-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2022Recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis (RVVC) affects up to 5% of women. No comprehensive systematic review of treatments for RVVC has been published. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis (RVVC) affects up to 5% of women. No comprehensive systematic review of treatments for RVVC has been published.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective was to assess the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for RVVC. The secondary objective was to assess patient preference of treatment options.
SEARCH METHODS
We conducted electronic searches of bibliographic databases, including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL (search date 6 October 2021). We also handsearched reference lists of identified trials and contacted authors of identified trials, experts in RVVC, and manufacturers of products for vulvovaginal candidiasis.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered all published and unpublished randomised controlled trials evaluating RVVC treatments for at least six months, in women with four or more symptomatic episodes of vulvovaginal candidiasis in the past year. We excluded women with immunosuppressive disorders or taking immunosuppressant medication. We included women with diabetes mellitus and pregnant women. Diagnosis of RVVC must have been confirmed by presence of symptoms and a positive culture and/or microscopy. We included all drug and non-drug therapies and partner treatment, assessing the following primary outcomes: • number of clinical recurrences per participant per year (recurrence defined as clinical signs and positive culture/microscopy); • proportion of participants with at least one clinical recurrence during the treatment and follow-up period; and • adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently reviewed titles and abstracts to identify eligible trials. Duplicate data extraction was completed independently by two authors. We assessed risk of bias as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used the fixed-effects model for pooling and expressed the results as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where important statistical heterogeneity was present we either did not pool data (I > 70%) or used a random-effects model (I 40-70%). We used the GRADE tool to assess overall certainty of the evidence for the pooled primary outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
Studies: Twenty-three studies involving 2212 women aged 17 to 67 years met the inclusion criteria. Most studies excluded pregnant women and women with diabetes or immunosuppression. The predominant species found on culture at study entry was Candida albicans. Overall, the included studies were small (<100 participants). Six studies compared antifungal treatment with placebo (607 participants); four studies compared oral versus topical antifungals (543 participants); one study compared different oral antifungals (45 participants); two studies compared different dosing regimens for antifungals (100 participants); one study compared two different dosing regimens of the same topical agent (23 participants); one study compared short versus longer treatment duration (26 participants); two studies assessed the effect of partner treatment (98 participants); one study compared a complementary treatment (Lactobacillus vaginal tablets and probiotic oral tablets) with placebo (34 participants); three studies compared complementary medicine with antifungals (354 participants); two studies compared 'dermasilk' briefs with cotton briefs (130 participants); one study examined Lactobacillus vaccination versus heliotherapy versus ciclopyroxolamine (90 participants); one study compared CAM treatments to an antifungal treatment combined with CAM treatments (68 participants). We did not find any studies comparing different topical antifungals. Nine studies reported industry funding, three were funded by an independent source and eleven did not report their funding source. Risk of bias: Overall, the risk of bias was high or unclear due to insufficient blinding of allocation and participants and poor reporting. Primary outcomes: Meta-analyses comparing drug treatments (oral and topical) with placebo or no treatment showed there may be a clinically relevant reduction in clinical recurrence at 6 months (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.63; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 2; participants = 607; studies = 6; I² = 82%; low-certainty evidence) and 12 months (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.89; NNTB = 6; participants = 585; studies = 6; I² = 21%; low-certainty evidence). No study reported on the number of clinical recurrences per participant per year. We are very uncertain whether oral drug treatment compared to topical treatment increases the risk of clinical recurrence at 6 months (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.83 to 3.31; participants = 206; studies = 3; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence) and reduces the risk of clinical recurrence at 12 months (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.27; participants = 206; studies = 3; I² = 10%; very low-certainty evidence). No study reported on the number of clinical recurrences per participant per year. Adverse events were scarce across both treatment and control groups in both comparisons. The reporting of adverse events varied amongst studies, was generally of very low quality and could not be pooled. Overall the adverse event rate was low for both placebo and treatment arms and ranged from less than 5% to no side effects or complications.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In women with RVVC, treatment with oral or topical antifungals may reduce symptomatic clinical recurrences when compared to placebo or no treatment. We were unable to find clear differences between different treatment options (e.g. oral versus topical treatment, different doses and durations). These findings are not applicable to pregnant or immunocompromised women and women with diabetes as the studies did not include or report on them. More research is needed to determine the optimal medication, dose and frequency.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Candidiasis, Oral; Candidiasis, Vulvovaginal; Female; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Pregnancy
PubMed: 35005777
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009151.pub2 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Apr 2021The use of probiotics in reproductive-related dysbiosis is an area of continuous progress due to the growing interest from clinicians and patients suffering from... (Review)
Review
The use of probiotics in reproductive-related dysbiosis is an area of continuous progress due to the growing interest from clinicians and patients suffering from recurrent reproductive microbiota disorders. An imbalance in the natural colonization sites related to reproductive health-vaginal, cervicovaginal, endometrial, and pregnancy-related altered microbiota-could play a decisive role in reproductive outcomes. Oral and vaginal administrations are in continuous discussion regarding the clinical effects pursued, but the oral route is used and studied more often despite the need for further transference to the colonization site. The aim of the present review was to retrieve the standardized protocols of vaginal probiotics commonly used for investigating their microbiota modulation capacities. Most of the studies selected focused on treating bacterial vaginosis (BV) as the most common dysbiosis; a few studies focused on vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) and on pretreatment during in vitro fertilization (IVF). Vaginal probiotic doses administered were similar to oral probiotics protocols, ranging from ≥10 CFU/day to 2.5 × 10 CFU/day, but were highly variable regarding the treatment duration timing. Moderate vaginal microbiota modulation was achieved; the relative abundance of abnormal microbiota decreased and species increased.
PubMed: 33918150
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10071461 -
BMC Oral Health Mar 2020High incidence of treatable oral conditions has been reported among palliative patients. However, a large proportion of palliative patients lose their ability to...
BACKGROUND
High incidence of treatable oral conditions has been reported among palliative patients. However, a large proportion of palliative patients lose their ability to communicate their sufferings. Therefore, it may lead to under-reporting of oral conditions among these patients. This review systematically synthesized the published evidence on the presence of oral conditions among palliative patients, the impact, management, and challenges in treating these conditions.
METHODS
An integrative review was undertaken with defined search strategy from five databases and manual search through key journals and reference list. Studies which focused on oral conditions of palliative patients and published between years 2000 to 2017 were included.
RESULTS
Xerostomia, oral candidiasis and dysphagia were the three most common oral conditions among palliative patients, followed by mucositis, orofacial pain, taste change and ulceration. We also found social and functional impact of having certain oral conditions among these patients. In terms of management, complementary therapies such as acupuncture has been used but not well explored. The lack of knowledge among healthcare providers also posed as a challenge in treating oral conditions among palliative patients.
CONCLUSIONS
This review is first in its kind to systematically synthesize the published evidence regarding the impact, management and challenges in managing oral conditions among palliative patients. Although there is still lack of study investigating palliative oral care among specific group of patients such as patients with dementia, geriatric or pediatric advanced cancer patients, this review has however provided baseline knowledge that may guide health care professionals in palliative settings.
Topics: Aged; Child; Humans; Mouth Diseases; Oral Health; Oral Ulcer; Palliative Care; Terminally Ill; Xerostomia
PubMed: 32188452
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-01075-w -
International Journal of Antimicrobial... Aug 2022Invasive candidiasis is the most common fungal infection in patients attending health services and is associated with high mortality rates and prolonged hospital stay.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
Invasive candidiasis is the most common fungal infection in patients attending health services and is associated with high mortality rates and prolonged hospital stay. The aim of this review was to evaluate and compare efficacy and safety of antifungal agents for the treatment of candidemia.
METHODS
A systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA), surface under the cumulative ranking analysis (SUCRA) and stochastic multicriteria acceptability analyses (SMAA) was performed (PROSPERO-CRD42020149264). Searches were conducted in PubMed and Scopus (Nov-2021). Randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of oral antifungals (any dose or regimen) on mycological cure, discontinuation rates and adverse events were included.
RESULTS
Overall, 13 trials (n=3632) were analysed. There were no significant differences between therapies for the efficacy outcomes; however, caspofungin (50-150 mg), rezafungin (200-400 mg) and micafungin (100-150 mg) had higher rates of clinical and mycological responses (SUCRA overall response >60%) and were considered the most promising therapies. Fluconazole (400 mg) rated worst for overall response (17%). Rezafungin (200-400 mg) and micafungin (100 mg) were associated with lower discontinuation rates (<40%). Conventional amphotericin B (0.6-0.7 mg/kg) was more likely to be discontinued (odds ratio [OR] 0.08; 95% credibility interval [CrI] 0.00-0.95 vs. caspofungin 150 mg) and may impair liver function (87%).
CONCLUSION
Echinocandins are recommended as first-line treatments for invasive candidiasis following a priority order of caspofungin then micafungin. Rezafungin, an echinocandin under development, represents a potential option that should be further investigated. Azoles and liposomal amphotericin B can be used as second-line treatments in cases of fungal resistance or hypersensitivity.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Candidemia; Candidiasis, Invasive; Caspofungin; Echinocandins; Humans; Lipopeptides; Micafungin; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 35691603
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106614 -
Evidence-based Dentistry Jan 2022Introduction Several studies reported that hyposalivation was associated with a higher prevalence of oral Candida colonisation and oral candidiasis, and despite the... (Review)
Review
Introduction Several studies reported that hyposalivation was associated with a higher prevalence of oral Candida colonisation and oral candidiasis, and despite the correlation between these conditions, no previous systematic review was conducted to examine this relationship in its utmost depth.Objectives This study aims to investigate the relationship between xerostomia, hyposalivation and oral candidiasis.Search methods This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in February 2021 through an electronic search.Data sources The electronic search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science through Clarivate, Medline through Clarivate and Cochrane Library.Data selection This systematic review and meta-analysis included cohort, observational nested case-control cohort studies, and studies of other designs providing the number of patients with and without xerostomia or hyposalivation crossed with the number of patients with and without oral candidiasis or oral Candida growth. Studies included were conducted on adult populations with no restriction to sex or race. Included studies should use a reliable diagnostic method for all conditions of interest.Data extraction Results were obtained from the implementation of the search strategy and managed using the EndNote Web and Rayyan Qatar Computing Research Institute (QCRI). Quantitative data synthesis was performed using the Review Manager 5.4 software.Results A total of 429 studies were identified by searching the databases, of which nine studies were included for qualitative and quantitative data synthesis. The analysis included 590 xerostomic patients and 697 controls subgrouped into two categories: Candida growth (207 patients and 195 controls) and oral candidiasis (383 patients and 502 controls). The Candida growth subgroup analysis shows that the xerostomic patients are at higher risk for oral Candida growth than controls (OR [95% CI] = 3.13 [2.02-4.86]) and the oral candidiasis subgroup analysis yields that xerostomic patients are at higher risk for developing manifest oral candidiasis than controls (OR [95% CI] = 2.48 [1.83-3.37]).Conclusion Our study concludes that patients with xerostomia have a higher risk than non-xerostomic control groups of developing oral candidiasis and oral fungal growth. Major inter-study heterogeneity, however, may restrict confidence in the accuracy of our results, and caution should therefore be taken in interpreting the evidence. In caring for patients with hyposalivation, we recommend healthcare professionals consider the possible association between both conditions. Furthermore, we recommend further research with improved methodological qualities and more valid diagnostic methods.
PubMed: 35075251
DOI: 10.1038/s41432-021-0210-2 -
BMC Oral Health Oct 2023To evaluate the clinical efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as an adjunct or alternative to traditional antifungal drugs in the treatment of oral candidiasis, and to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the clinical efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as an adjunct or alternative to traditional antifungal drugs in the treatment of oral candidiasis, and to provide evidence-based medical evidence for its use in the treatment of oral candidiasis.
METHODS
Computer combined with manual retrieval of China Academic Journals Full-text Database (CNKI), China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), Wanfang Database, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus retrieval for articles published before January 2023, basic information and required data were extracted according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the Revman V5.4 software was used to conduct Meta-analysis of the included literature.
RESULTS
A total of 11 articles were included, 7 of which used nystatin as an antifungal drug, 2 of which were combined treatment of PDT and nystatin, 2 of the remaining 4 articles were treated with fluconazole, and 2 were treated with miconazole. Meta results showed that PDT was superior to nystatin in reducing the number of oral candida colonies in the palate of patients MD = -0.87, 95%CI = (-1.52,-0.23), P = 0.008, the difference was statistically significant, and the denture site MD = -1.03, 95%CI = (-2.21, -0.15), P = 0.09, the difference was not statistically significant; compared with the efficacy of fluconazole, RR = 1.01, 95%CI = (0.56,1.83), P = 0.96; compared with miconazole RR = 0.55, 95%CI = (0.38, 0.81), P = 0.002; PDT combined with nystatin RR = 1.27, 95%CI = (1.06, 1.52), P = 0.01; recurrence rate RR = 0.28, 95%CI = (0.09, 0.88), P = 0.03.
CONCLUSIONS
PDT was effective in the treatment of oral candidiasis; PDT was more effective than nystatin for the treatment of denture stomatitis in the palate, while there was no significant difference between the two for the denture site; The efficacy of PDT for oral candidiasis was similar to that of fluconazole; PDT was less effective than miconazole for oral candidiasis; Compared with nystatin alone, the combination of PDT and nystatin is more effective in treating oral candidiasis with less risk of recurrence.
Topics: Humans; Candidiasis, Oral; Antifungal Agents; Nystatin; Fluconazole; Miconazole; Photochemotherapy
PubMed: 37884914
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03484-z -
Clinical and Experimental Dental... Oct 2023The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a respiratory infection that has spread worldwide and... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a respiratory infection that has spread worldwide and is responsible for a high death toll. Although respiratory symptoms are the most common, there is growing evidence that oral signs of COVID-19 can also be seen in children. The purpose of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the available data on the oral manifestations of COVID-19 in children and to recommend appropriate methods of diagnosis and treatment.
METHODS
A systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases was done to discover relevant papers published between their establishment and January 2023. Articles detailing oral symptoms in pediatric patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection were included, and data on clinical characteristics, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes were extracted and evaluated.
RESULTS
A total of 24 studies involving 2112 pediatric patients with COVID-19 were included in the review. The most common presentations are oral lesions, taste and smell disorders, oral candidiasis, hemorrhagic crust, tongue discoloration, lip and tongue fissuring, gingivitis, and salivary gland inflammation. These manifestations were sometimes associated with multi-system inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) or Kawasaki disease (KD). Management strategies varied depending on the severity of the oral manifestation and ranged from symptomatic relief with topical analgesics to systemic medications.
CONCLUSION
Oral symptoms of COVID-19 are relatively prevalent in juvenile patients and can be accompanied by severe systemic diseases, such as MIS-C or Kawasaki illness. Early detection and adequate care of these oral symptoms are critical for the best patient results. Understanding the underlying pathophysiology and developing targeted treatments requires more investigation.
Topics: Child; Humans; COVID-19; Databases, Factual; SARS-CoV-2; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 37602892
DOI: 10.1002/cre2.776 -
Inflammation Research : Official... May 2024γδ T cells are a distinct subset of unconventional T cells, which link innate and adaptive immunity by secreting cytokines and interacting with other immune cells,... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
γδ T cells are a distinct subset of unconventional T cells, which link innate and adaptive immunity by secreting cytokines and interacting with other immune cells, thereby modulating immune responses. As the first line of host defense, γδ T cells are essential for mucosal homeostasis and immune surveillance. When abnormally activated or impaired, γδ T cells can contribute to pathogenic processes. Accumulating evidence has revealed substantial impacts of γδ T cells on the pathogenesis of cancers, infections, and immune-inflammatory diseases. γδ T cells exhibit dual roles in cancers, promoting or inhibiting tumor growth, depending on their phenotypes and the clinical stage of cancers. During infections, γδ T cells exert high cytotoxic activity in infectious diseases, which is essential for combating bacterial and viral infections by recognizing foreign antigens and activating other immune cells. γδ T cells are also implicated in the onset and progression of immune-inflammatory diseases. However, the specific involvement and underlying mechanisms of γδ T cells in oral diseases have not been systematically discussed.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature review using the PubMed/MEDLINE databases to identify and analyze relevant literature on the roles of γδ T cells in oral diseases.
RESULTS
The literature review revealed that γδ T cells play a pivotal role in maintaining oral mucosal homeostasis and are involved in the pathogenesis of oral cancers, periodontal diseases, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), oral lichen planus (OLP), and oral candidiasis. γδ T cells mainly influence various pathophysiological processes, such as anti-tumor activity, eradication of infection, and immune response regulation.
CONCLUSION
This review focuses on the involvement of γδ T cells in oral diseases, with a particular emphasis on the main functions and underlying mechanisms by which γδ T cells influence the pathogenesis and progression of these conditions. This review underscores the potential of γδ T cells as therapeutic targets in managing oral health issues.
Topics: Humans; Mouth Diseases; Animals; Receptors, Antigen, T-Cell, gamma-delta; Intraepithelial Lymphocytes; Graft vs Host Disease; T-Lymphocytes
PubMed: 38563967
DOI: 10.1007/s00011-024-01870-z -
Frontiers in Oral Health 2023The aim of this systematic review is to provide a clinical update of the current knowledge on COVID-19 and oral mucosal lesions, to analyze the types and prevalence of... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this systematic review is to provide a clinical update of the current knowledge on COVID-19 and oral mucosal lesions, to analyze the types and prevalence of oral mucosal lesions in patients with COVID-19, and to clarify the potential association between COVID-19 and oral mucosal lesions.
METHODS
The literature search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and the Cochrane Library, as well as literatures via manual searches of the reference lists of included studies. Studies published in English that mentioned oral mucosal lesions in patients with COVID-19 were included, resulting in a total of 31 studies.
RESULTS
Most of the included studies were considered to have a moderate to high risk of bias according to the Joanna Briggs Institute bias assessment tools. Based on COVID-19 severity, the characteristics and patterns of oral mucosal lesions in COVID-19 patients were described, analyzed and synthesized. Overall, ulcers without specific diagnosis had the highest prevalence in COVID-19 patients, followed by traumatic ulcers, candidiasis, petechiae and aphthous-like lesions. Homogeneity of data cannot be achieved in statical analysis, indicating randomness of outcome (ulcers without specific diagnosis, 95% CI: 28%-96%, = 98.7%).
DISCUSSION
Given the limited evidence from currently available studies, the association between COVID-19 and oral mucosal lesions remains difficult to clarify. Healthcare professionals should be aware of the possible association between COVID-19 and oral mucosal lesions, and we hereby discuss our findings.
PubMed: 38169876
DOI: 10.3389/froh.2023.1322458 -
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2024Oral candidiasis (OC) is a prevalent opportunistic infection in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The increasing resistance to antifungal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Oral candidiasis (OC) is a prevalent opportunistic infection in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The increasing resistance to antifungal agents in HIV-positive individuals suffering from OC raised concerns. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the prevalence of drug-resistant OC in HIV-positive patients.
METHODS
Pubmed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase databases were systematically searched for eligible articles up to November 30, 2023. Studies reporting resistance to antifungal agents in Candida species isolated from HIV-positive patients with OC were included. Baseline characteristics, clinical features, isolated Candida species, and antifungal resistance were independently extracted by two reviewers. The pooled prevalence with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using the random effect model or fixed effect model.
RESULTS
Out of the 1942 records, 25 studies consisting of 2564 Candida species entered the meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of resistance to the antifungal agents was as follows: ketoconazole (25.5%, 95% CI: 15.1-35.8%), fluconazole (24.8%, 95% CI: 17.4-32.1%), 5-Flucytosine (22.9%, 95% CI: -13.7-59.6%), itraconazole (20.0%, 95% CI: 10.0-26.0%), voriconazole (20.0%, 95% CI: 1.9-38.0%), miconazole (15.0%, 95% CI: 5.1-26.0%), clotrimazole (13.4%, 95% CI: 2.3-24.5%), nystatin (4.9%, 95% CI: -0.05-10.3%), amphotericin B (2.9%, 95% CI: 0.5-5.3%), and caspofungin (0.1%, 95% CI: -0.3-0.6%). Furthermore, there were high heterogeneities among almost all included studies regarding the resistance to different antifungal agents (I > 50.00%, P < 0.01), except for caspofungin (I = 0.00%, P = 0.65).
CONCLUSIONS
Our research revealed that a significant number of Candida species found in HIV-positive patients with OC were resistant to azoles and 5-fluocytosine. However, most of the isolates were susceptible to nystatin, amphotericin B, and caspofungin. This suggests that initial treatments for OC, such as azoles, may not be effective. In such cases, healthcare providers may need to consider prescribing alternative treatments like polyenes and caspofungin.
REGISTRATION
The study protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews as PROSPERO (Number: CRD42024497963).
Topics: Humans; Candidiasis, Oral; Antifungal Agents; HIV Infections; Drug Resistance, Fungal; Candida; Prevalence; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; AIDS-Related Opportunistic Infections; Fluconazole
PubMed: 38822256
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-024-09442-6