-
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases Mar 2016Topical and oral antibiotics are routinely used to treat acne. However, antibiotic resistance is increasing, with many countries reporting that more than 50% of... (Review)
Review
Topical and oral antibiotics are routinely used to treat acne. However, antibiotic resistance is increasing, with many countries reporting that more than 50% of Propionibacterium acnes strains are resistant to topical macrolides, making them less effective. We reviewed the current scientific literature to enable proposal of recommendations for antibiotic use in acne treatment. References were identified through PubMed searches for articles published from January, 1954, to March 7, 2015, using four multiword searches. Ideally, benzoyl peroxide in combination with a topical retinoid should be used instead of a topical antibiotic to minimise the impact of resistance. Oral antibiotics still have a role in the treatment of moderate-to-severe acne, but only with a topical retinoid, benzoyl peroxide, or their combination, and ideally for no longer than 3 months. To limit resistance, it is recommended that benzoyl peroxide should always be added when long-term oral antibiotic use is deemed necessary. The benefit-to-risk ratio of long-term antibiotic use should be carefully considered and, in particular, use alone avoided where possible. There is a need to treat acne with effective alternatives to antibiotics to reduce the likelihood of resistance.
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Benzoyl Peroxide; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Humans; Propionibacterium acnes; Retinoids
PubMed: 26852728
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00527-7 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2011Acne vulgaris affects over 80% of teenagers, and persists beyond the age of 25 years in 3% of men and 12% of women. Typical lesions of acne include comedones,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Acne vulgaris affects over 80% of teenagers, and persists beyond the age of 25 years in 3% of men and 12% of women. Typical lesions of acne include comedones, inflammatory papules, and pustules. Nodules and cysts occur in more severe acne and can cause scarring and psychological distress.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of topical and oral treatments in people with acne vulgaris? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to February 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 69 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: topical treatments (adapalene, azelaic acid, benzoyl peroxide, clindamycin, erythromycin [alone or plus zinc]; isotretinoin, tetracycline, tretinoin); and oral treatments (doxycycline, isotretinoin, lymecycline, minocycline, oxytetracycline, tetracycline).
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Benzoyl Peroxide; Humans; Isotretinoin; Lymecycline; Minocycline; Tretinoin
PubMed: 21477388
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) is a major public health problem in low- and middle-income countries, affecting 190 million children under five years of age and leading to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) is a major public health problem in low- and middle-income countries, affecting 190 million children under five years of age and leading to many adverse health consequences, including death. Based on prior evidence and a previous version of this review, the World Health Organization has continued to recommend vitamin A supplementation (VAS) for children aged 6 to 59 months. The last version of this review was published in 2017, and this is an updated version of that review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of vitamin A supplementation (VAS) for preventing morbidity and mortality in children aged six months to five years.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, six other databases, and two trials registers up to March 2021. We also checked reference lists and contacted relevant organisations and researchers to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs evaluating the effect of synthetic VAS in children aged six months to five years living in the community. We excluded studies involving children in hospital and children with disease or infection. We also excluded studies evaluating the effects of food fortification, consumption of vitamin A rich foods, or beta-carotene supplementation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
For this update, two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion resolving discrepancies by discussion. We performed meta-analyses for outcomes, including all-cause and cause-specific mortality, disease, vision, and side effects. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
The updated search identified no new RCTs. We identified 47 studies, involving approximately 1,223,856 children. Studies were set in 19 countries: 30 (63%) in Asia, 16 of these in India; 8 (17%) in Africa; 7 (15%) in Latin America, and 2 (4%) in Australia. About one-third of the studies were in urban/periurban settings, and half were in rural settings; the remaining studies did not clearly report settings. Most studies included equal numbers of girls and boys and lasted about one year. The mean age of the children was about 33 months. The included studies were at variable overall risk of bias; however, evidence for the primary outcome was at low risk of bias. A meta-analysis for all-cause mortality included 19 trials (1,202,382 children). At longest follow-up, there was a 12% observed reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality for VAS compared with control using a fixed-effect model (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence). Nine trials reported mortality due to diarrhoea and showed a 12% overall reduction for VAS (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.98; 1,098,538 children; high-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference for VAS on mortality due to measles (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.11; 6 studies, 1,088,261 children; low-certainty evidence), respiratory disease (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.12; 9 studies, 1,098,538 children; low-certainty evidence), and meningitis. VAS reduced the incidence of diarrhoea (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.87; 15 studies, 77,946 children; low-certainty evidence), measles (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.67; 6 studies, 19,566 children; moderate-certainty evidence), Bitot's spots (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.53; 5 studies, 1,063,278 children; moderate-certainty evidence), night blindness (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.50; 2 studies, 22,972 children; moderate-certainty evidence), and VAD (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.78; 4 studies, 2262 children, moderate-certainty evidence). However, there was no evidence of a difference on incidence of respiratory disease (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.06; 11 studies, 27,540 children; low-certainty evidence) or hospitalisations due to diarrhoea or pneumonia. There was an increased risk of vomiting within the first 48 hours of VAS (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.69; 4 studies, 10,541 children; moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This update identified no new eligible studies and the conclusions remain the same. VAS is associated with a clinically meaningful reduction in morbidity and mortality in children. Further placebo-controlled trials of VAS in children between six months and five years of age would not change the conclusions of this review, although studies that compare different doses and delivery mechanisms are needed. In populations with documented VAD, it would be unethical to conduct placebo-controlled trials.
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Diarrhea; Dietary Supplements; Female; Humans; Male; Measles; Morbidity; Respiration Disorders; Vitamin A; Vitamin A Deficiency
PubMed: 35294044
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008524.pub4 -
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 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2018Pressure ulcers, localised injuries to the skin or underlying tissue, or both, occur when people cannot reposition themselves to relieve pressure on bony prominences.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pressure ulcers, localised injuries to the skin or underlying tissue, or both, occur when people cannot reposition themselves to relieve pressure on bony prominences. These wounds are difficult to heal, painful, expensive to manage and have a negative impact on quality of life. Prevention strategies include nutritional support and pressure redistribution. Dressing and topical agents aimed at prevention are also widely used, however, it remains unclear which, if any, are most effective. This is the first update of this review, which was originally published in 2013.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of dressings and topical agents on pressure ulcer prevention, in people of any age, without existing pressure ulcers, but considered to be at risk of developing one, in any healthcare setting.
SEARCH METHODS
In March 2017 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Embase, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We searched clinical trials registries for ongoing trials, and bibliographies of relevant publications to identify further eligible trials. There was no restriction on language, date of trial or setting. In May 2018 we updated this search; as a result several trials are awaiting classification.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials that enrolled people at risk of pressure ulcers.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
The original search identified nine trials; the updated searches identified a further nine trials meeting our inclusion criteria. Of the 18 trials (3629 participants), nine involved dressings; eight involved topical agents; and one included dressings and topical agents. All trials reported the primary outcome of pressure ulcer incidence.Topical agentsThere were five trials comparing fatty acid interventions to different treatments. Two trials compared fatty acid to olive oil. Pooled evidence shows that there is no clear difference in pressure ulcer incidence between groups, fatty acid versus olive oil (2 trials, n=1060; RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.17; low-certainty evidence, downgraded for very serious imprecision; or fatty acid versus standard care (2 trials, n=187; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.18; low-certainty evidence, downgraded for serious risk of bias and serious imprecision). Trials reported that pressure ulcer incidence was lower with fatty acid-containing-treatment compared with a control compound of trisostearin and perfume (1 trial, n=331; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.80; low-certainty evidence, downgraded for serious risk of bias and serious imprecision). Pooled evidence shows that there is no clear difference in incidence of adverse events between fatty acids and olive oil (1 trial, n=831; RR 2.22 95% CI 0.20 to 24.37; low-certainty evidence, downgraded for very serious imprecision).Four trials compared further different topical agents with placebo. Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) cream may increase the risk of pressure ulcer incidence compared with placebo (1 trial, n=61; RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.57; low-certainty evidence; downgraded for serious risk of bias and serious imprecision). The other three trials reported no clear difference in pressure ulcer incidence between active topical agents and control/placebo; active lotion (1 trial, n=167; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.19), Conotrane (1 trial, n=258; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.07), Prevasore (1 trial, n=120; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.11) (very low-certainty evidence, downgraded for very serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision). There was limited evidence from one trial to determine whether the application of a topical agent may delay or prevent the development of a pressure ulcer (Dermalex 9.8 days vs placebo 8.7 days). Further, two out of 76 reactions occurred in the Dermalex group compared with none out of 91 in the placebo group (RR 6.14, 95% CI 0.29 to 129.89; very low-certainty evidence; downgraded for very serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision).DressingsSix trials (n = 1247) compared a silicone dressing with no dressing. Silicone dressings may reduce pressure ulcer incidence (any stage) (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.41; low-certainty evidence; downgraded for very serious risk of bias). In the one trial (n=77) we rated as being at low risk of bias, there was no clear difference in pressure ulcer incidence between silicone dressing and placebo-treated groups (RR 1.95, 95% CI 0.18 to 20.61; low-certainty evidence, downgraded for very serious imprecision).One trial (n=74) reported no clear difference in pressure ulcer incidence when a thin polyurethane dressing was compared with no dressing (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.07). In the same trial pressure ulcer incidence was reported to be higher in an adhesive foam dressing compared with no dressing (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.48). We rated evidence from this trial as very low certainty (downgraded for very serious risk of bias and serious imprecision).Four trials compared other dressings with different controls. Trials reported that there was no clear difference in pressure ulcer incidence between the following comparisons: polyurethane film and hydrocolloid dressing (n=160, RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.41); Kang' huier versus routine care n=100; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.05); 'pressure ulcer preventive dressing' (PPD) versus no dressing (n=74; RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.76) We rated the evidence as very low certainty (downgraded for very serious risk of bias and serious or very serious imprecision).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Most of the trials exploring the impact of topical applications on pressure ulcer incidence showed no clear benefit or harm. Use of fatty acid versus a control compound (a cream that does not include fatty acid) may reduce the incidence of pressure ulcers. Silicone dressings may reduce pressure ulcer incidence (any stage). However the low level of evidence certainty means that additional research is required to confirm these results.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Aged; Allantoin; Bandages; Dimethyl Sulfoxide; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Combinations; Fatty Acids; Hexachlorophene; Humans; Incidence; Middle Aged; Olive Oil; Pressure Ulcer; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Silicones; Skin Care; Skin Cream; Squalene
PubMed: 30537080
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009362.pub3 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Dec 2008Skin disorders associated with photodamage from ultraviolet light include wrinkles, hyperpigmentation, tactile roughness, and telangiectasia, and are more common in... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Skin disorders associated with photodamage from ultraviolet light include wrinkles, hyperpigmentation, tactile roughness, and telangiectasia, and are more common in people with white compared with other skin types. Wrinkles are also associated with aging, hormonal status, smoking, and intercurrent disease.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of interventions to prevent and treat skin wrinkles? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to April 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 20 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: carbon dioxide laser, chemical peel, dermabrasion, facelifts, glycolic acid, isotretinoin, lactic acid, natural cartilage polysaccharides (oral or topical), retinyl esters, sunscreens, tazarotene, tretinoin, variable pulse erbium:YAG laser, and vitamin C or E (topical).
Topics: Administration, Oral; Humans; Hyperpigmentation; Isotretinoin; Rhytidoplasty; Skin Aging; Tretinoin
PubMed: 19445782
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jul 2011Chronic prostatitis can cause pain and urinary symptoms, and usually occurs without positive bacterial cultures from prostatic secretions (known as chronic abacterial... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Chronic prostatitis can cause pain and urinary symptoms, and usually occurs without positive bacterial cultures from prostatic secretions (known as chronic abacterial prostatitis or chronic pelvic pain syndrome [CP/CPPS]). Bacterial infection can result from urinary tract instrumentation, but the cause and natural history of CP/CPPS are unknown.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments for chronic bacterial prostatitis? What are the effects of treatments for chronic abacterial prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to August 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 33 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: 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors, allopurinol, alpha-blockers, biofeedback, local injections of antimicrobial drugs, mepartricin, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), oral antimicrobial drugs, pentosan polysulfate, prostatic massage, quercetin, radical prostatectomy, sitz baths, transurethral microwave thermotherapy, and transurethral resection.
Topics: 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors; Chronic Disease; Humans; Male; Mepartricin; Pentosan Sulfuric Polyester; Prostatitis; Quercetin
PubMed: 21736764
DOI: No ID Found -
BMJ Clinical Evidence May 2008Acne vulgaris affects over 80% of teenagers, and persists beyond the age of 25 years in 3% of men and 12% of women. Typical lesions of acne include comedones,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Acne vulgaris affects over 80% of teenagers, and persists beyond the age of 25 years in 3% of men and 12% of women. Typical lesions of acne include comedones, inflammatory papules, and pustules. Nodules and cysts occur in more severe acne and can cause scarring and psychological distress.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of topical and oral treatments in people with acne vulgaris? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to June 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 67 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: topical treatments (adapalene, azelaic acid, benzoyl peroxide, clindamycin, erythromycin (alone or plus zinc), isotretinoin, tetracycline, tretinoin), and oral treatments (doxycycline, isotretinoin, lymecycline, minocycline, oxytetracycline, tetracycline).
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Benzoyl Peroxide; Clindamycin; Erythromycin; Humans; Isotretinoin
PubMed: 19450306
DOI: No ID Found -
The American Journal of Tropical... Jul 2020The common cold had resulted in significant economic and social burden worldwide. The effect of vitamin C on preventing common cold in healthy adults has been...
The common cold had resulted in significant economic and social burden worldwide. The effect of vitamin C on preventing common cold in healthy adults has been investigated extensively, but not that of other micronutrients. Thus, we aim to assess the effects of providing micronutrients singly through oral means, on cold incidence, and/or management (in terms of cold duration and symptom severity) in healthy adults from systematically searched randomized controlled trials. From four electronic databases, 660 identified studies were screened and data were extracted from 20 studies (zinc, 10; vitamin D, 8; and vitamins A and E, 2). The quality of selected studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and certainty in the outcomes was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The review found that micronutrients supplementation, except vitamin C, may not prevent cold incidence or reduce symptom severity among healthy adults. However, zinc supplementation was observed to potentially reduce cold duration by 2.25 days (when zinc is provided singly, 95% CI: -3.39, -1.12). This suggests that zinc supplementation may reduce the overall burden due to common cold among healthy adults.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Ascorbic Acid; Common Cold; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Incidence; Micronutrients; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Severity of Illness Index; Vitamin A; Vitamin D; Vitamin E; Zinc
PubMed: 32342851
DOI: 10.4269/ajtmh.19-0718 -
European Review For Medical and... Jun 2023Recently, nutraceuticals have been widely explored in many medical fields and their use is also increasing in oral and dental problems. Since the nutraceutical evidence... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Recently, nutraceuticals have been widely explored in many medical fields and their use is also increasing in oral and dental problems. Since the nutraceutical evidence landscape in the literature has not been fully elucidated yet, this review aims to examine the effects of commercially available nutraceuticals and their potential evidence and applications in dentistry.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A scoping review was conducted following the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR)" checklist. The electronic search was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science on March 2022. The inclusion criteria include humans, clinical trials, randomized controlled trials (RCT), reviews, and systematic reviews published over the last ten years.
RESULTS
18 studies met the eligibility criteria. There were 2 RCTs, 11 systematic reviews, and four narrative reviews. In most studies, the clinical indications were oral leucoplakia, periodontitis, osseointegration of implants, oral mucositis, oral clefts, and oral health. Probiotics, prebiotics, polyunsaturated fatty acids, and vitamins A, B, C, D, and E were the most common nutraceuticals used in dentistry.
CONCLUSIONS
Nutraceuticals are foods that, according to the literature, may be useful for preventing and treating dental diseases.
Topics: Humans; Dietary Supplements; Vitamins; Osseointegration; Vitamin A; Dentistry
PubMed: 37318464
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202306_32607