Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Lasers Med Sci ; 38(1): 228, 2023 Sep 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37776370

RESUMEN

Laser therapies have been well-established in ameliorating skin-aging consequences. This systematic review aims to determine the efficacy, safety profile, and satisfaction rates of laser combination therapies on skin rejuvenation resurfacing. A systematic search was performed in four major databases up to September 2022. Skin rejuvenation studies were eligible comprising at least one laser combination arm, inclusive of all laser types (ablative or non-ablatives), and one monotherapy arm selected from one of the combined modalities. Studies combining one laser modality with radiofrequency (RF) or intense pulse light (IPL) were also assessed. Trials that did not encompass a monotherapy control arm were evaluated independently as single-arm studies. Eighteen clinical trials recruiting 448 cases were included after screening. A total of 532 nm KTP + 1064 nm Nd:YAG and 2940 nm Er:YAG + Nd:YAG were the two most utilized laser combinations and exerted higher improvements and milder adverse events, compared to their monotherapy in most studies. Combining CO2 with rhodamine-IPL or gallium arsenide laser increased efficacy and satisfaction and brings about faster skin recovery time. Augmenting CO2 + RF did not increase improvement vs CO2 laser alone but prolonged skin erythema. Our meta-analysis revealed the pooled prevalence of quartile improvement rates as 0%, 28%, 40%, 27% in laser combination group, and 0%, 9%, 31%, 17% in laser monotherapy group, respectively. The satisfaction within each quartile category was 39%, 25%, 15%, 7% in laser combination and 20%, 25%, 16%, 17% in laser monotherapy, respectively, suggestive of the higher efficacy and satisfaction of laser combination group. The pain scores were lower in laser combination group than monotherapy (4.8 ± 1.18 vs 7.18 ± 0.7, converted on a scale of 0 to 10). Post-laser skin erythema lasted less longer in the combination group (12.8 vs 15.24 days). Laser combination therapies were discovered to be superior to their monotherapies in terms of clinical improvement rates, diminished adverse events such as pain and erythema and patients satisfaction rates. Due to paucity of high-quality reportings, additional trials are warranted to corroborate these results.


Asunto(s)
Terapia por Láser , Láseres de Gas , Láseres de Estado Sólido , Envejecimiento de la Piel , Humanos , Rejuvenecimiento , Dióxido de Carbono , Terapia por Láser/efectos adversos , Eritema , Láseres de Gas/efectos adversos , Dolor , Láseres de Estado Sólido/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
Dermatol Ther ; 33(6): e13986, 2020 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32639077

RESUMEN

COVID-19 had a great impact on medical approaches among dermatologist. This systematic review focuses on all skin problems related to COVID-19, including primary and secondary COVID-related cutaneous presentations and the experts recommendations about dermatological managements especially immunomodulators usage issues. Search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Embase and ScienceDirect. Other additional resources were searched included Cochrane, WHO, Medscape and coronavirus dermatology resource of Nottingham university. The search completed on May 3, 2020. Three hundred seventy-seven articles assigned to the inclusion and exclusion groups. Eighty-nine articles entered the review. Primary mucocutaneous and appendageal presentations could be the initial or evolving signs of COVID-19. It could be manifest most commonly as a maculopapular exanthamatous or morbiliform eruption, generalized urticaria or pseudo chilblains recognized as "COVID toes" (pernio-like acral lesions or vasculopathic rashes). During pandemic, Non-infected non-at risk patients with immune-medicated dermatologic disorders under treatment with immunosuppressive immunomodulators do not need to alter their regimen or discontinue their therapies. At-risk o suspected patients may need dose reduction, interval increase or temporary drug discontinuation (at least 2 weeks). Patients with an active COVID-19 infection should hold the biologic or non-biologic immunosuppressives until the complete recovery occur (at least 4 weeks).


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/complicaciones , Inmunosupresores/administración & dosificación , Enfermedades Cutáneas Virales/etiología , Eritema Pernio/virología , Humanos , Inmunosupresores/efectos adversos , Enfermedades de la Piel/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedades de la Piel/inmunología , Enfermedades Cutáneas Virales/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedades Cutáneas Virales/fisiopatología
3.
Health Sci Rep ; 6(9): e1576, 2023 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37752973

RESUMEN

Background and Aim: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a well-known noncommunicable disease that plays a significant role in emerging other chronic disorders and following complications. MetS is also involved in the pathophysiology of numerous dermatological diseases. We aim to evaluate the association of MetS with the most prevalent dermatological diseases. Methods: A systematic search was carried out on PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, Cochrane, as well as the Google Scholar search engine. Only English case-control studies regarding MetS and any skin disease from the beginning of 2010 up to November 15, 2022, were selected. The study was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Results: A total of 37 studies (13,830 participants) met the inclusion criteria. According to our result, patients with psoriasis, hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), vitiligo, androgenetic alopecia (AGA), and lichen planus (LP) have a higher chance of having MetS compared to the general population. Furthermore, people with seborrheic dermatitis (SED) and rosacea are more prone to insulin resistance, high blood pressure (BP), and higher blood lipids. After pooling data, the meta-analysis revealed a significant association between MetS and skin diseases (pooled odds ratio [OR]: 3.28, 95% confidence interval: 2.62-4.10). Concerning the type of disease, MetS has been correlated with AGA (OR: 11.86), HS (OR: 4.46), LP (OR: 3.79), and SED (OR: 2.45). Psoriasis also showed a significant association but with high heterogeneity (OR: 2.89). Moreover, skin diseases and MetS are strongly associated in Spain (OR: 5.25) and Thailand (OR: 11.86). Regarding the metaregression model, the effect size was reduced with increasing age (OR: 0.965), while the size increased with AGA (OR: 3.064). Conclusions: MetS is closely associated with skin complications. Dermatologists and other multidisciplinary teams should be cautious while treating these patients to prevent severe complications resulting from MetS.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA