-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2016Foot ulceration is a major problem in people with diabetes and is the leading cause of hospitalisation and limb amputations. Skin grafts and tissue replacements can be... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Foot ulceration is a major problem in people with diabetes and is the leading cause of hospitalisation and limb amputations. Skin grafts and tissue replacements can be used to reconstruct skin defects for people with diabetic foot ulcers in addition to providing them with standard care. Skin substitutes can consist of bioengineered or artificial skin, autografts (taken from the patient), allografts (taken from another person) or xenografts (taken from animals).
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits and harms of skin grafting and tissue replacement for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes.
SEARCH METHODS
In April 2015 we searched: The Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE and EBSCO CINAHL. We also searched clinical trial registries to identify ongoing studies. We did not apply restrictions to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of skin grafts or tissue replacements for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seventeen studies with a total of 1655 randomised participants in this review. Risk of bias was variable among studies. Blinding of participants, personnel and outcome assessment was not possible in most trials because of obvious differences between the treatments. The lack of a blinded outcome assessor may have caused detection bias when ulcer healing was assessed. However, possible detection bias is hard to prevent due to the nature of the skin replacement products we assessed, and the fact that they are easily recognisable. Strikingly, nearly all studies (15/17) reported industry involvement; at least one of the authors was connected to a commercial organisation or the study was funded by a commercial organisation. In addition, the funnel plot for assessing risk of bias appeared to be asymmetrical; suggesting that small studies with 'negative' results are less likely to be published.Thirteen of the studies included in this review compared a skin graft or tissue replacement with standard care. Four studies compared two grafts or tissue replacements with each other. When we pooled the results of all the individual studies, the skin grafts and tissue replacement products that were used in the trials increased the healing rate of foot ulcers in patients with diabetes compared to standard care (risk ratio (RR) 1.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30 to 1.85, low quality of evidence). However, the strength of effect was variable depending on the specific product that was used (e.g. EpiFix® RR 11.08, 95% CI 1.69 to 72.82 and OrCel® RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 5.05). Based on the four included studies that directly compared two products, no specific type of skin graft or tissue replacement showed a superior effect on ulcer healing over another type of skin graft or tissue replacement.Sixteen of the included studies reported on adverse events in various ways. No study reported a statistically significant difference in the occurrence of adverse events between the intervention and the control group.Only two of the included studies reported on total incidence of lower limb amputations. We found fewer amputations in the experimental group compared with the standard care group when we pooled the results of these two studies, although the absolute risk reduction for amputation was small (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.81; risk difference (RD) -0.06, 95% CI -0.10 to -0.01, very low quality of evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the studies included in this review, the overall therapeutic effect of skin grafts and tissue replacements used in conjunction with standard care shows an increase in the healing rate of foot ulcers and slightly fewer amputations in people with diabetes compared with standard care alone. However, the data available to us was insufficient for us to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of different types of skin grafts or tissue replacement therapies. In addition, evidence of long term effectiveness is lacking and cost-effectiveness is uncertain.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Diabetic Foot; Foot Ulcer; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Transplantation; Wound Healing
PubMed: 26866804
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011255.pub2 -
NPJ Digital Medicine May 2024
PubMed: 38789723
DOI: 10.1038/s41746-024-01138-0 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2020Burn injuries are an important health problem. They occur frequently in the head and neck region. The face is the area central to a person's identity that provides our...
BACKGROUND
Burn injuries are an important health problem. They occur frequently in the head and neck region. The face is the area central to a person's identity that provides our most expressive means of communication. Topical interventions are currently the cornerstone of treatment of burns to the face.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of topical interventions on wound healing in people with facial burns of any depth.
SEARCH METHODS
In December 2019 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of topical treatment for facial burns were eligible for inclusion in this review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
In this first update, we included 12 RCTs, comprising 507 participants. Most trials included adults admitted to specialised burn centres after recent burn injuries. Topical agents included antimicrobial agents (silver sulphadiazine (SSD), Aquacel-Ag, cerium-sulphadiazine, gentamicin cream, mafenide acetate cream, bacitracin), non-antimicrobial agents (Moist Exposed Burn Ointment (MEBO), saline-soaked dressings, skin substitutes (including bioengineered skin substitute (TransCyte), allograft, and xenograft (porcine Xenoderm), and miscellaneous treatments (growth hormone therapy, recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor hydrogel (rhGMCS)), enzymatic debridement, and cream with Helix Aspersa extract). Almost all the evidence included in this review was assessed as low or very low-certainty, often because of high risk of bias due to unclear randomisation procedures (i.e. sequence generation and allocation concealment); lack of blinding of participants, providers and sometimes outcome assessors; and imprecision resulting from few participants, low event rates or both, often in single studies. Topical antimicrobial agents versus topical non-antimicrobial agents There is moderate-certainty evidence that there is probably little or no difference between antimicrobial agents and non-antimicrobial agents (SSD and MEBO) in time to complete wound healing (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.85, 1 study, 39 participants). Topical antimicrobial agents may make little or no difference to the proportion of wounds completely healed compared with topical non-antimicrobial agents (comparison SSD and MEBO, risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.29; 1 study, 39 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in wound infection (comparison topical antimicrobial agent (Aquacel-Ag) and MEBO; RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.21; 1 study, 40 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported change in wound surface area over time or partial wound healing. There is low-certainty evidence for the secondary outcomes scar quality and patient satisfaction. Two studies assessed pain but it was incompletely reported. Topical antimicrobial agents versus other topical antimicrobial agents It is uncertain whether topical antimicrobial agents make any difference in effects as the evidence is low to very low-certainty. For primary outcomes, there is low-certainty evidence for time to partial (i.e. greater than 90%) wound healing (comparison SSD versus cerium SSD: mean difference (MD) -7.10 days, 95% CI -16.43 to 2.23; 1 study, 142 participants). There is very low-certainty evidence regarding whether topical antimicrobial agents make a difference to wound infection (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.17; 1 study, 15 participants). There is low to very low-certainty evidence for the proportion of facial burns requiring surgery, pain, scar quality, adverse effects and length of hospital stay. Skin substitutes versus topical antimicrobial agents There is low-certainty evidence that a skin substitute may slightly reduce time to partial (i.e. greater than 90%) wound healing, compared with a non-specified antibacterial agent (MD -6.00 days, 95% CI -8.69 to -3.31; 1 study, 34 participants). We are uncertain whether skin substitutes in general make any other difference in effects as the evidence is very low certainty. Outcomes included wound infection, pain, scar quality, adverse effects of treatment and length of hospital stay. Single studies showed contrasting low-certainty evidence. A bioengineered skin substitute may slightly reduce procedural pain (MD -4.00, 95% CI -5.05 to -2.95; 34 participants) and background pain (MD -2.00, 95% CI -3.05 to -0.95; 34 participants) compared with an unspecified antimicrobial agent. In contrast, a biological dressing (porcine Xenoderm) might slightly increase pain in superficial burns (MD 1.20, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.75; 15 participants (30 wounds)) as well as deep partial thickness burns (MD 3.00, 95% CI 2.34 to 3.66; 10 participants (20 wounds)), compared with antimicrobial agents (Physiotulle Ag (Coloplast)). Miscellaneous treatments versus miscellaneous treatments Single studies show low to very low-certainty effects of interventions. Low-certainty evidence shows that MEBO may slightly reduce time to complete wound healing compared with saline soaked dressing (MD -1.7 days, 95% CI -3.32 to -0.08; 40 participants). In addition, a cream containing Helix Aspersa may slightly increase the proportion of wounds completely healed at 14 days compared with MEBO (RR 4.77, 95% CI 1.87 to 12.15; 43 participants). We are uncertain whether any miscellaneous treatment in the included studies makes a difference in effects for the outcomes wound infection, scar quality, pain and patient satisfaction as the evidence is low to very low-certainty.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is mainly low to very low-certainty evidence on the effects of any topical intervention on wound healing in people with facial burns. The number of RCTs in burn care is growing, but the body of evidence is still hampered due to an insufficient number of studies that follow appropriate evidence-based standards of conducting and reporting RCTs.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Anti-Infective Agents; Bias; Burns; Carboxymethylcellulose Sodium; Facial Injuries; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin, Artificial; Wound Healing
PubMed: 32725896
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008058.pub3 -
Endocrine Connections Oct 2021A systematic review of publications addressing change in vitamin D status (25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD)) after exposure to UV radiation identified 2001 independent... (Review)
Review
A systematic review of publications addressing change in vitamin D status (25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD)) after exposure to UV radiation identified 2001 independent peer-reviewed publications. Of these, 21 used artificial sources of UV radiation, met all inclusion criteria and were quality assured; 13 publications used solar radiation and met sufficient inclusion criteria to be retained as supporting evidence; 1 further included publication used both solar and artificial sources. The review consistently identified that low dose, sub-erythemal doses are more effective for vitamin D synthesis than doses close to a minimum erythema dose; increasing skin area exposed increases the amount of vitamin D synthesised although not necessarily in a linear manner; constant dosing leads to a dose-dependent plateau in 25OHD, and dose-response is greatest at the start of a dosing regime; there is a large interpersonal variation in response to UV exposure. Fourteen of the studies using artificial sources of radiation were used to determine a dose-response relationship for change in 25OHD on whole-body exposure to repeated sub-erythemal doses of UV radiation, taking the form Δ25OHD (nmol/L) = A ln(standard vitamin D dose) + B. This helps quantify our understanding of UV as a source of vitamin D and enables exposure regimes for safe synthesis of vitamin D to be assessed. Specific studies of people with pigmented skin (Fitzpatrick skin types 5 and 6) were rare, and this dose-response relationship is only applicable to white-skinned individuals as skin type is a determinant of response to UV radiation. Findings provide information for vitamin D guidance updates.
PubMed: 34519278
DOI: 10.1530/EC-21-0308 -
Infectious Diseases of Poverty Jan 2020Crowdsourcing is used increasingly in health and medical research. Crowdsourcing is the process of aggregating crowd wisdom to solve a problem. The purpose of this...
BACKGROUND
Crowdsourcing is used increasingly in health and medical research. Crowdsourcing is the process of aggregating crowd wisdom to solve a problem. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize quantitative evidence on crowdsourcing to improve health.
METHODS
We followed Cochrane systematic review guidance and systematically searched seven databases up to September 4th 2019. Studies were included if they reported on crowdsourcing and related to health or medicine. Studies were excluded if recruitment was the only use of crowdsourcing. We determined the level of evidence associated with review findings using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
We screened 3508 citations, accessed 362 articles, and included 188 studies. Ninety-six studies examined effectiveness, 127 examined feasibility, and 37 examined cost. The most common purposes were to evaluate surgical skills (17 studies), to create sexual health messages (seven studies), and to provide layperson cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) out-of-hospital (six studies). Seventeen observational studies used crowdsourcing to evaluate surgical skills, finding that crowdsourcing evaluation was as effective as expert evaluation (low quality). Four studies used a challenge contest to solicit human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing promotion materials and increase HIV testing rates (moderate quality), and two of the four studies found this approach saved money. Three studies suggested that an interactive technology system increased rates of layperson initiated CPR out-of-hospital (moderate quality). However, studies analyzing crowdsourcing to evaluate surgical skills and layperson-initiated CPR were only from high-income countries. Five studies examined crowdsourcing to inform artificial intelligence projects, most often related to annotation of medical data. Crowdsourcing was evaluated using different outcomes, limiting the extent to which studies could be pooled.
CONCLUSIONS
Crowdsourcing has been used to improve health in many settings. Although crowdsourcing is effective at improving behavioral outcomes, more research is needed to understand effects on clinical outcomes and costs. More research is needed on crowdsourcing as a tool to develop artificial intelligence systems in medicine.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO: CRD42017052835. December 27, 2016.
Topics: Biomedical Research; Crowdsourcing; Humans
PubMed: 31959234
DOI: 10.1186/s40249-020-0622-9 -
Cell Journal Feb 2024Exposure to phosgene, a colourless poisonous gas, can lead to various health issues including eye irritation, a dry and burning throat, vomiting, coughing, the...
Exposure to phosgene, a colourless poisonous gas, can lead to various health issues including eye irritation, a dry and burning throat, vomiting, coughing, the production of foamy sputum, difficulty in breathing, and chest pain. This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the clinical manifestations and treatment of phosgene toxicity by systematically analyzing available literature. The search was carried out on various scientific online databases to include related studies based on inclusion and exclusion criteria with the use of PRISMA guidelines. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Thirteen articles were included in this study after the screening process. Inhalation was found to be the primary health problem of phosgene exposure with respiratory symptoms such as coughing and dyspnea. Chest pain and pulmonary oedema were also observed in some cases. Furthermore, pulmonary crackle was the most common reported physical examination. Beyond respiratory tract health issues, other organs involvements such as cardiac, skin, eye, and renal were also reported in some studies. The symptoms can occur within minutes to hours after exposure, and the severity of symptoms depends on the amount of inhaled phosgene. The findings showed that bronchodilators can alleviate symptoms of bronchoconstriction caused by phosgene. Oxygen therapy is essential for restoring oxygen levels and improving respiratory function in cases of hypoxemia. In severe cases, endotracheal intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation are used for artificial respiration, along with the removal of tracheal secretions and pulmonary oedema fluid through suctioning as crucial components of supportive therapy.
PubMed: 38459726
DOI: 10.22074/cellj.2024.2011864.1405 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.... Jul 2020Dermal regeneration templates such as Integra are effective reconstructive biomaterials used in a variety of soft-tissue defects. Fully understanding the complications... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
Dermal regeneration templates such as Integra are effective reconstructive biomaterials used in a variety of soft-tissue defects. Fully understanding the complications associated with their use is paramount to improve outcomes and maximize patient safety. In this study, our purpose is to perform a comprehensive literature review to assess the previously reported infectious complications linked to Integra-based wound closure.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify previous articles indexed in PubMed and Ovid for Integra and its synonymous terms. We used these search terms: [Integra OR (dermal regenerative matrix) OR (dermal regeneration matrix) OR (dermal regenerative template) OR (dermal regeneration template) OR (dermal substitute) OR (skin substitute) OR (artificial skin)] AND infection.
RESULTS
Of the 3508 articles for initial review, 69 reported rates of infection, of which 26 reported ≥1 infection within their cohort. Of these 26 articles, the patients (n = 602) underwent Integra-based reconstruction in 1254 sites and had reported infections in 212 of the sites (16.9%). Among these, we encountered a single report of a fatal case of toxic shock syndrome (TSS) related to the use of Integra in secondary burn reconstruction.
CONCLUSIONS
While Integra offers many benefits, surgeons must be aware that infectious complications are not uncommon. As a result, a careful risk-benefit analysis of its use in reconstruction must be performed, and open discussion with the patient preoperatively regarding infection rate is of utmost importance.
PubMed: 32802634
DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002869 -
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive &... Nov 2019Dermal regenerative matrices (DRMs) have been used for several decades in the treatment of acute and reconstructive burn injury. The objective of this study was to...
BACKGROUND
Dermal regenerative matrices (DRMs) have been used for several decades in the treatment of acute and reconstructive burn injury. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature to assess clinical outcomes and safety profile of DRMs in full-thickness burn injury.
METHODS
Comprehensive searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were performed from 1988 to 2017. Two independent reviewers completed preliminary and full-text screening of all articles. English-language articles reporting on DRM use in patients with full-thickness burn injury were included.
RESULTS
Literature search generated 914 unique articles. Following screening, 203 articles were assessed for eligibility, and 72 met inclusion criteria for analysis. DRM was applied to1084 patients (74% acute burns, 26% burn reconstruction). Of the twelve studies that described changes in ROM, significant improvement was observed in 95% of reconstructive patients. The most frequently treated reconstructive sites were the neck, hand/wrist, lower extremity, and axilla. Vancouver scar scale was used in eight studies and indicated a significant improvement in the scar quality with DRM. The overall complication rate was 13%, most commonly infection, graft loss, hematoma formation, and contracture.
CONCLUSIONS
Although variability in functional and cosmetic outcomes was observed, DRM demonstrates improvements in ROM and scar appearance without objective regression. Essential demographic data were lacking in many studies, highlighting the need for future standardization of reporting outcomes in burns following application of dermal substitutes.
Topics: Acellular Dermis; Burns; Humans; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Skin, Artificial
PubMed: 31492583
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2019.07.021 -
International Journal of Environmental... Feb 2021Early detection of melanoma is critical to reduce the mortality and morbidity rates of this tumor. Total body photography (TBP) may aid in the early detection of... (Review)
Review
Early detection of melanoma is critical to reduce the mortality and morbidity rates of this tumor. Total body photography (TBP) may aid in the early detection of melanoma. To summarize the current evidence on TBP for the early detection of melanoma, we performed a systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for eligible records up to 6th August 2020. Outcomes of interest included melanoma incidence, incisional and excisional biopsy rates, as well as the Breslow's index of detected tumors. Results from individual studies were described qualitatively. The risks of bias and applicability of the included studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 checklist. In total, 14 studies published between 1997 and 2020 with an overall sample size of = 12082 (range 100-4692) were included in the qualitative analysis. Individuals undergoing TBP showed a trend towards a lower Breslow's thickness and a higher proportion of in situ melanomas compared to those without TBP. The number needed to excise one melanoma varied from 3:1 to 14.3:1 and was better for lesions that arose de novo than for tracked ones. The included studies were judged to be of unclear methodological concern with specific deficiencies in the domains "flow and timing" and "reference standard". The use of TBP can improve the early detection of melanoma in high-risk populations. Future studies are warranted to reduce the heterogeneity of phenotypic risk factor definition and the technical implementation of TBP. Artificial intelligence-assisted analysis of images derived from 3-D TBP systems and digital dermoscopy may further improve the early detection of melanoma.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Dermoscopy; Humans; Melanoma; Photography; Sensitivity and Specificity; Skin Neoplasms
PubMed: 33578996
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18041726 -
Iranian Journal of Allergy, Asthma, and... Dec 2020The prevalence of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) has increased since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic started. This study was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The prevalence of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) has increased since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic started. This study was aimed to describe clinical manifestation and outcomes of MIS-C associated with COVID-19. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on all available literature until July 3rd, 2020. The screening was done by using the following keywords: ("novel coronavirus" Or COVID-19 or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or coronavirus) and ("MIS-C" or "multisystem inflammatory" or Kawasaki). Data on gender, ethnicity, clinical presentations, need for mechanical ventilation or admission to intensive care unit (ICU), imaging, cardiac complications, and COVID-19 laboratory results were extracted to measure the pooled estimates. Out of 314 found articles, 16 articles with a total of 600 patients were included in the study, the most common presentation was fever (97%), followed by gastrointestinal symptoms (80%), and skin rashes (60%) as well as shock (55%), conjunctivitis (54%), and respiratory symptoms (39%). Less common presentations were neurologic problems (33%), and skin desquamation (30%), MIS-C was slightly more prevalent in males (53.7%) compared to females (46.3%). The findings of this meta-analysis on current evidence found that the common clinical presentations of COVID-19 associated MIS-C include a combination of fever and mucocutaneous involvements, similar to atypical Kawasaki disease, and multiple organ dysfunction. Due to the relatively higher morbidity and mortality rate, it is very important to diagnose this condition promptly.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Acute Kidney Injury; COVID-19; Cheilitis; Conjunctivitis; Cough; Diarrhea; Dyspnea; Exanthema; Fever; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Headache; Humans; Meningism; Myalgia; Prognosis; Respiration, Artificial; Sex Distribution; Shock; Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome; Vomiting
PubMed: 33463127
DOI: 10.18502/ijaai.v19i6.4927