A comparative evaluation of aluminum chloride hexahydrate gel iontophoresis versus tap water iontophoresis in people with primary palmar hyperhidrosis: A randomised clinical trial.

Background Primary palmar hyperhidrosis causes a lot of problems for patients and negatively affects their quality of life. Currently, iontophoresis with tap water and aluminum chloride hexahydrate is used for primary palmar hyperhidrosis. Yet, little evidence exists about iontophoresis with aluminum chloride hexahydrate in the form of gel. This study investigated the effect of aluminum chloride hexahydrate gel iontophoresis compared to tap water iontophoresis on primary palmar hyperhidrosis. Methods In this randomised controlled trial study, 32 patients with primary palmar hyperhidrosis were divided randomly into two groups (n = 16). Participants received 7 sessions of iontophoresis with aluminum chloride hexahydrate gel or tap water every other day on the dominant hand. The sweating rate was measured by gravimetry and iodine-starch tests before and after the last treatment session. Results Following the iontophoresis, the rate of sweating in both hands in the two groups was significantly reduced (P < 0.001). However, the sweating rate in the treated hand and the non-treated hand showed no significant difference. There was no significant difference observed in sweating rate reduction between both groups over time, but the larger effect size values observed in the aluminum chloride hexahydrate gel iontophoresis group may suggest the superiority of this gel over tap water in reducing the rate of sweating. Limitations Further investigations with longer follow-up are needed to confirm the hypothesis regarding the effectiveness of aluminum chloride hexahydrate gel iontophoresis over other types of iontophoresis. In addition, contraindications of iontophoresis such as pregnancy, pacemakers, and epilepsy should be considered. Conclusion The present study provides preliminary evidence suggesting that aluminum chloride hexahydrate gel iontophoresis is an effective alternative treatment to decrease sweating rate in extended areas with fewer side effects in patients with primary palmar hyperhidrosis.

Percutaneous ethanol injection as a promising and minimally invasive treatment for axillary osmidrosis: Double-blinded randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Axillary osmidrosis is a common problem with a strong negative impact on the professional and social quality of life. Several options are available for its treatment. But there are no treatment guidelines. The objective of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of percutaneous ethanol injection for treatment of axillary osmidrosis. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to assess clinical efficacy and postoperative complications of percutaneous ethanol injection was performed among 60 patients (12-35 years of age) with axillary osmidrosis. The active agent used in the experimental group (n = 30) was sterile 90% ethanol and the placebo used in the control group (n = 30) was sterile normal saline administered in an identical syringe. The results of malodor elimination were graded by the patients as excellent, good, fair, and poor. All patients were followed-up for 10 months. RESULTS: Malodor elimination was graded as good by 15 (50%) patients treated with percutaneous ethanol injection. A significant difference in the improvement of axillary osmidrosis was found between the experimental and control groups (P < 0.001). The most common post-procedure complication was transient subjective skin stiffness in the experimental group, which regressed spontaneously. There were no serious permanent side effects. LIMITATIONS: Relatively short duration of follow-up; and lack of histopathological evidence of destruction of the apocrine glands after treatment in most patients. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous ethanol injection is an effective and safe treatment method for axillary osmidrosis and does not have permanent side effects.