-
Cancer Medicine Feb 2023Cutaneous adverse effects (AEs) are common following the phosphoinositide-3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitors treatment. We aim to estimate the incidence and risk of PI3K... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Risk of cutaneous adverse events in cancer patients treated with phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Cutaneous adverse effects (AEs) are common following the phosphoinositide-3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitors treatment. We aim to estimate the incidence and risk of PI3K inhibitor-related cutaneous AEs.
METHODS
The protocol was submitted to the PROSPERO registry. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and international databases up to July 29, 2022. Meta-analysis was conducted by using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Fourteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 3877 patients were analyzed in this study. Compared with control arms, PI3K inhibitors showed a significant increase in the risk of all-grade rash, high-grade rash, and serious rash events (RR 2.29, 95% CI 1.58-3.31, p < 0.00001; RR 9.34, 95% CI 4.21-20.69, p < 0.00001; RR 5.11, 95% CI 2.11-12.36, p = 0.0003). The overall incidences of all-grade rash and high-grade rash were 26.2% (592/2257) and 4.4% (66/1487). Subgroup analyses of all-grade rash according to cancer types and PI3K inhibitor assignations identified the significant associations. PI3K inhibitors also significantly increased the risk of pruritus and dry skin (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.14-2.33, p = 0.007; RR 3.34, 95% CI 2.30-4.85, p < 0.00001), with incidences of 13.4% (284/2115) and 9.8% (141/1436) in the treatment group.
CONCLUSION
There is a significantly increased risk of some cutaneous AEs in patients using PI3K inhibitors. Advance intervention is recommended in case of severe and life-threatening events. Further research is required to investigate the risk factors and pathogenesis.
Topics: Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Neoplasms; Phosphoinositide-3 Kinase Inhibitors; Exanthema; Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases; Phosphatidylinositols
PubMed: 35986570
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.5153 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022Polygoni Cuspidati Rhizoma et Radix, the dry roots and stems of Houtt (called Huzhang, HZ in Chinese), is a traditional and popular chinese medicinal herb for thousands...
Polygoni Cuspidati Rhizoma et Radix, the dry roots and stems of Houtt (called Huzhang, HZ in Chinese), is a traditional and popular chinese medicinal herb for thousands of years. As a widely used ethnomedicine in Asia including China, Japan, and Korea, HZ can invigorate the blood, cool heat, and resolve toxicity, which is commonly used in the treatment of favus, jaundice, scald, and constipation. However, HZ is now considered an invasive plant in the United States and many European countries. Therefore, in order to take advantage of HZ and solve the problem of biological invasion, scholars around the world have carried out abundant research studies on HZ. Until now, about 110 compounds have been isolated and identified from HZ, in which anthraquinones, stilbenes, and flavonoids would be the main bioactive ingredients for its pharmacological properties, such as microcirculation improvement, myocardial protective effects, endocrine regulation, anti-atherosclerotic activity, anti-oxidant activity, anti-tumor activity, anti-viral activity, and treatment of skin inflammation, burns, and scalds. HZ has a variety of active ingredients and broad pharmacological activities. It is widely used in health products, cosmetics, and even animal husbandry feed and has no obvious toxicity. Efforts should be made to develop more products such as effective drugs, health care products, cosmetics, and agricultural and animal husbandry products to benefit mankind.
PubMed: 35770098
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.863707 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2020Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM), sometimes referred to as chronic otitis media (COM), is a chronic inflammation and infection of the middle ear and mastoid... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM), sometimes referred to as chronic otitis media (COM), is a chronic inflammation and infection of the middle ear and mastoid cavity, characterised by ear discharge (otorrhoea) through a perforated tympanic membrane. The predominant symptoms of CSOM are ear discharge and hearing loss. Topical antiseptics, one of the possible treatments for CSOM, inhibit the micro-organisms that may be responsible for the infection. Antiseptics can be used alone or in addition to other treatments for CSOM, such as antibiotics or ear cleaning (aural toileting). Antiseptics or their application can cause irritation of the skin of the outer ear, manifesting as discomfort, pain or itching. Some antiseptics (such as alcohol) may have the potential to be toxic to the inner ear (ototoxicity), with a possible increased risk of causing sensorineural hearing loss, dizziness or tinnitus.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of topical antiseptics for people with chronic suppurative otitis media.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 4, via the Cochrane Register of Studies); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 1 April 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least a one-week follow-up involving patients (adults and children) who had chronic ear discharge of unknown cause or CSOM, where the ear discharge had continued for more than two weeks. The interventions were any single, or combination of, topical antiseptic agent of any class, applied directly into the ear canal as ear drops, powders or irrigations, or as part of an aural toileting procedure. Two main comparisons were topical antiseptics compared to: a) placebo or no intervention; and b) another topical antiseptic (e.g. topical antiseptic A versus topical antiseptic B). Within each comparison we separated studies where both groups of patients had received topical antiseptics a) alone or with aural toileting and b) on top of antibiotic treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Our primary outcomes were: resolution of ear discharge or 'dry ear' (whether otoscopically confirmed or not), measured at between one week and up to two weeks, two weeks to up to four weeks, and after four weeks; health-related quality of life using a validated instrument; ear pain (otalgia) or discomfort or local irritation. Secondary outcomes included hearing, serious complications and ototoxicity measured in several ways.
MAIN RESULTS
Five studies were included. It was not possible to calculate the total number of participants as two studies only provided the number of ears included in the study. A. Topical antiseptic (boric acid) versus placebo or no treatment (all patients had aural toileting) Three studies compared topical antiseptics with no treatment, with one study reporting results we could use (254 children; cluster-RCT). This compared the instillation of boric acid in alcohol drops versus no ear drops for one month (both arms used daily dry mopping). We made adjustments to the data to account for the intra-cluster correlation. The very low certainty of the evidence means it is uncertain whether or not treatment with an antiseptic leads to an increase in resolution of ear discharge at both four weeks (risk ratio (RR) 1.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20 to 3.16; 174 participants) and at three to four months (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.47; 180 participants). This study narratively described no differences in suspected ototoxicity or hearing outcomes between the arms (very low-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported results for health-related quality of life, adverse effects or serious complications. B. Topical antiseptic A versus topical antiseptic B Two studies compared different antiseptics but only one (93 participants), comparing a single instillation of boric acid powder with daily acetic acid ear drops, provided any information for this comparison. The very low certainty of the evidence means that it is uncertain whether more patients had resolution of ear discharge with boric acid powder compared to acetic acid at four weeks (RR 2.61, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.53; 93 participants), or whether there was a difference between the arms with respect to ear discomfort due to the low number of reported events (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.81; 93 participants). Narratively, the study reported no difference in hearing outcomes between the groups. None of the included studies reported any of the other primary or secondary outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Due to paucity of the evidence and the very low certainty of that which is available the effectiveness and safety profile of antiseptics in the treatment of CSOM is uncertain.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Chronic Disease; Humans; Otitis Media, Suppurative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31902140
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013055.pub2 -
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies Feb 2024Evening primrose oil (EPO), extracted from the seeds of Oenothera biennis, has gained attention for its therapeutic effects in various inflammatory conditions.
BACKGROUND
Evening primrose oil (EPO), extracted from the seeds of Oenothera biennis, has gained attention for its therapeutic effects in various inflammatory conditions.
METHOD
We performed a systematic search in multiple databases and defined the inclusion criteria based on the following PICOs: P: Patients with a form of inflammatory condition, I: EPO, C: Placebo or other therapeutic interventions, O: changes in inflammatory markers or patients' symptoms; S: randomized controlled trials. The quality of the RCTs was evaluated using Cochrane's RoB tool.
RESULTS
Several conditions were investigated in the literature. In rheumatoid arthritis, mixed results were observed, with some studies reporting significant improvements in symptoms while others found no significant impact. EPO showed some results in diabetes mellitus, atopic eczema, menopausal hot flashes, and mastalgia. However, it did not demonstrate effectiveness in chronic hand dermatitis, tardive dyskinesia, psoriatic arthritis, cystic fibrosis, hepatitis B, premenstrual syndrome, contact lens-associated dry eyes, acne vulgaris, breast cyst, pre-eclampsia, psoriasis, or primary Sjogren's syndrome. Some results were reported from multiple sclerosis after EPO consumption. Studies in healthy volunteers indicated no significant effect of EPO on epidermal atrophy, nevertheless, positive effects on the skin regarding hydration and barrier function were achieved.
CONCLUSION
Some evidence regarding the potential benefits of EPO in inflammatory disorders were reported however caution is due to the limitations of the current survey. Overall, contemporary literature is highly heterogeneous and fails to provide strong recommendations regarding the efficacy of EPO on inflammatory disorders. Further high-quality studies are necessitated to draw more definite conclusions and establish O. biennis oil effectiveness as an assuring treatment option in alleviating inflammatory conditions.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Oenothera biennis; gamma-Linolenic Acid; Linoleic Acids; Plant Oils
PubMed: 38360611
DOI: 10.1186/s12906-024-04378-5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2020Illness-related absenteeism is an important problem among preschool and school children for low-, middle- and high- income countries. Appropriate hand hygiene is one... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Illness-related absenteeism is an important problem among preschool and school children for low-, middle- and high- income countries. Appropriate hand hygiene is one commonly investigated and implemented strategy to reduce the spread of illness and subsequently the number of days spent absent. Most hand hygiene strategies involve washing hands with soap and water, however this is associated with a number of factors that act as a barrier to its use, such as requiring running water, and the need to dry hands after cleaning. An alternative method involves washing hands using rinse-free hand wash. This technique has a number of benefits over traditional hand hygiene strategies and may prove to be beneficial in reducing illness-related absenteeism in preschool and school children.
OBJECTIVES
1. To assess the effectiveness of rinse-free hand washing for reducing absenteeism due to illness in preschool and school children compared to no hand washing, conventional hand washing with soap and water or other hand hygiene strategies. 2. To determine which rinse-free hand washing products are the most effective (if head-to-head comparisons exist), and what effect additional strategies in combination with rinse-free hand washing have on the outcomes of interest.
SEARCH METHODS
In February 2020 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, 12 other databases and three clinical trial registries. We also reviewed the reference lists of included studies and made direct contact with lead authors of studies to collect additional information as required. No date or language restrictions were applied.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), irrespective of publication status, comparing rinse-free hand wash in any form (hand rub, hand sanitizer, gel, foam etc.) with conventional hand washing using soap and water, other hand hygiene programs (such as education alone), or no intervention. The population of interest was children aged between two and 18 years attending preschool (childcare, day care, kindergarten, etc.) or school (primary, secondary, elementary, etc.). Primary outcomes included child or student absenteeism for any reason, absenteeism due to any illness and adverse skin reactions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Following standard Cochrane methods, two review authors (out of ZM, CT, CL, CS, TB), independently selected studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted relevant data. Absences were extracted as the number of student days absent out of total days. This was sometimes reported with the raw numbers and other times as an incidence rate ratio (IRR), which we also extracted. For adverse event data, we calculated effect sizes as risk ratios (RRs) and present these with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane for data analysis and followed the GRADE approach to establish certainty in the findings.
MAIN RESULTS
This review includes 19 studies with 30,747 participants. Most studies were conducted in the USA (eight studies), two were conducted in Spain, and one each in China, Colombia, Finland, France, Kenya, Bangladesh, New Zealand, Sweden, and Thailand. Six studies were conducted in preschools or day-care centres (children aged from birth to < five years), with the remaining 13 conducted in elementary or primary schools (children aged five to 14 years). The included studies were judged to be at high risk of bias in several domains, most-notably across the domains of performance and detection bias due to the difficulty to blind those delivering the intervention or those assessing the outcome. Additionally, every outcome of interest was graded as low or very low certainty of evidence, primarily due to high risk of bias, as well as imprecision of the effect estimates and inconsistency between pooled data. For the outcome of absenteeism for any reason, the pooled estimate for rinse-free hand washing was an IRR of 0.91 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.01; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence), which indicates there may be little to no difference between groups. For absenteeism for any illness, the pooled IRR was 0.82 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.97; 6 studies; very low-certainty evidence), which indicates that rinse-free hand washing may reduce absenteeism (13 days absent per 1000) compared to those in the 'no rinse-free' group (16 days absent per 1000). For the outcome of absenteeism for acute respiratory illness, the pooled IRR was 0.79 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.92; 6 studies; very low-certainty evidence), which indicates that rinse-free hand washing may reduce absenteeism (33 days absent per 1000) compared to those in the 'no rinse-free' group (42 days absent per 1000). When evaluating absenteeism for acute gastrointestinal illness, the pooled estimate found an IRR of 0.79 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.85; 4 studies; low-certainty evidence), which indicates rinse-free hand washing may reduce absenteeism (six days absent per 1000) compared to those in the 'no rinse-free' group (eight days absent per 1000). There may be little to no difference between rinse-free hand washing and 'no rinse-free' group regarding adverse skin reactions with a RR of 1.03 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.32; 3 studies, 4365 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Broadly, compliance with the intervention appeared to range from moderate to high compliance (9 studies, 10,749 participants; very-low certainty evidence); narrativley, no authors reported substantial issues with compliance. Overall, most studies that included data on perception reported that teachers and students perceived rinse-free hand wash positively and were willing to continue its use (3 studies, 1229 participants; very-low certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The findings of this review may have identified a small yet potentially beneficial effect of rinse-free hand washing regimes on illness-related absenteeism. However, the certainty of the evidence that contributed to this conclusion was low or very low according to the GRADE approach and is therefore uncertain. Further research is required at all levels of schooling to evaluate rinse-free hand washing regimens in order to provide more conclusive, higher-certainty evidence regarding its impact. When considering the use of a rinse-free hand washing program in a local setting, there needs to be consideration of the current rates of illness-related absenteeism and whether the small beneficial effects seen here will translate into a meaningful reduction across their settings.
Topics: Absenteeism; Adolescent; Child; Child, Preschool; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Hand Hygiene; Humans; Preventive Medicine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Tract Diseases; Schools
PubMed: 32270476
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012566.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2021Indoor exposure to dry air during heating periods has been associated with dryness and irritation symptoms of the upper respiratory airways and the skin. The irritated... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Indoor exposure to dry air during heating periods has been associated with dryness and irritation symptoms of the upper respiratory airways and the skin. The irritated or damaged mucous membrane poses an important entry port for pathogens causing respiratory infections.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness of interventions that increase indoor air humidity in order to reduce or prevent dryness symptoms of the eyes, the skin and the upper respiratory tract (URT) or URT infections, at work and in educational settings.
SEARCH METHODS
The last search for all databases was done in December 2020. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus and in the field of occupational safety and health: NIOSHTIC-2, HSELINE, CISDOC and the In-house database of the Division of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, University of Zurich. We also contacted experts, screened reference lists of included trials, relevant reviews and consulted the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included controlled studies with a parallel group or cross-over design, quasi-randomised studies, controlled before-and-after and interrupted time-series studies on the effects of indoor air humidification in reducing or preventing dryness symptoms and upper respiratory tract infections as primary outcomes at workplace and in the educational setting. As secondary outcomes we considered perceived air quality, other adverse events, sick leave, task performance, productivity and attendance and costs of the intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts for eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risks of bias of included studies. We synthesised the evidence for the primary outcomes 'dry eye', 'dry nose', 'dry skin', for the secondary outcome 'absenteeism', as well as for 'perception of stuffiness' as the harm-related measure. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE system.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 studies with at least 4551 participants, and extracted the data of 12 studies with at least 4447 participants. Seven studies targeted the occupational setting, with three studies comprising office workers and four hospital staff. Three of them were clustered cross-over studies with 846 participants (one cRCT), one parallel-group controlled trial (2395 participants) and three controlled before-and-after studies with 181 participants. Five studies, all CTs, with at least 1025 participants, addressing the educational setting, were reported between 1963 and 1975, and in 2018. In total, at least 3933 (88%) participants were included in the data analyses. Due to the lack of information, the results of the risk of bias assessment remained mainly unclear and the assessable risks of bias of included studies were considered as predominantly high. Primary outcomes in occupational setting: We found that indoor air humidification at the workplace may have little to no effect on dryness symptoms of the eye and nose (URT). The only cRCT showed a significant decrease in dry eye symptoms among working adults (odds ratio (OR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.79) with a low certainty of the evidence. The only cluster non-randomised cross-over study showed a non-significant positive effect of humidification on dryness nose symptoms (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.42) with a low certainty of evidence. We found that indoor air humidification at the workplace may have little and non-significant effect on dryness skin symptoms. The pooled results of two cluster non-RCTs showed a non-significant alleviation of skin dryness following indoor air humidification (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.32) with a low certainty of evidence. Similarly, the pooled results of two before-after studies yielded no statistically significant result (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.47) with very low certainty of evidence No studies reported on the outcome of upper respiratory tract infections. No studies conducted in educational settings investigated our primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes in occupational setting: Perceived stuffiness of the air was increased during the humidification in the two cross-over studies (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.23); (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.61) with low certainty of evidence. Secondary outcomes in educational setting: Based on different measures and settings of absenteeism, four of the six controlled studies found a reduction in absenteeism following indoor air humidification (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.65; OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.96; proportion 4.63% versus 5.08%).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Indoor air humidification at the workplace may have little to no effect on dryness symptoms of the eyes, the skin and the URT. Studies investigating illness-related absenteeism from work or school could only be summarised narratively, due to different outcome measures assessed. The evidence suggests that increasing humidification may reduce the absenteeism, but the evidence is very uncertain. Future RCTs involving larger sample sizes, assessing dryness symptoms more technically or rigorously defining absenteeism and controlling for potential confounders are therefore needed to determine whether increasing indoor air humidity can reduce or prevent dryness symptoms of the eyes, the skin, the URT or URT infections at work and in educational settings over time.
Topics: Absenteeism; Adult; Air Pollution, Indoor; Humans; Occupational Health; Respiratory Tract Infections; Workplace
PubMed: 34891215
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012219.pub2 -
Skin Research and Technology : Official... May 2024Notalgia paresthetica (NP) is a rare condition characterized by localized pain and pruritus of the upper back, associated with a distinct area of hyperpigmentation....
BACKGROUND
Notalgia paresthetica (NP) is a rare condition characterized by localized pain and pruritus of the upper back, associated with a distinct area of hyperpigmentation. Given the lack of standardized treatment and the uncertain efficacy of available options, applying procedural methods is of growing interest in treating NP.
AIMS
We sought to comprehensively evaluate the role of procedural treatments for NP.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed/Medline, Ovid Embase, and Web of Science until November 14th, 2023. We also performed a citation search to detect all relevant studies. Original clinical studies published in the English language were included.
RESULTS
Out of 243 articles, sixteen studies have reported various procedural modalities, with or without pharmacological components, in treating NP. Pharmacological procedures, including injections of botulinum toxin, lidocaine, and corticosteroids, led to a level of improvement in case reports and case series. However, botulinum toxin did not show acceptable results in a clinical trial. Moreover, non-pharmacological procedures were as follows: physical therapy, exercise therapy, kinesiotherapy, acupuncture and dry needling, electrical muscle stimulation, surgical decompression, and phototherapy. These treatments result in significant symptom control in refractory cases. Physical therapy can be considered a first-line choice or an alternative in refractory cases.
CONCLUSION
Procedural modalities are critical in the multidisciplinary approach to NP, especially for patients who are refractory to topical and oral treatments. Procedural modalities include a spectrum of options that can be applied based on the disease's symptoms and severity.
Topics: Humans; Pruritus; Lidocaine; Paresthesia; Hyperpigmentation; Physical Therapy Modalities; Acupuncture Therapy; Botulinum Toxins; Anesthetics, Local; Exercise Therapy; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Dry Needling
PubMed: 38696233
DOI: 10.1111/srt.13723 -
Endocrine Journal Sep 2020Androgen regulates the function of lacrimal and meibomian glands, and its deficiency is a pathological factor underlying dry eye disease (DED). However, no androgen has...
Androgen regulates the function of lacrimal and meibomian glands, and its deficiency is a pathological factor underlying dry eye disease (DED). However, no androgen has been approved for treating DED due to lack of definite evidence regarding its efficacy and safety in clinics. In this systematic review, we have summarized the clinical studies on the safety and efficacy of androgen replacement therapy (ART) for DED. Medline (via Pubmed), Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov, Wanfang and Chinese Clinical Trials Registry Database were searched for the relevant prospective studies, and 7 studies wherein androgen was applied topically via eye drops or systemically via oral or transdermal administration were included. The quality of these studies was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias and methodological index for non-randomized studies. Most studies showed that androgen effectively improved dry eye-related symptoms and increased tear secretion. Furthermore, elderly men and peri-menopausal women with lower levels of circulating androgens responded better to ART. However, one study involving patients with Sjögren's syndrome showed no improvement in the ART group compared to the placebo control, or to the baseline level. Adverse effects were also common but limited to mild skin problems. In conclusion, androgen is a potential treatment for dry eye disease, especially for people with primary androgen deficiency. Short-term application is relatively safe.
Topics: Androgens; Dry Eye Syndromes; Hormone Replacement Therapy; Humans; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32814731
DOI: 10.1507/endocrj.EJ20-0178 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2019Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) can cause secondary infection in eczema, and may promote inflammation in eczema that does not look infected. There is no standard... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) can cause secondary infection in eczema, and may promote inflammation in eczema that does not look infected. There is no standard intervention to reduce S. aureus burden in eczema. It is unclear whether antimicrobial treatments help eczema or promote bacterial resistance. This is an update of a 2008 Cochrane Review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of interventions to reduce S. aureus for treating eczema.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated our searches of the following databases to October 2018: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS. We searched five trials registers and three sets of conference proceedings. We checked references of trials and reviews for further relevant studies. We contacted pharmaceutical companies regarding ongoing and unpublished trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of products intended to reduce S. aureus on the skin in people diagnosed with atopic eczema by a medical practitioner. Eligible comparators were a similar treatment regimen without the anti-staphylococcal agent.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our key outcomes were participant- or assessor-rated global improvement in symptoms/signs, quality of life (QOL), severe adverse events requiring withdrawal, minor adverse events, and emergence of antibiotic-resistant micro-organisms.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 41 studies (1753 analysed participants) covering 10 treatment categories. Studies were conducted mainly in secondary care in Western Europe; North America; the Far East; and elsewhere. Twelve studies recruited children; four, adults; 19, both; and six, unclear. Fifty-nine per cent of the studies reported the mean age of participants (range: 1.1 to 34.6 years). Eczema severity ranged from mild to severe. Many studies did not report our primary outcomes. Treatment durations ranged from 10 minutes to 3 months; total study durations ranged from 15 weeks to 27 months. We considered 33 studies at high risk of bias in at least one domain. We present results for three key comparisons. All time point measurements were taken from baseline. We classed outcomes as short-term when treatment duration was less than four weeks, and long-term when treatment was given for more than four weeks. Fourteen studies evaluated topical steroid/antibiotic combinations compared to topical steroids alone (infective status: infected (two studies), not infected (four studies), unspecified (eight studies)). Topical steroid/antibiotic combinations may lead to slightly greater global improvement in good or excellent signs/symptoms than topical steroid alone at 6 to 28 days follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.21; 224 participants; 3 studies, low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference between groups for QOL in children, at 14 days follow-up (mean difference (MD) -0.18, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.04; 42 participants; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence). The subsequent results for this comparison were based on very low-quality evidence, meaning we are uncertain of their validity: severe adverse events were rare (follow-up: between 6 to 28 days): both groups reported flare of dermatitis, worsening of the condition, and folliculitis (325 participants; 4 studies). There were fewer minor adverse events (e.g. flare, stinging, itch, folliculitis) in the combination group at 14 days follow-up (218 participants; 2 studies). One study reported antibiotic resistance in children at three months follow-up, with similar results between the groups (65 participants; 1 study). Four studies evaluated oral antibiotics compared to placebo (infective status: infected eczema (two studies), uninfected (one study), one study's participants had colonisation but no clinical infection). Oral antibiotics may make no difference in terms of good or excellent global improvement in infants and children at 14 to 28 days follow-up compared to placebo (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.18 to 3.50; 75 participants; 2 studies, low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference between groups for QOL (in infants and children) at 14 days follow-up (MD 0.11, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.32, 45 participants, 1 study, moderate-quality evidence). The subsequent results for this comparison were based on very low-quality evidence, meaning we are uncertain of their validity: adverse events requiring treatment withdrawal between 14 to 28 days follow-up were very rare, but included eczema worsening (both groups), loose stools (antibiotic group), and Henoch-Schönlein purpura (placebo group) (4 studies, 199 participants). Minor adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and stomach and joint pains, at 28 days follow-up were also rare and generally low in both groups (1 study, 68 infants and children). Antibiotic resistance at 14 days was reported as similar in both groups (2 studies, 98 infants and children). Of five studies evaluating bleach baths compared to placebo (water) or bath emollient (infective status: uninfected (two studies), unspecified (three studies)), one reported global improvement and showed that bleach baths may make no difference when compared with placebo at one month follow-up (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.63; 36 participants; low-quality evidence). One study showed there is probably little or no difference in QOL at 28 days follow-up when comparing bleach baths to placebo (MD 0.90, 95% CI -1.32 to 3.12) (80 infants and children; moderate-quality evidence). We are uncertain if the groups differ in the likelihood of treatment withdrawals due to adverse events at two months follow-up (only one dropout reported due to worsening itch (placebo group)) as the quality of evidence was very low (1 study, 42 participants). One study reported that five participants in each group experienced burning/stinging or dry skin at two months follow-up, so there may be no difference in minor adverse events between groups (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.87, 36 participants, low-quality evidence). Very low-quality evidence means we are also uncertain if antibiotic resistance at four weeks follow-up is different between groups (1 study, 80 participants ≤ 18 years).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found insufficient evidence on the effects of anti-staphylococcal treatments for treating people with infected or uninfected eczema. Low-quality evidence, due to risk of bias, imprecise effect estimates and heterogeneity, made pooling of results difficult. Topical steroid/antibiotic combinations may be associated with possible small improvements in good or excellent signs/symptoms compared with topical steroid alone. High-quality trials evaluating efficacy, QOL, and antibiotic resistance are required.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Dermatologic Agents; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Eczema; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Staphylococcal Infections; Staphylococcus aureus
PubMed: 31684694
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003871.pub3 -
Evidence-based Complementary and... 2020The aim was to determine the effectiveness of minimally invasive techniques (MIT) in patients with patellar tendinopathy. Database searches were performed for randomized...
The aim was to determine the effectiveness of minimally invasive techniques (MIT) in patients with patellar tendinopathy. Database searches were performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in electronic databases (WOS, Cochrane Central, SportDiscus, and Medline via PubMed and PEDro). The inclusion criteria used were published in English or Spanish and involving adults with patellar tendinopathy (pain on the inferior pole of the patella for a minimum of 3 months), with at least one group receiving MIT. The quality of the relevant RCTs was evaluated using the PEDro scale. The primary outcome was functionality using the VISA-p questionnaire. Secondary outcome was focused on pain. A total of 1164 studies were screened for possible inclusion in our systematic review. Finally, 10 RCTs were included with a total of 326 individuals. Five RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The quality assessment revealed that all the studies included were considered to possess high methodological quality. All studies analyzing MIT such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP), dry needling, or skin-derived tenocyte-like cells, when combined with exercise, proved to be effective for patellar tendinopathy. Moreover, the PRP technique with doses greater than 4 mL together and combined with an exercise program lasting over 6 weeks obtained better results in functionality and pain than other treatments in the short term. However, in the long term, dry needling and skin-derived tenocyte-like cells are more effective than PRP. Although the infiltration of drugs was effective at posttreatment, these improvements were not maintained over time and may have secondary effects. Although there are no RCTs analyzing the effectiveness of MIT like percutaneous needle electrolysis, there has been an increasing number of publications achieving excellent results in the last years. However, it is necessary to develop RCTs analyzing not only the effect but also comparing the effectiveness between different MIT such as dry needling and percutaneous needle electrolysis.
PubMed: 32963575
DOI: 10.1155/2020/8706283