-
Journal of Toxicology and Environmental... Oct 2021Percutaneous absorption of chemicals is a potential route of topical and systemic toxicity. Skin decontamination interrupts this process by removing contaminants from... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
Percutaneous absorption of chemicals is a potential route of topical and systemic toxicity. Skin decontamination interrupts this process by removing contaminants from the skin surface. Decontamination using water-only or soap and water solutions is the current gold standard despite limited efficacy data. A summary of studies evaluating their efficacy in decontaminating occupational contaminants from human skin models is presented. Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles and data extracted from 15 investigations that reported on 21 occupational contaminants, which were further classified as industrial chemicals, drugs, or pesticides. Water-only decontamination yielded no response in 4.3% ( = 6/140) and partial decontamination in 95.7% ( = 134/140) of skin samples. Soap and water decontamination yielded complete decontamination in 4.9% ( = 13/264) and partial decontamination in 95.1% ( = 251/264) of skin samples. Four studies (26.7%, = 4/15) reported increased penetration rates or skin concentration of contaminants following decontamination, demonstrating a "wash-in" effect. Varying study methodologies hinder our ability to compare data and determine when water alone or soap and water are best used. International harmonized efficacy protocol might enhance our decontamination understanding and enable a more customized approach to decontamination clinical practice and research.
Topics: Animals; Decontamination; Humans; Occupational Exposure; Skin; Skin Absorption; Soaps; Water
PubMed: 34308791
DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2021.1957048 -
Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics Aug 2020To evaluate the outcome of studies comparing the effectiveness of QMix irrigant in removing the smear layer in the root canal system compared with other irrigants.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the outcome of studies comparing the effectiveness of QMix irrigant in removing the smear layer in the root canal system compared with other irrigants.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The research question was developed by using Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome and Study design framework. Literature search was performed using 3 electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and EBSCOhost until October 2019. Two reviewers were independently involved in the selection of the articles and data extraction process. Risk of bias of the studies was independently appraised using revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2.0) based on 5 domains.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies fulfilled the selection criteria. The overall risk of bias was moderate. QMix was found to have better smear layer removal ability than mixture of tetracycline isonomer, an acid and a detergent (MTAD), sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), and phytic acid. The efficacy was less effective than 7% maleic acid and 10% citric acid. No conclusive results could be drawn between QMix and 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid due to conflicting results. QMix was more effective when used for 3 minutes than 1 minute.
CONCLUSIONS
QMix has better smear layer removal ability compared to MTAD, NaOCl, Tubulicid Plus, and Phytic acid. In order to remove the smear layer more effectively with QMix, it is recommended to use it for a longer duration.
PubMed: 32839709
DOI: 10.5395/rde.2020.45.e28 -
The Journal of Evidence-based Dental... Dec 2019Effect of sodium lauryl sulfate on recurrent aphthous stomatitis: A systematic review. Alli BY, Erinoso OA, Olawuyi AB. J Oral Pathol Med. 2019;48(5):358-64. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Effect of sodium lauryl sulfate on recurrent aphthous stomatitis: A systematic review. Alli BY, Erinoso OA, Olawuyi AB. J Oral Pathol Med. 2019;48(5):358-64.
SOURCE OF FUNDING
None. The authors declared no conflict of interest.
TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN
Systematic review with meta-analysis of data from double-blind randomized controlled trials.
Topics: Dentifrices; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate; Stomatitis, Aphthous; Toothpastes
PubMed: 31843182
DOI: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2019.101349