-
The Nursing Clinics of North America Dec 2020Clinical aromatherapy is an alternative medicine therapy that can be beneficial in the inpatient or outpatient setting for symptom management for pain, nausea, general... (Review)
Review
Clinical aromatherapy is an alternative medicine therapy that can be beneficial in the inpatient or outpatient setting for symptom management for pain, nausea, general well-being, anxiety, depression, stress, and insomnia. It is beneficial for preoperative anxiety, oncology, palliative care, hospice, and end of life. Essential oils can be dangerous and toxic, with some being flammable, causing skin dermatitis, being phototoxic with risk of a chemical burn, or causing oral toxicity or death. The article investigates history, supporting theories, guidelines, plant sources, safety, pathophysiologic responses, and clinical nursing aromatherapy. Recommendations for developing a best practice clinical nursing aromatherapy program are provided.
Topics: Anxiety Disorders; Aromatherapy; Humans; Oils, Volatile; Pain; Pain Management
PubMed: 33131627
DOI: 10.1016/j.cnur.2020.06.015 -
Clinics in Dermatology 2022Photosensitizing drug reactions are cutaneous eruptions that occur after exposure to ultraviolet radiation in patients using photosensitizing medications. The reactions... (Review)
Review
Photosensitizing drug reactions are cutaneous eruptions that occur after exposure to ultraviolet radiation in patients using photosensitizing medications. The reactions can be broadly classified into phototoxic and photoallergic, with the former being much more common and well documented. There is an extensive list of photosensitizing medications, especially in the case of phototoxicity. The most common are amiodarone, chlorpromazine, doxycycline, hydrochlorothiazide, nalidixic acid, naproxen, piroxicam, tetracycline, thioridazine, vemurafenib, and voriconazole. Most of the medications implicated in photosensitivity share an action spectrum within the ultraviolet A range. Distinguishing between phototoxicity and photoallergy can be difficult, because some clinical overlap exists between the two disorders. It is often done based on pathogenesis, clinical presentation, and diagnosis. Management is similar for both types of reactions, with the gold standard being prevention. This review provides an overview of the photosensitizing drug reactions and highlights the similarities and differences between phototoxicity and photoallergy, as well as other photosensitizing drug reactions in the phototoxicity family including lichenoid reactions and pseudoporphyria.
Topics: Dermatitis, Photoallergic; Dermatitis, Phototoxic; Humans; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Photosensitivity Disorders; Ultraviolet Rays
PubMed: 35190066
DOI: 10.1016/j.clindermatol.2021.08.014 -
Nature Reviews. Disease Primers May 2021Contact dermatitis (CD) is among the most common inflammatory dermatological conditions and includes allergic CD, photoallergic CD, irritant CD, photoirritant CD (also... (Review)
Review
Contact dermatitis (CD) is among the most common inflammatory dermatological conditions and includes allergic CD, photoallergic CD, irritant CD, photoirritant CD (also called phototoxic CD) and protein CD. Occupational CD can be of any type and is the most prevalent occupational skin disease. Each CD type is characterized by different immunological mechanisms and/or requisite exposures. Clinical manifestations of CD vary widely and multiple subtypes may occur simultaneously. The diagnosis relies on clinical presentation, thorough exposure assessment and evaluation with techniques such as patch testing and skin-prick testing. Management is based on patient education, avoidance strategies of specific substances, and topical treatments; in severe or recalcitrant cases, which can negatively affect the quality of life of patients, systemic medications may be needed.
Topics: Allergens; Dermatitis, Allergic Contact; Dermatitis, Irritant; Humans; Patch Tests; Quality of Life
PubMed: 34045488
DOI: 10.1038/s41572-021-00271-4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2021Atopic eczema (AE), also known as atopic dermatitis, is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that causes significant burden. Phototherapy is sometimes used to treat AE... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Atopic eczema (AE), also known as atopic dermatitis, is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that causes significant burden. Phototherapy is sometimes used to treat AE when topical treatments, such as corticosteroids, are insufficient or poorly tolerated.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of phototherapy for treating AE.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov to January 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials in adults or children with any subtype or severity of clinically diagnosed AE. Eligible comparisons were any type of phototherapy versus other forms of phototherapy or any other treatment, including placebo or no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology. For key findings, we used RoB 2.0 to assess bias, and GRADE to assess certainty of the evidence. Primary outcomes were physician-assessed signs and patient-reported symptoms. Secondary outcomes were Investigator Global Assessment (IGA), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), safety (measured as withdrawals due to adverse events), and long-term control.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 32 trials with 1219 randomised participants, aged 5 to 83 years (mean: 28 years), with an equal number of males and females. Participants were recruited mainly from secondary care dermatology clinics, and study duration was, on average, 13 weeks (range: 10 days to one year). We assessed risk of bias for all key outcomes as having some concerns or high risk, due to missing data, inappropriate analysis, or insufficient information to assess selective reporting. Assessed interventions included: narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB; 13 trials), ultraviolet A1 (UVA1; 6 trials), broadband ultraviolet B (BB-UVB; 5 trials), ultraviolet AB (UVAB; 2 trials), psoralen plus ultraviolet A (PUVA; 2 trials), ultraviolet A (UVA; 1 trial), unspecified ultraviolet B (UVB; 1 trial), full spectrum light (1 trial), Saalmann selective ultraviolet phototherapy (SUP) cabin (1 trial), saltwater bath plus UVB (balneophototherapy; 1 trial), and excimer laser (1 trial). Comparators included placebo, no treatment, another phototherapy, topical treatment, or alternative doses of the same treatment. Results for key comparisons are summarised (for scales, lower scores are better): NB-UVB versus placebo/no treatment There may be a larger reduction in physician-assessed signs with NB-UVB compared to placebo after 12 weeks of treatment (mean difference (MD) -9.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.62 to -15.18; 1 trial, 41 participants; scale: 0 to 90). Two trials reported little difference between NB-UVB and no treatment (37 participants, four to six weeks of treatment); another reported improved signs with NB-UVB versus no treatment (11 participants, nine weeks of treatment). NB-UVB may increase the number of people reporting reduced itch after 12 weeks of treatment compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.72, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.69; 1 trial, 40 participants). Another trial reported very little difference in itch severity with NB-UVB (25 participants, four weeks of treatment). The number of participants with moderate to greater global improvement may be higher with NB-UVB than placebo after 12 weeks of treatment (RR 2.81, 95% CI 1.10 to 7.17; 1 trial, 41 participants). NB-UVB may not affect rates of withdrawal due to adverse events. No withdrawals were reported in one trial of NB-UVB versus placebo (18 participants, nine weeks of treatment). In two trials of NB-UVB versus no treatment, each reported one withdrawal per group (71 participants, 8 to 12 weeks of treatment). We judged that all reported outcomes were supported with low-certainty evidence, due to risk of bias and imprecision. No trials reported HRQoL. NB-UVB versus UVA1 We judged the evidence for NB-UVB compared to UVA1 to be very low certainty for all outcomes, due to risk of bias and imprecision. There was no evidence of a difference in physician-assessed signs after six weeks (MD -2.00, 95% CI -8.41 to 4.41; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 0 to 108), or patient-reported itch after six weeks (MD 0.3, 95% CI -1.07 to 1.67; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 0 to 10). Two split-body trials (20 participants, 40 sides) also measured these outcomes, using different scales at seven to eight weeks; they reported lower scores with NB-UVB. One trial reported HRQoL at six weeks (MD 2.9, 95% CI -9.57 to 15.37; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 30 to 150). One split-body trial reported no withdrawals due to adverse events over 12 weeks (13 participants). No trials reported IGA. NB-UVB versus PUVA We judged the evidence for NB-UVB compared to PUVA (8-methoxypsoralen in bath plus UVA) to be very low certainty for all reported outcomes, due to risk of bias and imprecision. There was no evidence of a difference in physician-assessed signs after six weeks (64.1% reduction with NB-UVB versus 65.7% reduction with PUVA; 1 trial, 10 participants, 20 sides). There was no evidence of a difference in marked improvement or complete remission after six weeks (odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.13 to 7.89; 1 trial, 9/10 participants with both treatments). One split-body trial reported no withdrawals due to adverse events in 10 participants over six weeks. The trials did not report patient-reported symptoms or HRQoL. UVA1 versus PUVA There was very low-certainty evidence, due to serious risk of bias and imprecision, that PUVA (oral 5-methoxypsoralen plus UVA) reduced physician-assessed signs more than UVA1 after three weeks (MD 11.3, 95% CI -0.21 to 22.81; 1 trial, 40 participants; scale: 0 to 103). The trial did not report patient-reported symptoms, IGA, HRQoL, or withdrawals due to adverse events. There were no eligible trials for the key comparisons of UVA1 or PUVA compared with no treatment. Adverse events Reported adverse events included low rates of phototoxic reaction, severe irritation, UV burn, bacterial superinfection, disease exacerbation, and eczema herpeticum.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared to placebo or no treatment, NB-UVB may improve physician-rated signs, patient-reported symptoms, and IGA after 12 weeks, without a difference in withdrawal due to adverse events. Evidence for UVA1 compared to NB-UVB or PUVA, and NB-UVB compared to PUVA was very low certainty. More information is needed on the safety and effectiveness of all aspects of phototherapy for treating AE.
Topics: Adult; Child; Dermatitis, Atopic; Eczema; Female; Humans; Male; Phototherapy; Quality of Life; Ultraviolet Therapy
PubMed: 34709669
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013870.pub2 -
Journal Der Deutschen Dermatologischen... Jan 2021Drug-induced photosensitivity, the development of phototoxic or photoallergic reactions due to pharmaceuticals and subsequent exposure to ultraviolet or visible light,... (Review)
Review
Drug-induced photosensitivity, the development of phototoxic or photoallergic reactions due to pharmaceuticals and subsequent exposure to ultraviolet or visible light, is an adverse effect of growing interest. This is illustrated by the broad spectrum of recent investigations on the topic, ranging from molecular mechanisms and culprit drugs through epidemiological as well as public health related issues to long-term photoaging and potential photocarcinogenic consequences. The present review summarizes the current state of knowledge on the topic while focusing on culprit drugs and long-term effects. In total, 393 different drugs or drug compounds are reported to have a photosensitizing potential, although the level of evidence regarding their ability to induce photosensitive reactions varies markedly among these agents. The pharmaceuticals of interest belong to a wide variety of drug classes. The epidemiological risk associated with the use of photosensitizers is difficult to assess due to under-reporting and geographical differences. However, the widespread use of photosensitizing drugs combined with the potential photocarcinogenic effects reported for several agents has major implications for health and safety and suggests a need for further research on the long-term effects.
Topics: Dermatitis, Photoallergic; Dermatitis, Phototoxic; Drug Eruptions; Humans; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Photosensitivity Disorders; Ultraviolet Rays
PubMed: 33491908
DOI: 10.1111/ddg.14314 -
Drug Safety Jul 2019Photosensitive drug eruptions are cutaneous adverse events due to exposure to a medication and either ultraviolet or visible radiation. In this review, the diagnosis,... (Review)
Review
Photosensitive drug eruptions are cutaneous adverse events due to exposure to a medication and either ultraviolet or visible radiation. In this review, the diagnosis, prevention and management of drug-induced photosensitivity is discussed. Diagnosis is based largely on the history of drug intake and the appearance of the eruption primarily affecting sun-exposed areas of the skin. This diagnosis can also be aided by tools such as phototesting, photopatch testing and rechallenge testing. The mainstay of management is prevention, including informing patients of the possibility of increased photosensitivity as well as the use of appropriate sun protective measures. Once a photosensitivity reaction has occurred, it may be necessary to discontinue the culprit medication and treat the reaction with corticosteroids. For certain medications, long-term surveillance may be indicated because of a higher risk of developing melanoma or squamous cell carcinoma at sites of earlier photosensitivity reactions. A large number of medications have been implicated as causes of photosensitivity, many with convincing clinical and scientific supporting evidence. We review the medical literature regarding the evidence for the culpability of each drug, including the results of phototesting, photopatch testing and rechallenge testing. Amiodarone, chlorpromazine, doxycycline, hydrochlorothiazide, nalidixic acid, naproxen, piroxicam, tetracycline, thioridazine, vemurafenib and voriconazole are among the most consistently implicated and warrant the most precaution by both the physician and patient.
Topics: Dermatitis, Phototoxic; Drug Eruptions; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Sunlight
PubMed: 30888626
DOI: 10.1007/s40264-019-00806-5 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Apr 2022
Topics: Biological Assay; Dermatitis, Photoallergic; Dermatitis, Phototoxic; Humans; Ultraviolet Rays
PubMed: 35396082
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2022.02.013 -
Plants (Basel, Switzerland) Jan 2020This review presents important botanical, chemical and pharmacological characteristics of Citrus limon (lemon)-a species with valuable pharmaceutical, cosmetic and... (Review)
Review
(Lemon) Phenomenon-A Review of the Chemistry, Pharmacological Properties, Applications in the Modern Pharmaceutical, Food, and Cosmetics Industries, and Biotechnological Studies.
This review presents important botanical, chemical and pharmacological characteristics of Citrus limon (lemon)-a species with valuable pharmaceutical, cosmetic and culinary (healthy food) properties. A short description of the genus is followed by information on the chemical composition, metabolomic studies and biological activities of the main raw materials obtained from (fruit extract, juice, essential oil). The valuable biological activity of C. limon is determined by its high content of phenolic compounds, mainly flavonoids (e.g., diosmin, hesperidin, limocitrin) and phenolic acids (e.g., ferulic, synapic, p-hydroxybenzoic acids). The essential oil is rich in bioactive monoterpenoids such as D-limonene, β-pinene, γ-terpinene. Recently scientifically proven therapeutic activities of C. limon include anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, anticancer and antiparasitic activities. The review pays particular attention, with references to published scientific research, to the use of in the food industry and cosmetology. It also addresses the safety of use and potential phototoxicity of the raw materials. Lastly, the review emphasizes the significance of biotechnological studies on .
PubMed: 31963590
DOI: 10.3390/plants9010119 -
Pharmacology & Therapeutics Aug 2023Protoporphyrin IX (PPIX) is an intermediate in the heme biosynthesis pathway. Abnormal accumulation of PPIX due to certain pathological conditions such as erythropoietic... (Review)
Review
Protoporphyrin IX (PPIX) is an intermediate in the heme biosynthesis pathway. Abnormal accumulation of PPIX due to certain pathological conditions such as erythropoietic protoporphyria and X-linked protoporphyria causes painful phototoxic reactions of the skin, which can significantly impact daily life. Endothelial cells in the skin have been proposed as the primary target for PPIX-induced phototoxicity through light-triggered generation of reactive oxygen species. Current approaches for the management of PPIX-induced phototoxicity include opaque clothing, sunscreens, phototherapy, blood therapy, antioxidants, bone marrow transplantation, and drugs that increase skin pigmentation. In this review, we discuss the present understanding of PPIX-induced phototoxicity including PPIX production and disposition, conditions that lead to PPIX accumulation, symptoms and individual differences, mechanisms, and therapeutics.
Topics: Humans; Endothelial Cells; Protoporphyrins; Protoporphyria, Erythropoietic; 5-Aminolevulinate Synthetase
PubMed: 37392940
DOI: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2023.108487