-
International Journal of Environmental... Nov 2022Despite the restoration of the mechanical stability of the knee joint after ACL reconstruction (ACLR), patients often experience postoperative limitations. To our... (Review)
Review
Despite the restoration of the mechanical stability of the knee joint after ACL reconstruction (ACLR), patients often experience postoperative limitations. To our knowledge, there are no systematic reviews analyzing additional physiotherapy interventions implementing standard rehabilitation programs in the early postoperative phase after ACLR. The objective of this study was to analyze the additional physiotherapy interventions implemented in standard rehabilitation programs that improve early-stage ACLR rehabilitation. For this systematic review, we followed the PRISMA guidelines. In March 2022 we conducted a literature review using electronic databases. Primary outcomes were pain, edema, muscle strength, ROM, and knee function. The risk of bias and scientific quality of included studies were assessed with the RoB 2, ROBINS-I and PEDro scale. For the review, we included 10 studies that met the inclusion criteria (total = 3271). The included studies evaluated the effectiveness of Kinesio Taping, Whole-body vibration, Local Vibration Training, Trigger Point Dry Needling, High Tone Power Therapy, alternating magnetic field, and App-Based Active Muscle Training Program. Most of the additional physiotherapy interventions improved pain, edema, ROM, knee muscle strength, or knee function in early-stage postoperative ACL rehabilitation. Except for one study, no adverse events occurred in the included studies, which demonstrates the safety of the discussed physiotherapy interventions. Further in-depth research is needed in this area.
Topics: Humans; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Anterior Cruciate Ligament; Knee Joint; Pain
PubMed: 36497965
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192315893 -
European Journal of Dermatology : EJD Oct 2016Taxanes (docetaxel and paclitaxel) are among the most commonly prescribed anticancer drugs approved for the treatment of metastatic or locally advanced breast, non-small... (Review)
Review
Taxanes (docetaxel and paclitaxel) are among the most commonly prescribed anticancer drugs approved for the treatment of metastatic or locally advanced breast, non-small cell lung, prostate, gastric, head and neck, and ovarian cancers, as well as in the adjuvant setting for operable node-positive breast cancers. Although the true incidence of dermatological adverse events (AEs) in patients receiving taxanes is not known, and has never been prospectively analysed, they clearly represent one of the major AEs associated with these agents. With an increase in the occurrence of cutaneous AEs during treatment with novel targeted and immunological therapies when used in combination with taxanes, a thorough understanding of reactions attributable to this class is imperative. Moreover, identification and management of dermatological AEs is critical for maintaining the quality of life in cancer patients and for minimizing dose modifications of their antineoplastic regimen. This analysis represents a systematic review of the dermatological conditions reported with the use of these drugs, complemented by experience at comprehensive cancer centres. The conditions reported herein include skin, hair, and nail toxicities. Lastly, we describe the dermatological data available for the new, recently FDA-and EMA- approved, solvent-free nab-paclitaxel.
Topics: Alopecia; Antineoplastic Agents; Docetaxel; Drug Eruptions; Edema; Humans; Lupus Erythematosus, Cutaneous; Nail Diseases; Paclitaxel; Pigmentation Disorders; Radiodermatitis; Taxoids
PubMed: 27550571
DOI: 10.1684/ejd.2016.2833 -
Dermatologic Therapy Jun 2022With dermatologic side effects being fairly prevalent following vaccination against COVID-19, and the multitude of studies aiming to report and analyze these adverse... (Review)
Review
A systematic review on mucocutaneous presentations after COVID-19 vaccination and expert recommendations about vaccination of important immune-mediated dermatologic disorders.
With dermatologic side effects being fairly prevalent following vaccination against COVID-19, and the multitude of studies aiming to report and analyze these adverse events, the need for an extensive investigation on previous studies seemed urgent, in order to provide a thorough body of information about these post-COVID-19 immunization mucocutaneous reactions. To achieve this goal, a comprehensive electronic search was performed through the international databases including Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane, Web of science, and Google scholar on July 12, 2021, and all articles regarding mucocutaneous manifestations and considerations after COVID-19 vaccine administration were retrieved using the following keywords: COVID-19 vaccine, dermatology considerations and mucocutaneous manifestations. A total of 917 records were retrieved and a final number of 180 articles were included in data extraction. Mild, moderate, severe and potentially life-threatening adverse events have been reported following immunization with COVID vaccines, through case reports, case series, observational studies, randomized clinical trials, and further recommendations and consensus position papers regarding vaccination. In this systematic review, we categorized these results in detail into five elaborate tables, making what we believe to be an extensively informative, unprecedented set of data on this topic. Based on our findings, in the viewpoint of the pros and cons of vaccination, mucocutaneous adverse events were mostly non-significant, self-limiting reactions, and for the more uncommon moderate to severe reactions, guidelines and consensus position papers could be of great importance to provide those at higher risks and those with specific worries of flare-ups or inefficient immunization, with sufficient recommendations to safely schedule their vaccine doses, or avoid vaccination if they have the discussed contra-indications.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Humans; Mucous Membrane; Skin; Vaccination
PubMed: 35316551
DOI: 10.1111/dth.15461 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2020Acne is a common, economically burdensome condition that can cause psychological harm and, potentially, scarring. Topical benzoyl peroxide (BPO) is a widely used acne... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Acne is a common, economically burdensome condition that can cause psychological harm and, potentially, scarring. Topical benzoyl peroxide (BPO) is a widely used acne treatment; however, its efficacy and safety have not been clearly evaluated.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of BPO for acne.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to February 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs that compared topical BPO used alone (including different formulations and concentrations of BPO) or as part of combination treatment against placebo, no treatment, or other active topical medications for clinically diagnosed acne (used alone or in combination with other topical drugs not containing BPO) on the face or trunk.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. Primary outcome measures were 'participant global self-assessment of acne improvement' and 'withdrawal due to adverse events in the whole course of a trial'. 'Percentage of participants experiencing any adverse event in the whole course of a trial' was a key secondary outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 120 trials (29,592 participants randomised in 116 trials; in four trials the number of randomised participants was unclear). Ninety-one studies included males and females. When reported, 72 trials included participants with mild to moderate acne, 26 included participants with severe acne, and the mean age of participants ranged from 18 to 30 years. Our included trials assessed BPO as monotherapy, as add-on treatment, or combined with other active treatments, as well as BPO of different concentrations and BPO delivered through different vehicles. Comparators included different concentrations or formulations of BPO, placebo, no treatment, or other active treatments given alone or combined. Treatment duration in 80 trials was longer than eight weeks and was only up to 12 weeks in 108 trials. Industry funded 50 trials; 63 trials did not report funding. We commonly found high or unclear risk of performance, detection, or attrition bias. Trial setting was under-reported but included hospitals, medical centres/departments, clinics, general practices, and student health centres. We reported on outcomes assessed at the end of treatment, and we classified treatment periods as short-term (two to four weeks), medium-term (five to eight weeks), or long-term (longer than eight weeks). For 'participant-reported acne improvement', BPO may be more effective than placebo or no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12 to 1.45; 3 RCTs; 2234 participants; treatment for 10 to 12 weeks; low-certainty evidence). Based on low-certainty evidence, there may be little to no difference between BPO and adapalene (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.10; 5 RCTs; 1472 participants; treatment for 11 to 12 weeks) or between BPO and clindamycin (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.34; 1 RCT; 240 participants; treatment for 10 weeks) (outcome not reported for BPO versus erythromycin or salicylic acid). For 'withdrawal due to adverse effects', risk of treatment discontinuation may be higher with BPO compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 2.13, 95% CI 1.55 to 2.93; 24 RCTs; 13,744 participants; treatment for 10 to 12 weeks; low-certainty evidence); the most common causes of withdrawal were erythema, pruritus, and skin burning. Only very low-certainty evidence was available for the following comparisons: BPO versus adapalene (RR 1.85, 95% CI 0.94 to 3.64; 11 RCTs; 3295 participants; treatment for 11 to 24 weeks; causes of withdrawal not clear), BPO versus clindamycin (RR 1.93, 95% CI 0.90 to 4.11; 8 RCTs; 3330 participants; treatment for 10 to 12 weeks; causes of withdrawal included local hypersensitivity, pruritus, erythema, face oedema, rash, and skin burning), erythromycin (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 15.26; 1 RCT; 60 participants; treatment for 8 weeks; withdrawal due to dermatitis), and salicylic acid (no participants had adverse event-related withdrawal; 1 RCT; 59 participants; treatment for 12 weeks). There may be little to no difference between these groups in terms of withdrawal; however, we are unsure of the results because the evidence is of very low certainty. For 'proportion of participants experiencing any adverse event', very low-certainty evidence leaves us uncertain about whether BPO increased adverse events when compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.70; 21 RCTs; 11,028 participants; treatment for 10 to 12 weeks), with adapalene (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.00; 7 RCTs; 2120 participants; treatment for 11 to 24 weeks), with erythromycin (no participants reported any adverse events; 1 RCT; 89 participants; treatment for 10 weeks), or with salicylic acid (RR 4.77, 95% CI 0.24 to 93.67; 1 RCT; 41 participants; treatment for 6 weeks). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that the risk of adverse events may be increased for BPO versus clindamycin (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.58; 6 RCTs; 3018 participants; treatment for 10 to 12 weeks); however, the 95% CI indicates that BPO might make little to no difference. Most reported adverse events were mild to moderate, and local dryness, irritation, dermatitis, erythema, application site pain, and pruritus were the most common.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence suggests that BPO as monotherapy or add-on treatment may be more effective than placebo or no treatment for improving acne, and there may be little to no difference between BPO and either adapalene or clindamycin. Our key efficacy evidence is based on participant self-assessment; trials of BPO versus erythromycin or salicylic acid did not report this outcome. For adverse effects, the evidence is very uncertain regarding BPO compared with adapalene, erythromycin, or salicylic acid. However, risk of treatment discontinuation may be higher with BPO compared with placebo or no treatment. Withdrawal may be linked to tolerability rather than to safety. Risk of mild to moderate adverse events may be higher with BPO compared with clindamycin. Further trials should assess the comparative effects of different preparations or concentrations of BPO and combination BPO versus monotherapy. These trials should fully assess and report adverse effects and patient-reported outcomes measured on a standardised scale.
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Adolescent; Adult; Benzoyl Peroxide; Cicatrix; Dermatologic Agents; Female; Humans; Male; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Young Adult
PubMed: 32175593
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011154.pub2 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.... Oct 2021A variety of complications after injection of nonpermanent fillers for facial rejuvenation have been reported so far. However, to date, the overall complication rate is...
BACKGROUND
A variety of complications after injection of nonpermanent fillers for facial rejuvenation have been reported so far. However, to date, the overall complication rate is still a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of literature to assess the type and severity of associated complications following injections in different anatomical regions of the face.
METHODS
The entire PubMed/Medline database was screened to identify case reports and clinical studies describing complications that have occurred after injection of nonpermanent fillers in the face. These complications have been reviewed and analyzed according to their occurrence in different anatomical regions of the face.
RESULTS
Forty-six articles including a total of 164 patients reported on a total of 436 complications during the time period between January 2003 and February 2020. The majority of the complications were reported after injections to the nose and the nasolabial fold (n = 230), the forehead and the eyebrows (n = 53), and the glabellar region (n = 36). Out of 436 complications, 163 have been classified as severe or permanent including skin necrosis (n = 46), loss of vision (n = 35), or encephalitis (n = 1), whereas 273 complications were classified as mild or transient, such as local edema (n = 74), skin erythema (n = 69), and filler migration (n = 2). The most severe complications were observed in treatments of nose, glabella, and forehead.
CONCLUSIONS
Nonpermanent facial fillers are associated with rare but potentially severe complications. Severity and impact of complications depend on the anatomical region of the face and eventually require profound knowledge of facial anatomy.
PubMed: 34703713
DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000003851 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Nov 2007Diabetic retinopathy is the most common cause of blindness in the UK, with older people and those with worse diabetic control, hypertension, and hyperlipidaemia being... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Diabetic retinopathy is the most common cause of blindness in the UK, with older people and those with worse diabetic control, hypertension, and hyperlipidaemia being most at risk. Diabetic retinopathy can cause microaneurysms, haemorrhages, exudates, changes to blood vessels, and retinal thickening.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in people with diabetic retinopathy? What are the effects of treatments for vitreous haemorrhage? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to November March 2007 (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 29 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: peripheral retinal laser photocoagulation, focal and grid laser photocoagulation for maculopathy, corticosteroids for macular oedema, and vitrectomy for vitreous haemorrhage.
Topics: Diabetic Retinopathy; Humans; Laser Coagulation; Macular Edema; Visual Acuity; Vitreous Body
PubMed: 19450351
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence May 2011Diabetic retinopathy is the most common cause of blindness in the UK, with older people and those with worse diabetes control, hypertension, and hyperlipidaemia being... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Diabetic retinopathy is the most common cause of blindness in the UK, with older people and those with worse diabetes control, hypertension, and hyperlipidaemia being most at risk. Diabetic retinopathy can cause microaneurysms, haemorrhages, exudates, changes to blood vessels, and retinal thickening.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments in people with diabetic retinopathy? What are the effects of treatments for vitreous haemorrhage? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2010 (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 58 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: peripheral retinal laser photocoagulation, focal and grid laser photocoagulation for maculopathy, corticosteroids for macular oedema, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors, and vitrectomy for vitreous haemorrhage.
Topics: Diabetic Retinopathy; Humans; Injections; Macular Edema; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 21609511
DOI: No ID Found -
Frontiers in Medicine 2022To date, various treatments for cystoid macular edema (CME) in retinitis pigmentosa (RP) have been reported. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to...
BACKGROUND
To date, various treatments for cystoid macular edema (CME) in retinitis pigmentosa (RP) have been reported. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of current treatments for RP-CME.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library were searched from inception to August 2021. ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and ISRCTN were also searched for relevant studies. Only studies published in English were included. The RoB 2 tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and the MINORS scale was used to assess the methodological quality of non-RCTs. Review manager (Revman) was used to pool the data. The primary outcomes included the change of central macular thickness (CMT) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline. The secondary outcomes included fluorescein angiography (FA) leakage, rebound of CME and adverse effects.
RESULTS
Thirty-two studies were included in the current systematic review and 7 studies were used for meta-analysis. Treatments for RP-CME included oral and topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors (CAIs), systematic and local steroids, anti-VEGF therapy, NSAIDS, grid LASER photocoagulation, subliminal micropulse LASER, vitrectomy, lutein supplement and oral minocycline. CAIs and local steroids were proved to be effective in reducing CMT. The effects of anti-VEGF reagents varied among studies. Regarding other treatments, only one study for each method fitted the inclusion criteria, so the evidence was very limited.
CONCLUSION
Topical CAIs, oral CAIs and local steroids are effective in treating RP-CME. However, due to the overall inferior design and small patient number of the included studies, the quality of evidence was poor. Systematic steroids, LASER, NSAIDS and vitrectomy may also be effective, nevertheless, considering the limited number of studies, no conclusion could be drawn regarding these treatments. More well-designed and conducted studies are needed in this field.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021273979, identifier CRD42021273979.
PubMed: 35652079
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.895208 -
The Breast Journal 2022To assess determinants associated with late local radiation toxicity in patients treated for breast cancer. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To assess determinants associated with late local radiation toxicity in patients treated for breast cancer.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed. All studies reporting ≥2 variables associated with late local radiation toxicity after treatment with postoperative whole breast irradiation were included. Cohort studies, randomized controlled trials, and cross-sectional studies were eligible designs. Study characteristics and definitions of determinants and outcome measures were extracted. If possible, the measure of association was extracted.
RESULTS
Twenty-one studies were included in this review. Six out of seven studies focused on the association between radiotherapy (boost) dose or irradiated breast volume and late radiation toxicity found significant results. Tumor bed boost was associated with late radiation toxicity, fibrosis, and/or edema in six out of twelve studies. Lower age was associated with late breast toxicity in one study, while in another study, higher age was significantly associated with breast fibrosis. Also, no association between age and late radiation toxicity was found in eight out of twelve studies. Similar inconsistent results were found in the association between late radiation toxicity and other patient-related factors (i.e., breast size, diabetes mellitus) and surgical and systemic treatment-related factors (i.e., complications after surgery, chemotherapy, and time between surgery and radiotherapy).
CONCLUSION
In modern 3D radiotherapy, radiotherapy (boost) dose and volume are-like in 2D radiotherapy-associated with late local radiation toxicity, such as breast fibrosis and edema. Treatment de-escalation, for example, partial breast irradiation in selected patients might be important to decrease late local toxicity without compromising locoregional control and survival.
Topics: Breast; Breast Neoplasms; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Fibrosis; Humans; Mastectomy, Segmental; Radiation Injuries
PubMed: 35711897
DOI: 10.1155/2022/6745954 -
Open Access Emergency Medicine : OAEM 2023Heatstroke (HS) is a severe form of heat-related illness (HRI) associated with high morbidity and mortality, representing a condition that includes long-term multiorgan...
INTRODUCTION
Heatstroke (HS) is a severe form of heat-related illness (HRI) associated with high morbidity and mortality, representing a condition that includes long-term multiorgan dysfunction and susceptibility to further heat illness.
METHODS
In a systematic review searching Medline PubMed from the studies conducted between 2009 and 2020, 16 papers were identified.
RESULTS
A hallmark symptom of heat stroke is CNS dysfunction (a hallmark sign of HS) which manifests as mental status changes, including agitation, delirium, epilepsy, or coma at the time of the collapse. Acute kidney injury (AKI), gut ischemia, blood clots in the stomach and small intestine, cytoplasmic protein clumps in the spleen, and injury of skeletal muscle (rhabdomyolysis) are all characteristics of peripheral tissue damage. Severe heat stroke tends to be complicated by rhabdomyolysis, especially in patients with exertional heat stroke. Rhabdomyolysis may lead to systemic effects, including the local occurrence of compartment syndrome, hyperkalemic cardiac arrest, and/or lethal disseminated intravascular coagulopathy. Untreated heat stroke might exacerbate psychosis, lactic acidosis, consumptive coagulopathy, hematuria, pulmonary edema, renal failure, and other metabolic abnormalities. Core body temperature and level of consciousness are the most significant indicators to diagnose the severity of heat stroke and prevent unfavorable consequences. Heatstroke is a life-threatening illness if not promptly recognized and effectively treated.
DISCUSSION
This review highlighted that core body temperature and white blood cell count are significant contributing factors affecting heat stroke outcomes. Other factors contributing to the poor outcome include old age, low GCS, and prolonged hospital stay. The prevalence of both classic and exertional heatstroke can be reduced by certain simple preventive measures, such as avoiding strenuous activity in hot environments and reducing exposure to heat stress.
PubMed: 37771523
DOI: 10.2147/OAEM.S419028