemic therapy. We rated the certainty of the evidence for each outcome using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine studies with a total of 308 participants (131 males and 155 females) from seven countries. We included two studies in the quantitative meta-analysis. We included three RCTs and six prospective, controlled observational studies. Sample sizes ranged from 10 to 91. Most studies did not report study duration or time to follow-up. Two studies reported a mean SCORe of Toxic Epidermal Necrosis (SCORTEN) of 3 and 1.9. Seven studies did not report SCORTEN, although four of these studies reported average or ranges of body surface area (BSA) (means ranging from 44% to 51%). Two studies were set in burns units, two in dermatology wards, one in an intensive care unit, one in a paediatric ward, and three in unspecified inpatient units. Seven studies reported a mean age, which ranged from 29 to 56 years. Two studies included paediatric participants (23 children). We assessed the results from one of three RCTs as low risk of bias in all domains, one as high, and one as some concerns. We judged the results from all six prospective observational comparative studies to be at a high risk of bias. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence because of serious risk of bias concerns and for imprecision due to small numbers of participants. The interventions assessed included systemic corticosteroids, tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) inhibitors, cyclosporin, thalidomide, N-acetylcysteine, IVIG, and supportive care. No data were available for the main comparisons of interest as specified in the review protocol: etanercept versus cyclosporin, etanercept versus IVIG, IVIG versus supportive care, IVIG versus cyclosporin, and cyclosporin versus corticosteroids. Corticosteroids versus no corticosteroids It is uncertain if there is any difference between corticosteroids (methylprednisolone 4 mg/kg/day for two more days after fever had subsided and no new lesions had developed) and no corticosteroids on disease-specific mortality (risk ratio (RR) 2.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 9.03; 2 studies; 56 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Time to complete re-epithelialisation, length of hospital stay, and adverse effects leading to discontinuation of therapy were not reported. IVIG versus no IVIG It is uncertain if there is any difference between IVIG (0.2 to 0.5 g/kg cumulative dose over three days) and no IVIG in risk of disease-specific mortality (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.91); time to complete re-epithelialisation (mean difference (MD) -2.93 days, 95% CI -4.4 to -1.46); or length of hospital stay (MD -2.00 days, 95% CI -5.81 to 1.81). All results in this comparison were based on one study with 36 participants, and very low-certainty evidence. Adverse effects leading to discontinuation of therapy were not reported. Etanercept (TNF-alpha inhibitor) versus corticosteroids Etanercept (25 mg (50 mg if weight > 65 kg) twice weekly "until skin lesions healed") may reduce disease-specific mortality compared to corticosteroids (intravenous prednisolone 1 to 1.5 mg/kg/day "until skin lesions healed") (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.63; 1 study; 91 participants; low-certainty evidence); however, the CIs were consistent with possible benefit and possible harm. Serious adverse events, such as sepsis and respiratory failure, were reported in 5 of 48 participants with etanercept and 9 of 43 participants with corticosteroids, but it was not clear if they led to discontinuation of therapy. Time to complete re-epithelialisation and length of hospital stay were not reported. Cyclosporin versus IVIG It is uncertain if there is any difference between cyclosporin (3 mg/kg/day or intravenous 1 mg/kg/day until complete re-epithelialisation, then tapered off (10 mg/day reduction every 48 hours)) and IVIG (continuous infusion 0.75 g/kg/day for 4 days (total dose 3 g/kg) in participants with normal renal function) in risk of disease-specific mortality (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.98, 1 study; 22 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Time to complete re-epithelialisation, length of hospital stay, and adverse effects leading to discontinuation of therapy were not reported. No studies measured intensive care unit length of stay.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
When compared to corticosteroids, etanercept may result in mortality reduction. For the following comparisons, the certainty of the evidence for disease-specific mortality is very low: corticosteroids versus no corticosteroids, IVIG versus no IVIG and cyclosporin versus IVIG. There is a need for more multicentric studies, focused on the most important clinical comparisons, to provide reliable answers about the best treatments for SJS/TEN.
Topics: Acetylcysteine; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Autoimmune Diseases; Child; Cyclosporine; Etanercept; Female; Humans; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Male; Middle Aged; Observational Studies as Topic; Stevens-Johnson Syndrome; Thalidomide; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
PubMed: 35274741
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013130.pub2 -
Journal of the American Academy of... May 2021Neither dupilumab-associated facial erythema nor neck erythema was reported in phase 3 clinical trials for the treatment of atopic dermatitis, but there have been a...
BACKGROUND
Neither dupilumab-associated facial erythema nor neck erythema was reported in phase 3 clinical trials for the treatment of atopic dermatitis, but there have been a number of reports of patients developing this adverse event in clinical practice.
OBJECTIVE
To outline all cases of reported dupilumab-associated facial or neck erythema to better characterize this adverse event, and identify potential etiologies and management strategies.
METHODS
A search was conducted on EMBASE and PubMed databases. Two independent reviewers identified relevant studies for inclusion and performed data extraction.
RESULTS
A total of 101 patients from 16 studies were reported to have dupilumab-associated facial or neck erythema. A total of 52 of 101 patients (52%) had baseline atopic dermatitis facial or neck involvement and 45 of 101 (45%) reported different cutaneous symptoms from preexisting atopic dermatitis, possibly suggesting a different etiology. Suggested etiologies included rosacea, allergic contact dermatitis, and head and neck dermatitis. Most commonly used treatments included topical corticosteroids, topical calcineurin inhibitors, and antifungal agents. In the 57 patients with data on the course of the adverse events, improvement was observed in 29, clearance in 4, no response in 16, and worsening in 8. A total of 11 of 101 patients (11%) discontinued dupilumab owing to this adverse event.
LIMITATIONS
Limited diagnostic testing, nonstandardized data collection and reporting across studies, and reliance on retrospective case reports and case series.
CONCLUSION
Some patients receiving dupilumab develop facial or neck erythema that differs from their usual atopic dermatitis symptoms. Prompt identification and empiric treatment may minimize distress and potential discontinuation of dupilumab owing to this adverse event.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antifungal Agents; Calcineurin Inhibitors; Dermatitis, Allergic Contact; Dermatitis, Atopic; Diagnosis, Differential; Erythema; Facial Dermatoses; Humans; Neck; Rosacea
PubMed: 33428978
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2021.01.012 -
Clinics in Dermatology 2022Gel nail polish (GNP) has recently gained worldwide popularity. We have conducted a comprehensive summary of the complications of GNP through a literature search using...
Gel nail polish (GNP) has recently gained worldwide popularity. We have conducted a comprehensive summary of the complications of GNP through a literature search using the PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases to identify eligible contributions. Complications were divided into mechanical and traumatic nail disorders, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), and ultraviolet (UV)-induced lesions. A total of 12 contributions were included, identifying 88 patients, all of whom were women. Six of the reports described ACD (62 cases, 70.5%), 3 concerned mechanical nail damage (23 cases, 26.1%), and 3 reported UV-induced skin lesions (3 cases, 3.4%). ACD developed an average of 30 months after GNP initiation. The most frequent culprit allergens were 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate. Pterygium inversum unguis was the most frequent mechanical lesion (n = 17). Squamous cell carcinoma was reported in 3 cases. The delay between UV exposure and the diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma ranged from 11 to 15 years. Scant literature and a lack of education among consumers and beauticians have led to the uncontrolled use of GNP. The principle of managing nail cosmetic problems is prevention through education. There is a need for understanding the processes involved and the associated complications to facilitate appropriate treatment and safe use.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Patch Tests; Dermatitis, Allergic Contact; Cosmetics; Nails; Nail Diseases; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell
PubMed: 35907576
DOI: 10.1016/j.clindermatol.2022.07.008 -
The American Journal of Cardiology May 2022Pericardial disease secondary to sarcoidosis is a rare clinical entity with no observational studies in previous research. Therefore, we evaluated reported cases of... (Review)
Review
Pericardial disease secondary to sarcoidosis is a rare clinical entity with no observational studies in previous research. Therefore, we evaluated reported cases of pericarditis because of sarcoidosis to further understand its diagnosis and management. We performed a systematic review of previous research until December 16, 2020 in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science. Case reports and case series demonstrating pericardial involvement in sarcoidosis were included. Fourteen reports with a total of 27 patients were identified. Dyspnea (82%) was the most common presentation, with the lungs being the primary site of sarcoidosis in most patients (77%). The most frequently encountered pericardial manifestations were pericardial effusion (89%), constrictive pericarditis and cardiac tamponade (48%). Management of these patients included use of corticosteroids (82%), colchicine (11%), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (7%). Similar to the general population, the most common intervention in these patients was pericardiocentesis (59%), pericardial window (30%), and pericardiectomy (19%). Overall, the majority of this population (70%) achieved clinical improvement during median follow-up time of 8 months. In conclusion, the prevalence and incidence of sarcoid-induced pericarditial disease remain unclear. Clinical manifestations of pericardial involvement are variable, though many patients present with asymptomatic pericardial effusions. No consensus exists on the treatment of this special population, but corticosteroids and combination therapies are considered first-line therapies because of their efficacy in suppressing pericardial inflammation and underlying sarcoidosis. Patients with refractory cases of pericarditis may also benefit therapeutically from the addition of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, colchicine, and/or biologics.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Colchicine; Humans; Pericardial Effusion; Pericardiectomy; Pericardiocentesis; Pericarditis; Pericarditis, Constrictive; Sarcoidosis
PubMed: 35227500
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.01.025 -
Frontiers in Allergy 2022Gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) are frequently used in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations to increase sensitivity in diagnoses. Recently, an increase...
Gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) are frequently used in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations to increase sensitivity in diagnoses. Recently, an increase in the description of hypersensitivity reactions to GBCAs has been detected. We performed research in PubMed, PubMed, SCOPUS, and EMBASE until September 2021, searching for studies regarding immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions to gadolinium-based contrast agents in which an allergy study was performed. The initial research identified 149 articles written in English. After excluding articles duplicated and articles that had irrelevant designs, 26 articles were included. Finally, 17 studies concerning immediate reactions, six studies concerning non-immediate reactions, and three concerning both that performed allergy evaluations were selected. In the review, we analyzed the characteristics of immediate and delayed reactions and the results of the allergy study and cross-reactivity. Skin tests seem to have acceptable accuracy, but drug provocation tests are still needed when skin tests are negative o to find alternative agents. Although cross-reactivity patterns are not well established, cross-reactivity seems to exist among macrocyclic agents. Notwithstanding, the number of patients analyzed is low and further studies are required. A management algorithm is suggested.
PubMed: 35386665
DOI: 10.3389/falgy.2022.813927 -
Archives of Dermatological Research Oct 2022Recurrence of DRESS syndrome is poorly characterized, and dermatologists must be prepared to predict, identify, and manage patients after treatment of the initial... (Review)
Review
Recurrence of DRESS syndrome is poorly characterized, and dermatologists must be prepared to predict, identify, and manage patients after treatment of the initial presentation. In this study, a primary literature search was conducted using PubMed, capturing all articles recording cases of DRESS syndrome recurrence. Forty-two articles were included for review comprising a total of 60 patients. The average age of patients was 46.3 years and time to recurrence was 123 days. Recurrent episodes presented more frequently with a higher fever and eosinophil absolute peak. Relapse was most often attributed to the introduction of a new medication (n = 18). Of the 17 cases in which outcome data were available, the survival rate of those experiencing recurrence was 71%. Viral reactivation with HHV-6 and organ involvement of the liver were frequently recorded complications. In essence, viral reactivation, severe internal organ involvement, and hematological abnormalities all portended a poorer prognosis in those experiencing DRESS syndrome recurrence. An adequate course of treatment should be maintained until clinical and laboratory parameters normalize, with a slow taper to minimize the likelihood of relapse in those most at risk.
Topics: Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome; Humans; Leukocyte Count; Middle Aged; Recurrence
PubMed: 34505944
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-021-02274-3