-
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Nov 2020Androgens play a significant role in the development of male reproductive organs. The clinical use of synthetic testosterone derivatives, such as nandrolone, is focused...
Androgens play a significant role in the development of male reproductive organs. The clinical use of synthetic testosterone derivatives, such as nandrolone, is focused on maximizing the anabolic effects and minimizing the androgenic ones. Class II anabolic androgenic steroids (AAS), including nandrolone, are rapidly becoming a widespread group of drugs used both clinically and illicitly. The illicit use of AAS is diffused among adolescent and bodybuilders because of their anabolic proprieties and their capacity to increase tolerance to exercise. This systematic review aims to focus on side effects related to illicit AAS abuse, evaluating the scientific literature in order to underline the most frequent side effects on AAS abusers' bodies. A systematic review of the scientific literature was performed using the PubMed database and the keywords "nandrolone decanoate". The inclusion criteria for articles or abstracts were English language and the presence of the following words: "abuse" or "adverse effects". After applying the exclusion and inclusion criteria, from a total of 766 articles, only 148 were considered eligible for the study. The most reported adverse effects (found in more than 5% of the studies) were endocrine effects (18 studies, 42%), such as virilization, gynecomastia, hormonal disorders, dyslipidemia, genital alterations, and infertility; cardiovascular dysfunctions (six studies, 14%) such as vascular damage, coagulation disorders, and arteriosus hypertension; skin disorders (five studies, 12%) such as pricking, acne, and skin spots; psychiatric and mood disorders (four studies, 9%) such as aggressiveness, sleep disorders and anxiety; musculoskeletal disorders (two studies, 5%), excretory disorders (two studies, 5%), and gastrointestinal disorders (two studies, 5%). Based on the result of our study, the most common adverse effects secondary to the abuse of nandrolone decanoate (ND) involve the endocrine, cardiovascular, skin, and psychiatric systems. These data could prove useful to healthcare professionals in both sports and clinical settings.
Topics: Adolescent; Anabolic Agents; Androgens; Exercise; Humans; Male; Nandrolone; Nandrolone Decanoate
PubMed: 33187340
DOI: 10.3390/medicina56110606 -
The Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic... Jan 2021Microneedling is a relatively safe therapeutic procedure used to treat many dermatological conditions, including acne vulgaris, alopecia, melasma and other pigmentary... (Review)
Review
Microneedling is a relatively safe therapeutic procedure used to treat many dermatological conditions, including acne vulgaris, alopecia, melasma and other pigmentary disorders, as well as to promote skin rejuvenation, rhytide reduction, and scar remodeling. Given its popularity among patients and increasing use in the clinic and at home, we aim to explain the adverse effects associated with microneedling procedures. We reviewed the current literature describing microneedling and the complications that may accompany this therapeutic procedure. PubMed was searched to identify studies that involved microneedling procedures using the standard roller microneedling, stamp microneedling, pen-type microneedling, and/or fractional radiofrequency microneedling devices. The resulting publications included clinical trials, retrospective studies, and case reports, which were then thoroughly reviewed for description of potential or observed complications that arose secondary to the microneedling procedure. In this systematic review, a total of 51 articles were reviewed, which included 1,029 patients who received microneedling procedures for a variety of different skin conditions. Overall, this review found that microneedling, regardless of the specific device used, is a relatively safe procedure with minimal adverse effects, including, but not limited to, expected erythema, pain, edema, and temporary skin irritation. Microneedling has become an attractive treatment option for many patients with dermatological conditions. We advise that clinicians and patients be informed about the adverse side effects associated with microneedling so that the risk of preventable complications can be reduced or avoided.
PubMed: 33584968
DOI: No ID Found -
JAMA Dermatology Aug 2021Hidradenitis suppurativa/acne inversa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by occlusion of hair follicles as a primary pathogenic factor. There are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Hidradenitis suppurativa/acne inversa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by occlusion of hair follicles as a primary pathogenic factor. There are scarce data regarding the prevalence of HS.
OBJECTIVE
To estimate overall HS prevalence.
DATA SOURCES
This review and meta-regression analysis was conducted using the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline. The academic search included PubMed, Cochrane registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and evidence by NHS UK and Trip databases from inception through May 2020. To analyze HS prevalence, only cross-sectional studies or baseline assessments of longitudinal cohorts using census-based surveys or probabilistic and nonprobabilistic epidemiologic methods were considered. The search terms were (prevalence OR incidence OR epidemiology) AND (hidradenitis suppurativa OR acne inversa OR Verneuil's disease). No language restriction was applied.
STUDY SELECTION
Original investigations that reported HS prevalence were included. After exclusion criteria were applied, 17 studies qualified for qualitative analysis, but only 16 studies were quantitatively assessed.
DATA EXTRACTION AND MEASURES
Two reviewers extracted data by age, diagnostic criteria, presence of any comorbidity, sample sizes, continent/location, sex, and other characteristics. Assessment of bias risk used the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Instrument for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data using random-effects models to synthesize available evidence.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Hidradenitis suppurativa prevalence (with 95% CI) among the overall population and among subgroups. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed (Cochran Q statistic) and quantified (I2 statistic).
RESULTS
In 16 quantitatively assessed studies included, prevalence estimates were reported only from Western European and Scandinavian countries, the US, and Australia. Meta-analysis with random effects, after adjusting for publication bias in the prevalence estimates, revealed a 0.40% prevalence (95% CI, 0.26%-0.63%) for HS. Studies based on clinical samples revealed a higher pooled prevalence of HS (1.7%) than population-based studies (0.3%).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The findings of this systematic review and meta-regression analysis may help facilitate policy formulation, channeling funding and guiding principles for better disease diagnosis using universal valid tools and management.
Topics: Cross-Sectional Studies; Hidradenitis Suppurativa; Humans; Incidence; Observational Studies as Topic; Prevalence; Regression Analysis
PubMed: 34037678
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2021.1677 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2020Acne is a common, economically burdensome condition that can cause psychological harm and, potentially, scarring. Topical benzoyl peroxide (BPO) is a widely used acne... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Acne is a common, economically burdensome condition that can cause psychological harm and, potentially, scarring. Topical benzoyl peroxide (BPO) is a widely used acne treatment; however, its efficacy and safety have not been clearly evaluated.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of BPO for acne.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to February 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs that compared topical BPO used alone (including different formulations and concentrations of BPO) or as part of combination treatment against placebo, no treatment, or other active topical medications for clinically diagnosed acne (used alone or in combination with other topical drugs not containing BPO) on the face or trunk.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. Primary outcome measures were 'participant global self-assessment of acne improvement' and 'withdrawal due to adverse events in the whole course of a trial'. 'Percentage of participants experiencing any adverse event in the whole course of a trial' was a key secondary outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 120 trials (29,592 participants randomised in 116 trials; in four trials the number of randomised participants was unclear). Ninety-one studies included males and females. When reported, 72 trials included participants with mild to moderate acne, 26 included participants with severe acne, and the mean age of participants ranged from 18 to 30 years. Our included trials assessed BPO as monotherapy, as add-on treatment, or combined with other active treatments, as well as BPO of different concentrations and BPO delivered through different vehicles. Comparators included different concentrations or formulations of BPO, placebo, no treatment, or other active treatments given alone or combined. Treatment duration in 80 trials was longer than eight weeks and was only up to 12 weeks in 108 trials. Industry funded 50 trials; 63 trials did not report funding. We commonly found high or unclear risk of performance, detection, or attrition bias. Trial setting was under-reported but included hospitals, medical centres/departments, clinics, general practices, and student health centres. We reported on outcomes assessed at the end of treatment, and we classified treatment periods as short-term (two to four weeks), medium-term (five to eight weeks), or long-term (longer than eight weeks). For 'participant-reported acne improvement', BPO may be more effective than placebo or no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12 to 1.45; 3 RCTs; 2234 participants; treatment for 10 to 12 weeks; low-certainty evidence). Based on low-certainty evidence, there may be little to no difference between BPO and adapalene (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.10; 5 RCTs; 1472 participants; treatment for 11 to 12 weeks) or between BPO and clindamycin (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.34; 1 RCT; 240 participants; treatment for 10 weeks) (outcome not reported for BPO versus erythromycin or salicylic acid). For 'withdrawal due to adverse effects', risk of treatment discontinuation may be higher with BPO compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 2.13, 95% CI 1.55 to 2.93; 24 RCTs; 13,744 participants; treatment for 10 to 12 weeks; low-certainty evidence); the most common causes of withdrawal were erythema, pruritus, and skin burning. Only very low-certainty evidence was available for the following comparisons: BPO versus adapalene (RR 1.85, 95% CI 0.94 to 3.64; 11 RCTs; 3295 participants; treatment for 11 to 24 weeks; causes of withdrawal not clear), BPO versus clindamycin (RR 1.93, 95% CI 0.90 to 4.11; 8 RCTs; 3330 participants; treatment for 10 to 12 weeks; causes of withdrawal included local hypersensitivity, pruritus, erythema, face oedema, rash, and skin burning), erythromycin (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 15.26; 1 RCT; 60 participants; treatment for 8 weeks; withdrawal due to dermatitis), and salicylic acid (no participants had adverse event-related withdrawal; 1 RCT; 59 participants; treatment for 12 weeks). There may be little to no difference between these groups in terms of withdrawal; however, we are unsure of the results because the evidence is of very low certainty. For 'proportion of participants experiencing any adverse event', very low-certainty evidence leaves us uncertain about whether BPO increased adverse events when compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.70; 21 RCTs; 11,028 participants; treatment for 10 to 12 weeks), with adapalene (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.00; 7 RCTs; 2120 participants; treatment for 11 to 24 weeks), with erythromycin (no participants reported any adverse events; 1 RCT; 89 participants; treatment for 10 weeks), or with salicylic acid (RR 4.77, 95% CI 0.24 to 93.67; 1 RCT; 41 participants; treatment for 6 weeks). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that the risk of adverse events may be increased for BPO versus clindamycin (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.58; 6 RCTs; 3018 participants; treatment for 10 to 12 weeks); however, the 95% CI indicates that BPO might make little to no difference. Most reported adverse events were mild to moderate, and local dryness, irritation, dermatitis, erythema, application site pain, and pruritus were the most common.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence suggests that BPO as monotherapy or add-on treatment may be more effective than placebo or no treatment for improving acne, and there may be little to no difference between BPO and either adapalene or clindamycin. Our key efficacy evidence is based on participant self-assessment; trials of BPO versus erythromycin or salicylic acid did not report this outcome. For adverse effects, the evidence is very uncertain regarding BPO compared with adapalene, erythromycin, or salicylic acid. However, risk of treatment discontinuation may be higher with BPO compared with placebo or no treatment. Withdrawal may be linked to tolerability rather than to safety. Risk of mild to moderate adverse events may be higher with BPO compared with clindamycin. Further trials should assess the comparative effects of different preparations or concentrations of BPO and combination BPO versus monotherapy. These trials should fully assess and report adverse effects and patient-reported outcomes measured on a standardised scale.
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Adolescent; Adult; Benzoyl Peroxide; Cicatrix; Dermatologic Agents; Female; Humans; Male; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Young Adult
PubMed: 32175593
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011154.pub2 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Feb 2022Acne is a chronic inflammatory disease that occurs in the sebaceous glands of the hair follicles. Depressed acne scars, also known as depressed scars, remain after... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Acne is a chronic inflammatory disease that occurs in the sebaceous glands of the hair follicles. Depressed acne scars, also known as depressed scars, remain after recovery. Clinical treatments of depressed scars include chemical peels, surgical treatments, radio frequency treatments, and laser treatments. Ultra-pulse carbon dioxide (CO2) fractional laser treatment has become the main method for treating depressed scars in recent years, but there are no systematic reports on the effectiveness and safety of this treatment.
METHODS
English databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Ovid-Medline, were searched to retrieve relevant articles. The search period ran from the establishment of the databases to April 2021. The search terms included CO2 lattice laser, depressed acne scars, depressed scars, and effectiveness.
RESULTS
A total of 6 articles comprising 467 patients with depressed acne scars were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that patients treated with ultra-pulsed CO2 fractionated laser scored higher in skin smoothness compared to other methods [standard mean difference (SMD) =0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.13-0.84; P=0.008], and significantly higher total skin lesion scores (SMD =0.35, 95% CI: -0.00 to 0.70; P=0.05).
DISCUSSION
A total of 6 articles were included in this study on the clinical efficacy of the ultra-pulse CO2 fractional laser in the treatment of depressed acne scars. The study found that compared to other treatments, this laser had a better curative effect in terms of the effective rate and patient skin smoothness score.
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Carbon Dioxide; Cicatrix; Humans; Lasers, Gas; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35249351
DOI: 10.21037/apm-22-70 -
JAMA Dermatology Mar 2022While originally approved for the management of heart failure, hypertension, and edema, spironolactone is commonly used off label in the management of acne,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
While originally approved for the management of heart failure, hypertension, and edema, spironolactone is commonly used off label in the management of acne, hidradenitis, androgenetic alopecia, and hirsutism. However, spironolactone carries an official warning from the US Food and Drug Administration regarding potential for tumorigenicity.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the pooled occurrence of cancers, in particular breast and prostate cancers, among those who were ever treated with spironolactone.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception through June 11, 2021. The search was restricted to studies in the English language.
STUDY SELECTION
Included studies reported the occurrence of cancers in men and women 18 years and older who were exposed to spironolactone.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two independent reviewers (K.B. and H.H.) selected studies, extracted data, and appraised the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Studies were synthesized using random effects meta-analysis.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Cancer occurrence, with a focus on breast and prostate cancers.
RESULTS
Seven studies met eligibility criteria, with sample sizes ranging from 18 035 to 2.3 million and a total population of 4 528 332 individuals (mean age, 62.6-72.0 years; in the studies without stratification by sex, women accounted for 17.2%-54.4%). All studies were considered to be of low risk of bias. No statistically significant association was observed between spironolactone use and risk of breast cancer (risk ratio [RR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.86-1.22; certainty of evidence very low). There was an association between spironolactone use and decreased risk of prostate cancer (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.90; certainty of evidence very low). There was no statistically significant association between spironolactone use and risk of ovarian cancer (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.84-2.20; certainty of evidence very low), bladder cancer (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.71-1.07; certainty of evidence very low), kidney cancer (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.85-1.07; certainty of evidence low), gastric cancer (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.80-1.24; certainty of evidence low), or esophageal cancer (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.91-1.27; certainty of evidence low).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, spironolactone use was not associated with a substantial increased risk of cancer and was associated with a decreased risk of prostate cancer. However, the certainty of the evidence was low and future studies are needed, including among diverse populations such as younger individuals and those with acne or hirsutism.
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Aged; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Hirsutism; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Prostatic Neoplasms; Spironolactone; United States
PubMed: 35138351
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2021.5866 -
Archives of Dermatological Research Apr 2022There is increasing demand for home-based devices for the treatment of dermatologic conditions and cosmesis. Commercially available devices include intense pulsed light,...
There is increasing demand for home-based devices for the treatment of dermatologic conditions and cosmesis. Commercially available devices include intense pulsed light, laser diodes, radiofrequency, light-emitting diodes, and ultraviolet B phototherapy. The objective of this report is to evaluate the current evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of home-based devices for the treatment of skin conditions. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cinahl was conducted on November 9, 2020 using PRISMA guidelines. Original research articles that investigated the efficacy and safety of home-based devices for dermatologic use were included. Bibliographies were screened for additional relevant articles. Strength of evidence was graded using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines. Clinical recommendations were then made based on the quality of the existing literature. After review, 37 clinical trials were included-19 were randomized controlled trials, 16 were case series, and 2 were non-randomized controlled trials. Ultimately, from our analysis, we recommend the home-based use of intense pulsed light for hair removal, laser diodes for androgenic alopecia, low power radiofrequency for rhytides and wrinkles, and light-emitting diodes for acne vulgaris. Trials investigating ultraviolet B phototherapy for psoriasis revealed mixed evidence for home treatments compared to clinic treatments. All devices had favorable safety profiles with few significant adverse events. Limitations to our review include a limited number of randomized controlled trials as well as a lack of data on the long-term efficacy and safety of each device.
Topics: Cosmetic Techniques; Dermatology; Device Approval; Hair Removal; Humans; Laser Therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Self Administration; Skin Aging
PubMed: 33938981
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-021-02231-0 -
International Wound Journal Oct 2021To date, treatment of atrophic acne scars remains a therapeutic challenge for dermatologists, yet there is no standard option on the most effective treatment....
To date, treatment of atrophic acne scars remains a therapeutic challenge for dermatologists, yet there is no standard option on the most effective treatment. Microneedling (MN) is a minimally invasive technology that involves repetitive skin puncture using sterile microneedles to disrupt dermal collagen that connects the scar tissue. Recent studies have demonstrated the potency of MN, such as dermaroller and fractionated microneedle radiofrequency, in the treatment of atrophic scars. The objective of this review is to evaluate systematically the current literature on MN for atrophic acne scars. A systematic search of literature was performed from PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar databases for articles published during the last 20 years. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with full-text version of the manuscript available were included in our study. Nine RCTs were included in this review. All treatment modalities demonstrated consistent results that MN was efficacious in treating atrophic acne scars as a monotherapy or in combination with other treatments. Moreover, no serious adverse effects were reported in all studies after MN treatment. MN is a well-tolerated and effective therapeutic modality in treating atrophic acne scars. Further research is required to validate the efficacy of MN with a larger sample size and lengthy follow-up.
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Atrophy; Cicatrix; Cosmetic Techniques; Humans; Needles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33538106
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.13559 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022Steroids have been used widely since the early 1970s for the treatment of adult-onset minimal change disease (MCD). Recently, newer agents have been used in adult MCD... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Steroids have been used widely since the early 1970s for the treatment of adult-onset minimal change disease (MCD). Recently, newer agents have been used in adult MCD aiming to reduce the risk of adverse effects. The response rates to immunosuppressive agents in adult MCD are more variable than in children. The optimal agent, dose, and duration of treatment for the first episode of nephrotic syndrome, or for disease relapse(s) have not been determined. This is an update of a review first published in 2008.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to 1) evaluate the benefits and harms of different agents, including both immunosuppressive and non-immunosuppressive agents, in adults with MCD causing the nephrotic syndrome; and 2) evaluate the efficacy of interventions on 'time-to-remission' of nephrotic syndrome, in adults with MCD causing the nephrotic syndrome.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 21 July 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of any intervention for MCD with nephrotic syndrome in adults over 18 years were included. Studies comparing different types, routes, frequencies, and duration of immunosuppressive agents and non-immunosuppressive agents were assessed.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model and results were expressed as a risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, or mean difference (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Fifteen RCTs (769 randomised participants) were identified; four studies evaluated different prednisolone regimens, eight studies evaluated the calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) (tacrolimus or cyclosporin), two studies evaluated enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) and one study evaluated levamisole. In all but two studies of non-corticosteroid agents, reduced-dose prednisolone was given with the treatment agent and the comparator was high-dose prednisolone. In the risk of bias assessment, 11 and seven studies were at low risk of bias for sequence generation and allocation concealment, respectively. No studies were at low risk of performance bias and eight studies were at low risk of detection bias. Thirteen, 10 and six studies were at low risk of attrition bias, reporting bias and other bias, respectively. Compared with no specific treatment, it is uncertain whether prednisolone increases the number with complete remission (1 study, 28 participants: RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.19), complete or partial remission (1 study, 28 participants: RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.95), subsequent relapse (1 study, 28 participants: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.17), or reduces the adverse effects because the certainty of the evidence is very low. Compared with oral prednisolone alone, it is uncertain whether intravenous methylprednisolone and prednisolone increase the number with complete remission (2 studies, 35 participants: RR 1.76, 95% CI 0.17 to 18.32; I² = 90%), relapse (two studies, 19 participants. RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.15; I² = 0%) or adverse events because the certainty of the evidence is very low. Compared with prednisolone alone, CNIs with reduced-dose prednisolone or without prednisolone probably make little or no difference to the number achieving complete remission (8 studies; 492 participants: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; I² = 0%), complete or partial remission (4 studies, 269 participants: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.05; I² = 0%), or relapse (7 studies; 422 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.03; I² = 0%) (moderate certainty evidence), may reduce the risk of obesity or Cushing's Syndrome (5 studies; 388 participants: RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.59; I² = 45%) and the risk of acne (4 studies; 270 participants: RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.67; I² = 0%) (low certainty evidence); and had uncertain effects on diabetes or hyperglycaemia, hypertension, and acute kidney injury (AKI) (low certainty evidence). Compared with prednisolone alone, EC-MPS with reduced-dose prednisolone probably make little or no difference to the number undergoing complete remission at 4 weeks (1 study, 114 participants: RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.50), and at 24 weeks probably make little or no difference to the number undergoing complete remission (2 studies, 134 participants: RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.38; I² = 0%) (moderate certainty evidence), complete or partial remission (2 studies 134 participants: RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.12; I² = 0%), relapse (2 studies, 83 participants: RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.74; I² = 56%) (low certainty evidence); or to the adverse events of new-onset glucose intolerance, death, or AKI (low certainty evidence). One study (24 participants) compared levamisole and prednisolone with prednisolone in patients with relapsing disease. The authors identified no differences in mean relapse rate or adverse effects but no standard deviations were provided.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This updated review has identified evidence for the efficacy and adverse effects of CNIs and EC-MPS with or without reduced-dose prednisolone compared with prednisolone alone for the induction of remission in adults with MCD and nephrotic syndrome with some reductions in steroid-associated adverse events. RCT data on the efficacy and adverse effects of rituximab in adults with MCD are awaited. Further, adequately powered RCTs are required to determine the relative efficacies of CNIs and EC-MPS and to evaluate these medications in patients with relapsing or steroid-resistant disease.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Adult; Calcineurin Inhibitors; Child; Female; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Levamisole; Male; Methylprednisolone; Mycophenolic Acid; Nephrosis, Lipoid; Nephrotic Syndrome; Recurrence; Steroids
PubMed: 35230699
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001537.pub5 -
Skin Research and Technology : Official... Jun 2023Acne scar is a persistent complication of acne vulgaris. However, the prevalence and risk factors are still unclear. This study aimed to assess the global prevalence and...
BACKGROUND
Acne scar is a persistent complication of acne vulgaris. However, the prevalence and risk factors are still unclear. This study aimed to assess the global prevalence and risk factors of acne scars in patients with acne.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search of published studies in three databases was performed and the meta-analyses were conducted.
RESULTS
Finally, we included 37 studies involving 24 649 acne patients. And, the pooled prevalence of acne scars in these patients was 47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 38-56%). Besides, the differences in prevalence were observed based on the subgroup analysis for age, gender, acne severity, source of patients, and so on. Subsequently, we quantified the relationship of three risk factors with acne scars: male gender (odds ratio [OR]: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.19-2.09), positive family history of acne (OR: 2.73, 95% CI: 1.26-5.91), and acne severity (OR for moderate acne: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.54-3.57; OR for severe acne: 5.51, 95% CI: 2.45-12.41).
CONCLUSION
Herein, we found that 47% of acne patients suffered from acne scars and identified three risk factors: male gender, positive family history of acne, and acne severity. In order to reduce acne scarring, attention and effective therapy early in the course of acne is important.
Topics: Humans; Male; Acne Vulgaris; Cicatrix; Prevalence; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37357642
DOI: 10.1111/srt.13386