-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2012Urticaria is a common skin disease characterised by itching weals or hives, which can occur almost anywhere on the body. There are a number of different subtypes and a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Urticaria is a common skin disease characterised by itching weals or hives, which can occur almost anywhere on the body. There are a number of different subtypes and a range of available treatment options. There is lack of agreement on the efficacy of H2-receptor antagonists used in the treatment of urticaria.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the safety and effectiveness of H2-receptor antagonists in the treatment of urticaria.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to 7 October 2011: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library (2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE (from 2005), EMBASE (from 2007), and LILACS (from 1982). We also searched online trials registries for ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of H2-receptor antagonists in people with a clinical diagnosis of urticaria of any duration or of any subtype. Studies including H1-antihistamines for chronic urticaria are the topic of a separate Cochrane review; thus, they were not included in this review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted and analysed data.
MAIN RESULTS
Four studies of a relatively small size, involving 144 participants, were included in this review. A combination of ranitidine with diphenhydramine was more effective at improving the resolution of urticaria than diphenhydramine administered alone (risk ratio (RR) 1.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 2.36). Although there was a similar improvement in itching, weal size, and intensity, cimetidine provided no statistically significant greater overall improvement in symptoms of urticaria when compared to diphenhydramine. However, a combination of these medications was more effective than diphenhydramine alone (RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.94). Adverse events were reported with several of the interventions, i.e. ranitidine and diphenhydramine, causing drowsiness and sedation, but there was no significant difference in the level of sedation from baseline with either famotidine or diphenhydramine.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The very limited evidence provided by this review was based on a few old studies of a relatively small size, which we categorised as having high to unclear risk of bias. Thus, at present, the review does not allow confident decision-making about the use of H2-receptor antagonists for urticaria. Although some of these studies have reported a measure of relief of symptoms of urticaria and rather minimal clinical improvement in some of the participants, the evidence was weak and unreliable. We have emphasised the lack of precision and limitations in the reported data where appropriate in this review.
Topics: Cimetidine; Diphenhydramine; Drug Therapy, Combination; Famotidine; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Histamine H2 Antagonists; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ranitidine; Urticaria
PubMed: 22419335
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008596.pub2 -
Dermatology Online Journal Nov 2010Pemphigoid gestationis is a rare autoimmune blistering disease of pregnancy. It is characterized by pruritic, urticarial plaques with the development of tense vesicles...
Pemphigoid gestationis is a rare autoimmune blistering disease of pregnancy. It is characterized by pruritic, urticarial plaques with the development of tense vesicles and bullae within the lesions. Pemphigoid gestationis has been associated with premature delivery, small-for-gestational-age infants. Recurrences with subsequent pregnancies are often more severe. Oral glucocorticoids are the mainstay of therapy. Differentiation of pemphigoid gestationis from pruritic urticarial papules and plaques of pregnancy is essential because management and outcomes differ. In instances in which clinical diagnosis is difficult, direct immunofluorescence tests, immunoblots, or ELISA studies of anti-basement-membrane zone antibodies are useful in establishing the diagnosis.
Topics: Adult; Autoimmune Diseases; Basement Membrane; Complement C3; Diphenhydramine; Eosinophils; Female; Fibrin; Humans; Immunoglobulin G; Infant, Newborn; Lymphocytes; Male; Pemphigoid Gestationis; Prednisone; Pregnancy; Skin Diseases, Vesiculobullous; Treatment Outcome; Triamcinolone; Urticaria
PubMed: 21163161
DOI: No ID Found -
Advances in Therapy Jan 2022Since 1955, the only available H antihistamines for intravenous administration have been first-generation formulations and, of those, only intravenously administered... (Review)
Review
Since 1955, the only available H antihistamines for intravenous administration have been first-generation formulations and, of those, only intravenously administered (IV) diphenhydramine is still approved in the USA. Orally administered cetirizine hydrochloride, a second-generation H antihistamine, has been safely used over-the-counter for many years. In 2019, IV cetirizine was approved for the treatment of acute urticaria. In light of this approval, this narrative review discusses the changing landscape of IV antihistamines for the treatment of histamine-mediated conditions. Specifically, IV antihistamines will be discussed as a treatment option for acute urticaria and angioedema, as premedication to prevent infusion reactions related to anticancer agents and other biologics, and as an adjunct treatment for anaphylaxis and other allergic reactions. Before the development of IV cetirizine, randomized controlled trials of IV antihistamines for these indications were lacking. Three randomized controlled trials have been conducted with IV cetirizine versus IV diphenhydramine in the ambulatory care setting. A phase 3 trial of IV cetirizine 10 mg versus IV diphenhydramine 50 mg was conducted in 262 adults who presented to the urgent care/emergency department with acute urticaria requiring antihistamines. For the primary efficacy endpoint, defined as change from baseline in a 2-h patient-rated pruritus score, non-inferiority of IV cetirizine to IV diphenhydramine was demonstrated (score - 1.6 vs - 1.5, respectively; 95% CI - 0.1, 0.3). Compared with IV diphenhydramine, IV cetirizine demonstrated fewer adverse effects including less sedation, a significantly shorter length of stay in the treatment center, and fewer returns to the treatment center at 24 and 48 h. Similar findings were demonstrated in another phase 2 acute urticaria trial and in a phase 2 trial assessing IV cetirizine for pretreatment for infusion reactions in the oncology/immunology setting. IV cetirizine is associated with similar patient outcomes, fewer adverse effects, and increased treatment center efficiency than IV diphenhydramine.
Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Adult; Cetirizine; Diphenhydramine; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Urticaria
PubMed: 34862952
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-021-01999-x -
Emergency Medicine Journal : EMJ Apr 2007Serotonin syndrome is an under-reported and under-recognised condition that occurs on administration of selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors alone, or in combination...
Serotonin syndrome is an under-reported and under-recognised condition that occurs on administration of selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors alone, or in combination with other medication known to increase levels of 5-hydroxytryptamine. This case report demonstrates signs and symptoms associated with their overdose and illustrates the importance of recognition of this syndrome to instigate appropriate treatment for the patient.
Topics: Adult; Diphenhydramine; Drug Overdose; Female; Glasgow Coma Scale; Humans; Paroxetine; Serotonin Syndrome; Temazepam
PubMed: 17384366
DOI: 10.1136/emj.2006.040550 -
PloS One 2022Clinical testing typically relies on invasive blood draws and biopsies. Alternative methods of sample collection are continually being developed to improve patient...
Clinical testing typically relies on invasive blood draws and biopsies. Alternative methods of sample collection are continually being developed to improve patient experience; swabbing the skin is one of the least invasive sampling methods possible. To show that skin swabs in combination with untargeted mass spectrometry (metabolomics) can be used for non-invasive monitoring of an oral drug, we report the kinetics and metabolism of diphenhydramine in healthy volunteers (n = 10) over the course of 24 hours in blood and three regions of the skin. Diphenhydramine and its metabolites were observed on the skin after peak plasma levels, varying by compound and skin location, and is an illustrative example of how systemically administered molecules can be detected on the skin surface. The observation of diphenhydramine directly from the skin supports the hypothesis that both parent drug and metabolites can be qualitatively measured from a simple non-invasive swab of the skin surface. The mechanism of the drug and metabolites pathway to the skin's surface remains unknown.
Topics: Diphenhydramine; Humans; Mass Spectrometry; Metabolomics; Skin
PubMed: 35881585
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271794 -
American Family Physician Sep 2014
Topics: Aged; Anti-Allergic Agents; Cetirizine; Diagnosis, Differential; Diphenhydramine; Female; Humans; Mycosis Fungoides; Pruritus; Treatment Failure
PubMed: 25251092
DOI: No ID Found -
Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) Nov 2022The chemical stability of diphenhydramine (DIPH), azelastine (AZE) and bepotastine (BEPO) was examined in solutions and solids. The drugs were subjected to high...
Chemical Stability Study of H Antihistaminic Drugs from the First and the Second Generations, Diphenhydramine, Azelastine and Bepotastine, in Pure APIs and in the Presence of Two Excipients, Citric Acid and Polyvinyl Alcohol.
The chemical stability of diphenhydramine (DIPH), azelastine (AZE) and bepotastine (BEPO) was examined in solutions and solids. The drugs were subjected to high temperature (70 °C for 35 h) or UV/VIS light (18.902−94.510 kJ/m2) at pH 1−13, to examine their percentage degradation and kinetics of degradation. Further, the stability of solid DIPH, AZE and BEPO was examined in the presence of excipients of different reactivity, i.e., citric acid (CA) and polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) under high temperature/high humidity (70 °C/80% RH) or UV/VIS light (94.510 kJ/m2). Under high temperature, DIPH degraded visibly (>19%) at pH 1 and 4, AZE was shown stable, while the degradation of BEPO was rather high (>17%) in all pH conditions. Under UV/VIS irradiation all the drugs were shown labile with degradation in the range 5.5−96.3%. As far as the solid mixtures were concerned, all drugs interacted with excipients, especially under high temperature/high humidity or UV/VIS light. As a result, DIPH, AZE and BEPO were compared in terms of their stability, with regard to their different structures and acid/base properties. All these results may be helpful for manufacturing, storing and applying these drugs in their topical (skin, nasal and ocular), oral and injectable formulations.
Topics: Excipients; Drug Stability; Polyvinyl Alcohol; Diphenhydramine; Citric Acid; Histamine Antagonists
PubMed: 36500415
DOI: 10.3390/molecules27238322 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2015Nausea and vomiting are common symptoms in patients with terminal, incurable illnesses. Both nausea and vomiting can be distressing. Haloperidol is commonly prescribed... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Nausea and vomiting are common symptoms in patients with terminal, incurable illnesses. Both nausea and vomiting can be distressing. Haloperidol is commonly prescribed to relieve these symptoms. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 2, 2009, of Haloperidol for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in palliative care patients.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events associated with the use of haloperidol for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in palliative care patients.
SEARCH METHODS
For this updated review, we performed updated searches of CENTRAL, EMBASE and MEDLINE in November 2013 and in November 2014. We searched controlled trials registers in March 2015 to identify any ongoing or unpublished trials. We imposed no language restrictions. For the original review, we performed database searching in August 2007, including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and AMED, using relevant search terms and synonyms. Handsearching complemented the electronic searches (using reference lists of included studies, relevant chapters and review articles) for the original review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of haloperidol for the treatment of nausea or vomiting, or both, in any setting, for inclusion. The studies had to be conducted with adults receiving palliative care or suffering from an incurable progressive medical condition. We excluded studies where nausea or vomiting, or both, were thought to be secondary to pregnancy or surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We imported records from each of the electronic databases into a bibliographic package and merged them into a core database where we inspected titles, keywords and abstracts for relevance. If it was not possible to accept or reject an abstract with certainty, we obtained the full text of the article for further evaluation. The two review authors independently assessed studies in accordance with the inclusion criteria. There were no differences in opinion between the authors with regard to the assessment of studies.
MAIN RESULTS
We considered 27 studies from the 2007 search. In this update we considered a further 38 studies from the 2013 search, and two in the 2014 search. We identified one RCT of moderate quality with low risk of bias overall which met the inclusion criteria for this update, comparing ABH (Ativan®, Benadryl®, Haldol®) gel, applied to the wrist, with placebo for the relief of nausea in 22 participants. ABH gel includes haloperidol as well as diphenhydramine and lorazepam. The gel was not significantly better than placebo in this small study; however haloperidol is reported not to be absorbed significantly when applied topically, therefore the trial does not address the issue of whether haloperidol is effective or well-tolerated when administered by other routes (e.g. by mouth, subcutaneously or intravenously). We identified one ongoing trial of haloperidol for the management of nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer, with initial results published in a conference abstract suggesting that haloperidol is effective for 65% of patients. The trial had not been fully published at the time of our review. A further trial has opened, comparing oral haloperidol with oral methotrimeprazine (levomepromazine) for patients with cancer and nausea unrelated to their treatment, which we aim to include in the next review update.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Since the last version of this review, we found one new study for inclusion but the conclusion remains unchanged. There is incomplete evidence from published RCTs to determine the effectiveness of haloperidol for nausea and vomiting in palliative care. Other than the trial of ABH gel vs placebo, we did not identify any fully published RCTs exploring the effectiveness of haloperidol for nausea and vomiting in palliative care patients for this update, but two trials are underway.
Topics: Antiemetics; Diphenhydramine; Gels; Haloperidol; Humans; Lorazepam; Nausea; Palliative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vomiting
PubMed: 26524474
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006271.pub3 -
Forensic Toxicology Jan 2022Drug distribution in scalp hair can provide historical information about drug use, such as the date and frequency of drug ingestion. We previously developed...
Distribution profiles of diphenhydramine and lidocaine in scalp, axillary, and pubic hairs measured by micro-segmental hair analysis: good indicator for discrimination between administration and external contamination of the drugs.
PURPOSE
Drug distribution in scalp hair can provide historical information about drug use, such as the date and frequency of drug ingestion. We previously developed micro-segmental hair analysis, which visualizes drug distribution at 0.4-mm intervals in individual hairs. The present study examines whether the distribution profiles of drugs can be markers for the administration or external contamination of the drugs using scalp, axillary, and pubic hairs.
METHODS
A single dose of anti-itch ointment containing diphenhydramine (DP) and lidocaine (LD) was topically applied to the axillary or pubic areas of two volunteers; DP was also orally administered; and LD was intra-gingivally injected. Scalp, axillary, and pubic hairs were assessed using our micro-segmental analysis.
RESULTS
The localization of DP and LD differed within individual scalp hair strands, implying DP and LD were predominantly incorporated into scalp hair via the bloodstream and via sweat/sebum, respectively, showing double-peak profiles. However, DP and LD were distributed along the shafts of axillary and pubic hairs without appearance of the double-peak profiles when the ointment had been applied to the axillary and pubic areas. The distributions of DP and LD in scalp hairs did not significantly differ according to administration routes, such as oral administration, gingival injection, and topical application.
CONCLUSIONS
Micro-segmental analysis revealed differences in the distribution profiles of drugs in hairs, and distinguished hairs with and without external contamination. These findings will be useful for understanding of the mechanism of drug uptake into hair and for estimating the circumstances for a drug use.
Topics: Humans; Scalp; Diphenhydramine; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Lidocaine; Ointments; Hair; Emollients
PubMed: 36454485
DOI: 10.1007/s11419-021-00590-x -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2014Around 16 million cases of whooping cough (pertussis) occur worldwide each year, mostly in low-income countries. Much of the morbidity of whooping cough in children and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Around 16 million cases of whooping cough (pertussis) occur worldwide each year, mostly in low-income countries. Much of the morbidity of whooping cough in children and adults is due to the effects of the paroxysmal cough. Cough treatments proposed include corticosteroids, beta2-adrenergic agonists, pertussis-specific immunoglobulin, antihistamines and possibly leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of interventions to reduce the severity of paroxysmal cough in whooping cough in children and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated our searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2014, Issue 1), which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE 2014, Issue 2), accessed from The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1950 to 30 January 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 30 January 2014), AMED (1985 to 30 January 2014), CINAHL (1980 to 30 January 2014) and LILACS (30 January 2014). We searched Current Controlled Trials to identify trials in progress.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of any intervention (excluding antibiotics and vaccines) to suppress the cough in whooping cough.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors (SB, MT) independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed the quality of each trial for this review in 2009. Two review authors (SB, KW) independently reviewed additional studies identified by the updated searches in 2012 and 2014. The primary outcome was frequency of paroxysms of coughing. Secondary outcomes were frequency of vomiting, frequency of whoop, frequency of cyanosis (turning blue), development of serious complications, mortality from any cause, side effects due to medication, admission to hospital and duration of hospital stay.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 trials of varying sample sizes (N = 9 to 135), mainly from high-income countries, including a total of 578 participants. Ten trials recruited children (N = 448 participants). Two trials recruited adolescents and adults (N = 130 participants). We considered only three trials to be of high methodological quality (one trial each of diphenhydramine, pertussis immunoglobulin and montelukast). Included studies did not show a statistically significant benefit for any of the interventions. Only six trials, including a total of 196 participants, reported data in sufficient detail for analysis. Diphenhydramine did not change coughing episodes; the mean difference (MD) of coughing spells per 24 hours was 1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.7 to 8.5 (N = 49 participants from one trial). One trial on pertussis immunoglobulin reported a possible mean reduction of -3.1 whoops per 24 hours (95% CI -6.2 to 0.02, N = 47 participants) but no change in hospital stay (MD -0.7 days; 95% CI -3.8 to 2.4, N = 46 participants). Dexamethasone did not show a clear decrease in length of hospital stay (MD -3.5 days; 95% CI -15.3 to 8.4, N = 11 participants from one trial) and salbutamol showed no change in coughing paroxysms per day (MD -0.2; 95% CI -4.1 to 3.7, N = 42 participants from two trials). Only one trial comparing pertussis immunoglobulin versus placebo (N = 47 participants) reported data on adverse events: 4.3% in the treatment group (rash) versus 5.3% in the placebo group (loose stools, pain and swelling at injection site).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of interventions for the cough in whooping cough. More high-quality trials are needed to assess the effectiveness of potential antitussive treatments in patients with whooping cough.
Topics: Acetates; Adolescent; Adult; Albuterol; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Bordetella pertussis; Child; Cough; Cyclopropanes; Dexamethasone; Diphenhydramine; Histamine H1 Antagonists; Humans; Immunoglobulins; Length of Stay; Quinolines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfides; Whooping Cough
PubMed: 25243777
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003257.pub5