-
Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology... 2014Fungal keratitis (FK) typically requires intensive therapy with topical antifungal agents. To date, evidence from clinical trials has been conflicting with respect to...
Fungal keratitis (FK) typically requires intensive therapy with topical antifungal agents. To date, evidence from clinical trials has been conflicting with respect to the most effective topical antifungal drug in the treatment of FK. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTS) using the Cochrane methodology was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of topical antifungals in management of FK. Outcomes included time to cure, treatment failure, complications of infection, visual acuity and adverse effects. A comprehensive search for studies was undertaken resulting in inclusion of 8 RCTs, predominantly from India, involving a total of 793 participants, the majority of whom were infected with filamentous fungi. Topical voriconazole was more likely to result in therapeutic keratoplasty compared with natamycin [relative risk (RR) 1.89 95% CI: 1.14, 3.12] with a number needed to treat of 13 (95% CI: 7, 50). Final visual acuity was significantly better with natamycin compared with voriconazole [weighted mean difference (WMD) 0.13, 95% CI 0.00, 0.27]. There was no difference in risk of treatment failure across all topical antifungal treatments studied (chlorhexidine gluconate, econazole, miconazole, natamycin, silver sulphadiazine and voriconazole). This study suggests treatment failure was comparable among antifungal treatments reviewed. However, natamycin resulted in better visual acuity following acute infection, compared with voriconazole. Voriconazole had a significantly greater risk of therapeutic keratoplasty compared with natamycin in the populations studied.
PubMed: 26107307
DOI: 10.1097/APO.0b013e3182a618dd -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Nov 2013Candida is a fungus present in the mouths of up to 60% of healthy people, but overt infection is associated with immunosuppression, diabetes, broad-spectrum antibiotics,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Candida is a fungus present in the mouths of up to 60% of healthy people, but overt infection is associated with immunosuppression, diabetes, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and corticosteroid use. In most people, untreated candidiasis persists for months or years unless associated risk factors are treated or eliminated. In neonates, spontaneous cure of oropharyngeal candidiasis usually occurs after 3 to 8 weeks.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to prevent and treat oropharyngeal candidiasis in: adults undergoing treatments that cause immunosuppression; infants and children; people with dentures; and people with HIV infection? Which antifungal treatments reduce the risk of acquiring resistance to antifungal drugs? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to July 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), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 47 RCTs or systematic reviews of RCTs 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: antifungals (absorbed, partially or topically absorbed, or non-absorbed; for example, imidazole [ketoconazole, clotrimazole, toiconazole, miconazole], polyene [amphotericin B, nystatin], triazole [fluconazole, itraconazole], melaleuca and posaconazole), intermittent or continuous prophylaxis, or treatment, and denture hygiene.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Antifungal Agents; Candidiasis, Oral; HIV Infections; Humans; Miconazole; Oropharynx
PubMed: 24209593
DOI: No ID Found -
American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy 2012Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disorder of the nose and sinuses. Because fungi were postulated as a potential cause of CRS in the late 1990s,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disorder of the nose and sinuses. Because fungi were postulated as a potential cause of CRS in the late 1990s, contrasting articles have advocated and refuted the use of antifungal agents in its management. Although good research shows an interaction of the immune system with fungus in CRS, e.g., allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS), this does not imply that fungi are the cause of CRS or that antifungals will be effective in management. This study was designed to assess the potential advantage of either topical or systemic antifungal therapy in the symptomatic treatment of CRS to aid physicians in making informed decisions about treating patients with CRS.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed with meta-analysis. All studies obtained from searches were reviewed and trials meeting the eligibility criteria were selected. CRS was defined using either the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps or American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery criteria. Authors were contacted and original data were used for data analysis.
RESULTS
Five studies investigating topical antifungals and one investigating systemic antifungals met the inclusion criteria. All trials were double blinded and randomized. Pooled meta-analysis showed no statistically significant benefit of topical or systemic antifungals over placebo. Symptoms scores statistically favored the placebo group for this outcome. Adverse event reporting was higher in the antifungal group.
CONCLUSION
Reported side-effects of antifungal therapies may outweigh any potential benefits of treatment based on this meta-analysis and the authors therefore do not advocate the use antifungal treatment in the management of CRS.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Chronic Disease; Disease Management; Humans; Miconazole; Mycoses; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinitis; Sinusitis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 22487292
DOI: 10.2500/ajra.2012.26.3710 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Feb 2012Candida is a fungus present in the mouths of up to 60% of healthy people, but overt infection is associated with immunosuppression, diabetes, broad-spectrum antibiotics,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Candida is a fungus present in the mouths of up to 60% of healthy people, but overt infection is associated with immunosuppression, diabetes, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and corticosteroid use. In most people, untreated candidiasis persists for months or years unless associated risk factors are treated or eliminated. In neonates, spontaneous cure of oropharyngeal candidiasis usually occurs after 3 to 8 weeks.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to prevent and treat oropharyngeal candidiasis in: adults having treatment causing immunosuppression; infants and children; people with diabetes; people with dentures; and people with HIV infection? Which treatments reduce the risk of acquiring resistance to antifungal drugs? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to August 2011 (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 51 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational 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: antifungals (absorbed or partially absorbed, and topical absorbed/partially absorbed/non-absorbed: e.g., amphotericin B, clotrimazole, fluconazole, itraconazole, ketoconazole, miconazole, nystatin, posaconazole) used for intermittent or continuous prophylaxis or treatment, and denture hygiene.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Antifungal Agents; Candidiasis, Oral; Fluconazole; HIV Infections; Humans; Oropharynx
PubMed: 22348417
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2012Fungal keratitis is a fungal infection of the cornea. It is common in agricultural tropical countries but relatively uncommon in developed countries. Although there are... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Fungal keratitis is a fungal infection of the cornea. It is common in agricultural tropical countries but relatively uncommon in developed countries. Although there are medications available, their effectiveness is unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effect of different antifungal drugs in the management of fungal keratitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 8), MEDLINE (January 1950 to August 2011), EMBASE (January 1980 to August 2011), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to August 2011), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com) and ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov). There were no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. The electronic databases were last searched on 29 August 2011.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on medical therapy for fungal keratitis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors selected studies for inclusion into the review, assessed trials for risk of bias and extracted data. Interventions were compared by the proportions of participants that did not heal after a specific time of therapy. No meta-analysis was performed because the trials studied different medications with different concentrations.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine trials in this review; seven conducted in India, one in Bangladesh and one in Egypt. A total of 568 participants were randomised to the following comparisons: 1% topical itraconazole versus 1% topical itraconazole and oral itraconazole, different concentrations of silver sulphadiazine versus 1% miconazole, 1% silver sulphadiazine ointment versus 1% miconazole ointment, 2% econazole versus 5% natamycin, different concentrations of topical chlorhexidine gluconate versus 5% natamycin, 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate versus 2.5% natamycin and voriconazole 1% versus natamycin 5%. The included trials were small and of variable quality. Differences between different regimens were not statistically different, which may reflect the low sample sizes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the trials included in this review, there is no evidence to date that any particular drug, or combination of drugs, is more effective in the management of fungal keratitis. The trials included in this review were of variable quality and were generally underpowered.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Eye Infections, Fungal; Humans; Keratitis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 22336802
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004241.pub3 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Mar 2009Candida is present in the mouths of up to 60% of healthy people, but overt infection is associated with immunosuppression, diabetes, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Candida is present in the mouths of up to 60% of healthy people, but overt infection is associated with immunosuppression, diabetes, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and corticosteroid use. In most people, untreated candidiasis persists for months or years unless associated risk factors are treated or eliminated. In neonates, spontaneous cure of oropharyngeal candidiasis usually occurs after 3-8 weeks.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of interventions to prevent and treat oropharyngeal candidiasis in: adults having treatment causing immunosuppression; infants and children; people with diabetes; people with dentures; and people with HIV infection? Which treatments reduce the risk of acquiring resistance to antifungal drugs? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to September 2008 (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 46 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational 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: antifungals (absorbed or partially absorbed, and topical absorbed/partially absorbed/non-absorbed [e.g. amphotericin B, fluconazole, itraconazole, miconazole, and nystatin]) used for intermittent or continuous prophylaxis or therapy, and denture hygiene.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Antifungal Agents; Candidiasis; Candidiasis, Oral; Fluconazole; HIV Infections; Humans; Oropharynx
PubMed: 19445752
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jul 2009Around 15% to 25% of people are likely to have athlete's foot at any one time. The infection can spread to other parts of the body and to other people. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Around 15% to 25% of people are likely to have athlete's foot at any one time. The infection can spread to other parts of the body and to other people.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of topical treatments for athlete's foot? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to July 2008 (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 14 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational 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: improved foot hygiene, including socks and hosiery; topical allylamines (naftifine and terbinafine); topical azoles (bifonazole, clotrimazole, econazole nitrate, miconazole nitrate, sulconazole nitrate, and tioconazole); and topical ciclopirox olamine.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Clotrimazole; Drug Administration Schedule; Econazole; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Hygiene; Miconazole; Tinea Pedis
PubMed: 21696646
DOI: No ID Found