RESUMO
Melasma, a commonly acquired hyperpigmentation skin condition, is usually treated with topical agents as the first line of management. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of azelaic acid versus hydroquinone in treating melasma patients. We conducted a comprehensive search across four online databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) from the time of their creation until May 28, 2023. We considered randomized controlled studies comparing hydroquinone with azelaic acid for the treatment of melasma patients. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2 to evaluate the risk of bias. The mean difference (MD) for continuous variables and the risk ratio (RR) for categorical variables, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled. Six studies were included, with a total of 673 patients with melasma. The azelaic acid had a lower mean change in melasma area severity index (MASI) than the hydroquinone group [MD= -1.23, 95% CI (-2.05, -0.40), P=0.004]. No difference was observed regarding the improvement via the objective response scale, the reduction in pigmentation, or the adverse events reported. However, despite not being statistically significantly different, there was a trend towards having more good responses in the azelaic acid group. Azelaic acid may be better than hydroquinone in reducing melasma severity (measured by MASI). However, larger studies with long-term follow-up are needed to validate these findings.
RESUMO
Hemorrhoidectomy is one of the most common surgical interventions to remove the third and fourth degrees of prolapse hemorrhoid. We carried out this systematic review and meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of harmonic scalpel (HS) versus bipolar diathermy (BD) methods in terms of decreasing intraoperative and postoperative morbidities among patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy. Suitable citations were found utilizing digital medical sources, including the CENTRAL, Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, from inception until December 2022. Only RCTs that matched the inclusion requirements were selected. We used the updated Cochrane risk of bias (ROB) tool (version 2) to assess the quality of the involved citations. The Review Manager (version 5.4 for Windows) was used to perform the pooled analysis. Data were pooled and reported as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) in random-effects models. Overall, there was no significant difference between HS and BD in terms of decreasing intraoperative morbidities like operative time, intraoperative blood loss, mean duration of hospital stay, and mean duration of first bowel movement (P>0.05). Similarly, the rate of postoperative complications like pain, bleeding, urinary retention, anal stenosis, flatus incontinence, and wound edema; was similar in both groups with no significant difference (P>0.05). In conclusion, our pooled analysis revealed there was no substantial difference between HS and BD in terms of intraoperative and postoperative endpoints. Additional RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed to consolidate the power and quality of the presented evidence.