-
Sexually Transmitted Diseases Jun 2021No clear guidelines are available for the management of pregnant women with condyloma acuminata, a human papillomavirus-associated benign neoplasm that develops in the...
No clear guidelines are available for the management of pregnant women with condyloma acuminata, a human papillomavirus-associated benign neoplasm that develops in the genital tract. We performed a systematic review to gain a better understanding of the management of condyloma acuminata during pregnancy. In this review, we mainly focused on treatments. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science to identify studies on the treatment of condyloma acuminata during pregnancy. Thirty articles met the inclusion criteria. The treatment methods described in the literature were laser therapy, cryotherapy, imiquimod, photodynamic therapy, trichloroacetic acid, and local hyperthermia. The most effective treatment remains unclear. Various factors must be considered when deciding how to treat. Based on our assessment of the literature, we recommend cryotherapy as the first-choice treatment and laser therapy as the second-choice treatment. Imiquimod can be considered in cases such as extensive condyloma acuminata that is not easily treated by cryotherapy or laser therapy. In such cases, sufficient informed consent must be obtained from the patient. Cryotherapy, laser therapy, and imiquimod have been administered during all 3 trimesters with no severe adverse effects, but we cautiously recommend reserving laser therapy until the third trimester because of the lower risk of recurrence before delivery. There are still many unclear points regarding the management of condyloma in pregnancy, and further research is needed.
Topics: Condylomata Acuminata; Female; Humans; Imiquimod; Papillomaviridae; Photochemotherapy; Pregnancy; Recurrence
PubMed: 33093288
DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000001322 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jun 2014Warts are caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV), of which there are over 100 types. HPV probably infects the skin via areas of minimal trauma. Risk factors include... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Warts are caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV), of which there are over 100 types. HPV probably infects the skin via areas of minimal trauma. Risk factors include use of communal showers, occupational handling of meat, and immunosuppression. In immunocompetent people, warts are harmless and resolve as a result of natural immunity within months or years.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for warts (non-genital)? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to October 2013 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 17 studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic, review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: intralesional bleomycin; intralesional candida antigen; contact immunotherapy; cryotherapy; duct tape occlusion; photodynamic treatment; pulsed dye laser; surgical procedures; and topical salicylic acid.
Topics: Bleomycin; Cryotherapy; Humans; Immunotherapy; Lasers, Dye; Papillomaviridae; Papillomavirus Infections; Photochemotherapy; Salicylic Acid; Warts
PubMed: 24921240
DOI: No ID Found -
Lasers in Medical Science Mar 2022Glioma is the most common primary central nervous system tumor; many methods are currently being used to research and treat glioma. In recent years, fluorescent-guided... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Glioma is the most common primary central nervous system tumor; many methods are currently being used to research and treat glioma. In recent years, fluorescent-guided resection (FGR) and photodynamic therapy (PDT) have become hot spots in the treatment of glioma. Based on the existing literatures regarding the FGR enhancing resection rate and regarding efficacy of PDT for the treatment of glioma, this paper made a systematic review of FGR for gross total resection of patients and the PDT for the survival of patients with glioma. Meta-analysis of eligible studies was performed to derive precise estimation of PDT on the prognosis of patients with glioma by searching all related literatures in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases, and further to evaluate (GTR) under FGR and the efficacy of PDT therapy, including 1-year and 2-year survival rates, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 1294 patients with glioma were included in the final analysis of 31 articles, among which a 73.00% (95% CI, 68.00 ~ 79.00%, P < 0.01) rate of GTR in 27 groups included in 23 articles was reported for those receiving FGR. The OS was 17.78 months (95% CI, 8.89 ~ 26.67, P < 0.01) in 5 articles on PDT-treated patients with glioma, and the mean difference of OS was 6.18 (95% CI, 3.3 ~ 9.06, P < 0.01) between PDT treatment and conventional glioma surgery, showing a statistically significant difference (P < 0.01). The PFS was 10.82 months (95% CI, 7.04 ~ 14.61, P < 0.01) in 5 articles on PDT-treated patients with glioma. A 1-year survival rate of 59.00% (95% CI, 38.00 ~ 77.00%, P < 0.01) in 10 groups included in 8 articles and 2-year survival rate of 25.00% (95% CI, 15.00 ~ 36.00%, P < 0.01) in 7 groups included in 6 articles were reported for those with PDT. FGR and PDT are feasible for treatment of patients with glioma, because FGR can effectively increase the resection rate, at the same time, PDT can prolong the survival time. However, due to the limitation of small sample size in the existing studies, larger samples and randomized controlled clinical trials are needed to analyze the resection under FGR and efficacy of PDT in patients with glioma.
Topics: Brain Neoplasms; Glioma; Humans; Photochemotherapy
PubMed: 34581904
DOI: 10.1007/s10103-021-03426-7 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2020Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the commonest cancer affecting white-skinned individuals, and worldwide incidence is increasing. Although rarely fatal, BCC is associated... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the commonest cancer affecting white-skinned individuals, and worldwide incidence is increasing. Although rarely fatal, BCC is associated with significant morbidity and costs. First-line treatment is usually surgical excision, but alternatives are available. New published studies and the development of non-surgical treatments meant an update of our Cochrane Review (first published in 2003, and previously updated in 2007) was timely.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of interventions for BCC in immunocompetent adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated our searches of the following databases to November 2019: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and LILACS.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for BCC in immunocompetent adults with histologically-proven, primary BCC. Eligible comparators were placebo, active treatment, other treatments, or no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcome measures were recurrence at three years and five years (measured clinically) (we included recurrence data outside of these time points if there was no measurement at three or five years) and participant- and observer-rated good/excellent cosmetic outcome. Secondary outcomes included pain during and after treatment, early treatment failure within six months, and adverse effects (AEs). We used GRADE to assess evidence certainty for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 52 RCTs (26 new) involving 6690 participants (median 89) in this update. All studies recruited from secondary care outpatient clinics. More males than females were included. Study duration ranged from six weeks to 10 years (average 13 months). Most studies (48/52) included only low-risk BCC (superficial (sBCC) and nodular (nBCC) histological subtypes). The majority of studies were at low or unclear risk of bias for most domains. Twenty-two studies were industry-funded: commercial sponsors conducted most of the studies assessing imiquimod, and just under half of the photodynamic therapy (PDT) studies. Overall, surgical interventions have the lowest recurrence rates. For high-risk facial BCC (high-risk histological subtype or located in the facial 'H-zone' or both), there may be slightly fewer recurrences with Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) compared to surgical excision (SE) at three years (1.9% versus 2.9%, respectively) (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 2.64; 1 study, 331 participants; low-certainty evidence) and at five years (3.2% versus 5.2%, respectively) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.18 to 2.04; 1 study, 259 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, the 95% CI also includes the possibility of increased risk of recurrence and no difference between treatments. There may be little to no difference regarding improvement of cosmetic outcomes between MMS and SE, judged by participants and observers 18 months post-operatively (one study; low-certainty evidence); however, no raw data were available for this outcome. When comparing imiquimod and SE for nBCC or sBCC at low-risk sites, imiquimod probably results in more recurrences than SE at three years (16.4% versus 1.6%, respectively) (RR 10.30, 95% CI 3.22 to 32.94; 1 study, 401 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and five years (17.5% versus 2.3%, respectively) (RR 7.73, 95% CI 2.81 to 21.3; 1 study, 383 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in the number of participant-rated good/excellent cosmetic outcomes (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06; 1 study, 326 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, imiquimod may result in greater numbers of good/excellent cosmetic outcomes compared to SE when observer-rated (60.6% versus 35.6%, respectively) (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.15; 1 study, 344 participants; low-certainty evidence). Both cosmetic outcomes were measured at three years. Based on one study of 347 participants with high- and low-risk primary BCC of the face, radiotherapy may result in more recurrences compared to SE under frozen section margin control at three years (5.2% versus 0%, respectively) (RR 19.11, 95% CI 1.12 to 325.78; low-certainty evidence) and at four years (6.4% versus 0.6%, respectively) (RR 11.06, 95% CI 1.44 to 84.77; low-certainty evidence). Radiotherapy probably results in a smaller number of good participant- (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.91; 50.3% versus 66.1%, respectively) or observer-rated (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.62; 28.9% versus 60.3%, respectively) good/excellent cosmetic outcomes compared to SE, when measured at four years, where dyspigmentation and telangiectasia can occur (both moderate-certainty evidence). Methyl-aminolevulinate (MAL)-PDT may result in more recurrences compared to SE at three years (36.4% versus 0%, respectively) (RR 26.47, 95% CI 1.63 to 429.92; 1 study; 68 participants with low-risk nBCC in the head and neck area; low-certainty evidence). There were no useable data for measurement at five years. MAL-PDT probably results in greater numbers of participant- (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.27; 97.3% versus 82.5%) or observer-rated (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.26; 87.1% versus 46.6%) good/excellent cosmetic outcomes at one year compared to SE (2 studies, 309 participants with low-risk nBCC and sBCC; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on moderate-certainty evidence (single low-risk sBCC), imiquimod probably results in fewer recurrences at three years compared to MAL-PDT (22.8% versus 51.6%, respectively) (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.62; 277 participants) and five years (28.6% versus 68.6%, respectively) (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.57; 228 participants). There is probably little to no difference in numbers of observer-rated good/excellent cosmetic outcomes at one year (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.16; 370 participants). Participant-rated cosmetic outcomes were not measured for this comparison. AEs with surgical interventions include wound infections, graft necrosis and post-operative bleeding. Local AEs such as itching, weeping, pain and redness occur frequently with non-surgical interventions. Treatment-related AEs resulting in study modification or withdrawal occurred with imiquimod and MAL-PDT.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Surgical interventions have the lowest recurrence rates, and there may be slightly fewer recurrences with MMS over SE for high-risk facial primary BCC (low-certainty evidence). Non-surgical treatments, when used for low-risk BCC, are less effective than surgical treatments, but recurrence rates are acceptable and cosmetic outcomes are probably superior. Of the non-surgical treatments, imiquimod has the best evidence to support its efficacy. Overall, evidence certainty was low to moderate. Priorities for future research include core outcome measures and studies with longer-term follow-up.
Topics: Adult; Aminolevulinic Acid; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma, Basal Cell; Cryotherapy; Female; Humans; Imiquimod; Immunocompetence; Laser Therapy; Male; Mohs Surgery; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Radiotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33202063
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003412.pub3 -
Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy Sep 2022To evaluate the effectiveness of the use of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) in root canals disinfection in cases of endodontic retreatments. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
To evaluate the effectiveness of the use of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) in root canals disinfection in cases of endodontic retreatments.
METHODS
This Systematic Review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021260013) and followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Searches were performed in the electronic databases PubMeb, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Web of Science, Clinical Trials and Cochrane Library. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized clinical trials (RCT) and by the Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS) qualifier for non-RCT (prospective) studies. Meta-analysis was performed using R software, version 3.6.3 with the "META" package assistant by the RStudio platform. The odds ratio (OR) measure of effect was calculated and the random effect model was applied with a 95% confidence interval, and heterogeneity tested by the I2 index. The certainty of evidence was rated using GRADE.
RESULTS
Regarding the 1513 studies screened, 10 met the eligibility criteria and were included, and 8 used in the quantitative synthesis. Meta-analysis showed that all of studies data presented a significant difference before and after of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in the microbial load reduction in secondary endondontic infections (OR 0.15 [0.07; 0.32], p < 0.0001). Overall, the studies had a low risk of bias and, the analysis of evidence by GRADE assessment was rated as moderate.
CONCLUSION
It is suggested that aPDT is a beneficial and promising tool, showing efficacy in reducing the microbial load in cases of endodontic retreatment.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Infective Agents; Disinfection; Photochemotherapy
PubMed: 35840008
DOI: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2022.103014 -
Photodermatology, Photoimmunology &... Jul 2022Granuloma annulare (GA) is challenging to treat, especially when generalized. A systematic review to support the use of light- and laser-based treatments for GA is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Granuloma annulare (GA) is challenging to treat, especially when generalized. A systematic review to support the use of light- and laser-based treatments for GA is lacking.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review by searching Cochrane, MEDLINE, and Embase. Title, abstract, full-text screening, and data extraction were done in duplicate. Quality appraisal was performed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool for case series.
RESULTS
Thirty-one case series met the inclusion criteria, representing a total of 336 patients. Overall, psoralen ultraviolet light A (PUVA) showed the greatest frequency of cases with complete response (59%, n = 77/131), followed by photodynamic therapy (PDT) (52%, n = 13/25), ultraviolet light B (UVB)/narrowband UVB (nbUVB)/excimer laser (40%, n = 19/47), UVA1 (31%, n = 27/86), and lasers (29%, n = 8/28). Overall across treatment modalities, higher response rates were seen in localized GA compared to generalized GA.
CONCLUSIONS
The body of evidence for light- and laser-based treatment of GA is sparse. Our results suggest that PUVA has a high clearance rate for GA but its use may be limited by concerns of carcinogenesis. Although PDT has the second highest clearance rate, adverse effects, small sample sizes, impractical treatment delivery (especially with generalized disease), and long-term concerns of carcinogenesis may limit its use. Although UVB/nbUVB/excimer laser appeared slightly less effective than other light therapies, we recommend UVB/nbUVB/excimer laser therapy as a first-line treatment for patients with generalized GA given wider availability and a favorable long-term safety profile.
Topics: Carcinogenesis; Ficusin; Granuloma Annulare; Humans; PUVA Therapy; Photochemotherapy; Treatment Outcome; Ultraviolet Therapy
PubMed: 34875119
DOI: 10.1111/phpp.12756 -
Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy Jun 2021Oral mucositis is a significant reaction to antineoplastic treatment characterized with pain, nutritional compromise, impact on the quality of life, interruption in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Oral mucositis is a significant reaction to antineoplastic treatment characterized with pain, nutritional compromise, impact on the quality of life, interruption in cancer therapy and risk for infection. There is no effective standard protocol for the treatment of oral mucositis. This study aims to synthesize the scientific evidence available about the effects of photodynamic therapy on treatment of oral mucositis.
METHODS
PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, Scielo, Embase and Cochrane libraries were searched. Two independent and calibrated researchers (kappa = 0.92) performed all systematic steps according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). To access the risk of bias, RoB 2 and Delphi list criteria for clinical trials were used. Meta-analysis was conducted using the R software with "META" package.
RESULTS
Clinical and randomized clinical trials were included with a total of five articles. Meta-analysis, level of evidence, and risk of bias assessment were performed showing that photodynamic therapy was effective in reducing healing time in association with low-power laser therapy when compared to low-power laser therapy alone (p = 0.0005).
CONCLUSION
Photodynamic therapy presents promising results for the treatment of oral mucositis. It may be an effective therapeutic option, contributing to the healing of injured tissues especially in the time needed for repair.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Humans; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Quality of Life; Stomatitis
PubMed: 33940208
DOI: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2021.102316 -
Journal of Periodontology Sep 2014The primary aim of this systematic review is to address the following focused question: Is laser therapy, as a monotherapy or as an adjunctive therapy, an efficacious... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The primary aim of this systematic review is to address the following focused question: Is laser therapy, as a monotherapy or as an adjunctive therapy, an efficacious treatment modality for patients with peri-implantitis?
METHODS
The PubMed database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were electronically searched, complemented by manual searches up to June 2013.
RESULTS
The search yielded 137 titles and abstracts. After initial screening, 15 of 137 publications were scrutinized during the second phase of the review. In the second phase, nine articles were excluded from the analysis and six controlled, clinical studies were selected. Narrative synthesis of the results revealed that non-surgical laser treatment with a single application of either an erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) (2,940-nm) laser or a diode (660-nm) laser in combination with a phenothiazine chloride dye is efficient in controlling inflammation around treated implants for at least 6 months following intervention, whereas it has only a mild effect on reduction in probing depth (PD) and gain in clinical attachment level (CAL). There is limited information regarding the clinical application of the CO2 (10.6-µm) laser in the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis; however, its use may be promising. A meta-analysis could be performed only for the efficacy of Er:YAG laser due to the heterogeneity of the studies and the limited amount of data available. Meta-analysis did not reveal statistically significant evidence for treatment effects in reducing PD and CAL levels in comparison to controls.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the limited information currently available, any superiority of laser treatment in comparison to conventional treatment of peri-implantitis could not be identified. Considering the high heterogeneity and the low number of included studies, the authors cautiously conclude that non-surgical laser therapy may be investigated as phase I therapy for the treatment of peri-implantitis. Future research should emphasize detailed description of the specific laser characteristics and power settings in clinical studies.
Topics: Humans; Laser Therapy; Lasers; Lasers, Gas; Lasers, Semiconductor; Lasers, Solid-State; Peri-Implantitis; Photochemotherapy
PubMed: 24444398
DOI: 10.1902/jop.2014.130610 -
Acta Ophthalmologica May 2017Keratoconus can behave more aggressively in pediatric than in adult patients. We systematically reviewed the literature to determine the effectiveness of corneal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Keratoconus can behave more aggressively in pediatric than in adult patients. We systematically reviewed the literature to determine the effectiveness of corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) in children. For this study, MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched for all studies examining the effects of standard, trans-epithelial or accelerated CXL protocols in patients age 18 years or younger. Primary outcomes were; uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and maximum keratometry (Kmax) and secondary outcomes were; best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), mean refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE), central corneal thickness (CCT) and endothelial cell density (ECD). Standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated, comparing baseline values with those at 6, 12 and 24 months. A total of 13 papers, published between May 2011 and December 2014 examining 490 eyes of 401 patients with a mean age of 15.25 (±1.5) years, were included in the qualitative analysis in this review. Nine papers were included in the meta-analysis, showing significant improvement in UCVA and BCVA and stable Kmax at 12 months, and stable UCVA, improved BCVA and improved Kmax at 24 months in the standard protocol group UCVA, BCVA and KMax were stable at 12 months in the trans-epithelial group. Mean refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE), CCT and ECD remained stable in both groups. In conclusion it was found that standard CXL may be effective in halting progression of keratoconus in pediatric patients at 1 year. However, larger, more long-term studies are required to ascertain its effectiveness.
Topics: Collagen; Cornea; Corneal Topography; Cross-Linking Reagents; Humans; Keratoconus; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Ultraviolet Rays
PubMed: 27678078
DOI: 10.1111/aos.13224 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Oct 2014It remains unclear which type of non-surgical treatment is most appropriate as first-line intervention against peri-implantitis. This systematic review and Bayesian... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/AIM
It remains unclear which type of non-surgical treatment is most appropriate as first-line intervention against peri-implantitis. This systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical effect of various non-surgical peri-implantitis therapies.
METHODS
The PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL, DARE and Web of Knowledge databases were searched in duplicate for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to and including 01 January 2014. Additional relevant literature was identified using handsearching of reference lists within published systematic reviews, and screenings of OpenGrey, ClinicalTrials.gov and Controlled-Trials.com. Probing pocket depth (PPD) was the outcome measure assessed. Multilevel mixed modelling was used to perform the network meta-analysis, and Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation to obtain random effects.
RESULTS
Eleven studies were included in the network meta-analysis. Debridement in conjunction with antibiotics achieved the greatest additional PPD reduction in comparison to debridement only (0.490 mm; 95% credible interval: -0.647;1.252). The highest probabilities of being the most effective interventions were achieved by Vector system (p = 20.60%), debridement plus periochip (p = 20.00%) and photodynamic therapy (p = 18.90%).
CONCLUSION
The differences between various non-surgical treatments were relatively small with large credible intervals. On the basis of currently available RCTs, there is insufficient evidence to support that any particular non-surgical treatment for peri-implantitis showed better performance than debridement alone.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bayes Theorem; Combined Modality Therapy; Humans; Peri-Implantitis; Periodontal Debridement; Photochemotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25039292
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.12292