Characteristics of atopic dermatitis patients using complementary and alternative medicine: A literature review.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease. Due to the burden of the disease, some patients try complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). OBJECTIVE: To identify characteristics associated with CAM use in children and adults with AD. METHODS: We conducted a literature review in accordance with the PRISMA international guidelines for literature reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic search was performed in the PubMed database. Qualitative and quantitative analyses using a χ2 test were performed to compare characteristics between CAM users and non-users. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Out of 514 articles retrieved, 12 studies were included, giving a total of 2240 patients. Our statistical analysis identified an association between CAM use and rhino-conjunctivitis (p = 0.015 in children, p = 0.041 in adults), topical corticosteroid use (p = 0.042 in children, p = 0.008 in adults), and daily application of moisturizing cream (p = 0.002 in children, p < 0.001 in adults). Gender did not affect the decision to use CAM (p > 0.05). In studies, a higher number of affected eczema sites (p < 0.001), prior use of more than two conventional treatments (p = 0.047), and food avoidance diets (p = 0.016) were predictive of CAM use in children. In adults, a younger age (p < 0.05), higher education level (p = 0.043), and lower age at AD onset (p = 0.004) were related to CAM use. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first literature review focusing on socio-demographic and disease determinants related to CAM use among AD patients. The lack of homogeneity in measuring tools makes it difficult to compare and synthesize the studies.

Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of topical non-biological therapies for psoriasis patients.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory cutaneous disease that causes patients psychosocial distress. Topical therapies are utilized for mild-to-moderate disease and for more severe disease in conjunction with systemic therapies. Topical corticosteroids are a cornerstone of treatment for psoriasis, but long-term use can cause stria and cutaneous atrophy and as well as systemic side effects such as topical steroid withdrawal. Non-steroidal topical therapies tend to be safer than topical corticosteroids for long-term use. AREAS COVERED: We conducted a literature review on the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties of topical therapies for psoriasis. We discuss how the PK and PD characteristics of these therapies inform clinicians on efficacy and toxicity when prescribing for patients. EXPERT OPINION: Topical corticosteroids, used intermittently, are very safe and effective. Long-term, continuous use of topical corticosteroids can cause systemic side effects. Several generic and newly approved non-steroidal options are available, but no head-to-head studies compare the effectiveness of the generics (vitamin D analogs, tacrolimus, pimecrolimus) against the newer therapies (roflumilast, tapinarof). Patients often do not respond to topical therapies due to poor adherence to treatment regimens. For patients resistant to topical treatment, phototherapy or systemic therapy may be an option.

Clinical efficacy of intense pulsed light combined with low-dose intralesional corticosteroids in treating noninfectious granulomas after mesotherapy: A case series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mesotherapy is a popular cosmetic procedure for localized delivery of substances. However, due to the lack of standardized processes, there are potential risks of adverse reactions. Granulomas formation is one of the chronic reactions which impose significant physical and mental burdens on patients. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this analysis is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of combining intense pulsed light (IPL) with intralesional corticosteroids for treating noninfectious granulomas after mesotherapy. METHODS: This retrospective observational case series included patients who suffer from noninfectious granulomas after mesotherapy and received combination of IPL and intralesional corticosteroids treatment between October 2021 and December 2022 at Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen, China. The process and effect were analyzed and summarized. RESULTS: Among the seven patients, five expressed extreme satisfaction with the efficacy, while two was slightly satisfied. The physicians believed that all patients had shown significant improvement. No adverse reactions or recurrences were observed during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Based on this analysis, the application of the combined treatment in patients suffering from noninfectious granuloma due to mesotherapy demonstrates good clinical efficacy and safety, making it worth considering as a treatment option.

Impact of vitamin D supplementation on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 pneumonia patients: a single-center randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D supplementation for infectious diseases has been discussed, but its role in COVID-19 is unclear. Therefore, this study examined the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 pneumonia patients who received vitamin D supplementation. METHODS: This prospective, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted in a university hospital between July 2020 and March 2022. The inclusion criteria were patients aged ≥ 18 years with COVID-19 pneumonia patients. The patients were randomized into two groups: an intervention group receiving vitamin D supplementation (alfacalcidol, two mcg orally daily) until discharge and a control group. The clinical outcomes were pneumonia treatment duration, length of hospital stay, and change in pneumonia severity index between enrollment and discharge. Subgroup analysis was conducted for supplemental oxygen use, high-dose corticosteroid administration, evidence of lymphopenia, C-reactive protein concentration, and total serum vitamin D concentration. Adverse events were monitored. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-four patients were recruited (147 per group). The two groups did not differ in pneumonia treatment duration to discharge (p = 0.788) or length of hospital stay (p = 0.614). The reduction in the pneumonia severity index between enrollment and discharge was more significant in the intervention group (p = 0.007); a significant decrease was also observed among patients who had C-reactive protein > 30 mg/L (p < 0.001). No adverse reactions were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Adding active vitamin D to standard treatment may benefit COVID-19 pneumonia patients who require supplemental oxygen or high-dose corticosteroid therapy or who have high C-reactive protein concentrations (> 30 mg/L) upon treatment initiation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Thai Clinical Trials Registry TCTR20210906005 (retrospectively registered, 6 September 2021).

Photobiomodulation versus corticosteroid in the management of erosive oral lichen planus: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral lichen planus (OLP) is a chronic illness of immune origin that is typically treated with corticosteroids as a gold standard therapy. Photobiomodulation (PBM) may represent an alternative remedy that has the potential to treat a variety of pathological conditions by alleviating pain, reducing inflammation, and promoting tissue healing without the drawbacks of steroid therapies. Thus, the aim of the current study was to compare the effect of photobiomodulation to topical 0.1% triamcinolone acetonide on erosive oral lichen planus. METHODS: This randomized controlled clinical trial involved 44 patients complaining of erosive oral lichen planus. Patients were assigned to one of two groups: control group (n = 22) received 0.1% topical triamcinolone acetonide three times daily with miconazole oral gel once daily for 4 weeks, and photobiomodulation group (n = 22) received laser therapy by 980 nm diode laser utilizing output power 300 mW twice weekly for 5 weeks (a total of 10 sessions). The evaluation of patients was performed at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks postoperatively in terms of pain, clinical scores, and biochemical evaluation of salivary malondialdehyde levels. All recorded data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney test to compare the two studied groups regarding pain, lesion size, and salivary levels of malondialdehyde. Friedman test, followed by post hoc test, was used for comparison of the data within the same group along the 3 periods at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. RESULTS: Both groups showed significant improvement in pain and clinical scores, with no statistical difference between them. Moreover, there was a significant improvement in salivary malondialdehyde levels for both groups, with no significant difference between them. CONCLUSIONS: Photobiomodulation could be a promising therapeutic modality for management of erosive oral lichen planus without the side effects of steroid therapy. The salivary malondialdehyde level could be used as a biomarker to evaluate the disease severity and its response to the treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05951361) (19/07/2023).

Effects of triple therapy on disease burden in patients of GOLD groups C and D: results from the observational COPD cohort COSYCONET.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials described beneficial effects of inhaled triple therapy (LABA/LAMA/ICS) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and high risk of exacerbations. We studied whether such effects were also detectable under continuous treatment in a retrospective observational setting. METHODS: Data from baseline and 18-month follow-up of the COPD cohort COSYCONET were used, including patients categorized as GOLD groups C/D at both visits (n = 258). Therapy groups were defined as triple therapy at both visits (triple always, TA) versus its complement (triple not always, TNA). Comparisons were performed via multiple regression analysis, propensity score matching and inverse probability weighting to adjust for differences between groups. For this purpose, variables were divided into predictors of therapy and outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 258 patients were eligible (TA: n = 162, TNA: n = 96). Without adjustments, TA patients showed significant (p < 0.05) impairments regarding lung function, quality of life and symptom burden. After adjustments, most differences in outcomes were no more significant. Total direct health care costs were reduced but still elevated, with inpatient costs much reduced, while costs of total and respiratory medication only slightly changed. CONCLUSION: Without statistical adjustment, patients with triple therapy showed multiple impairments as well as elevated treatment costs. After adjusting for differences between treatment groups, differences were reduced. These findings are compatible with beneficial effects of triple therapy under continuous, long-term treatment, but also demonstrate the limitations encountered in the comparison of controlled intervention studies with observational studies in patients with severe COPD using different types of devices and compounds.

[Standard technical specifications for methacholine chloride (Methacholine) bronchial challenge test (2023)].

The methacholine challenge test (MCT) is a standard evaluation method of assessing airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and its severity, and has significant clinical value in the diagnosis and treatment of bronchial asthma. A consensus working group consisting of experts from the Pulmonary Function and Clinical Respiratory Physiology Committee of the Chinese Association of Chest Physicians, the Task Force for Pulmonary Function of the Chinese Thoracic Society, and the Pulmonary Function Group of Respiratory Branch of the Chinese Geriatric Society jointly developed this consensus. Based on the "Guidelines for Pulmonary Function-Bronchial Provocation Test" published in 2014, the issues encountered in its use, and recent developments, the group has updated the Standard technical specifications of methacholine chloride (methacholine) bronchial challenge test (2023). Through an extensive collection of expert opinions, literature reviews, questionnaire surveys, and multiple rounds of online and offline discussions, the consensus addressed the eleven core issues in MCT's clinical practice, including indications, contraindications, preparation of provocative agents, test procedures and methods, quality control, safety management, interpretation of results, and reporting standards. The aim was to provide clinical pulmonary function practitioners in healthcare institutions with the tools to optimize the use of this technique to guide clinical diagnosis and treatment.Summary of recommendationsQuestion 1: Who is suitable for conducting MCT? What are contraindications for performing MCT?Patients with atypical symptoms and a clinical suspicion of asthma, patients diagnosed with asthma requiring assessment of the severity of airway hyperresponsiveness, individuals with allergic rhinitis who are at risk of developing asthma, patients in need of evaluating the effectiveness of asthma treatment, individuals in occupations with high safety risks due to airway hyperresponsiveness, patients with chronic diseases prone to airway hyperresponsiveness, others requiring assessment of airway reactivity.Absolute contraindications: (1) Patients who are allergic to methacholine (MCh) or other parasympathomimetic drugs, with allergic reactions including rash, itching/swelling (especially of the face, tongue, and throat), severe dizziness, and dyspnea; (2) Patients with a history of life-threatening asthma attacks or those who have required mechanical ventilation for asthma attacks in the past three months; (3) Patients with moderate to severe impairment of baseline pulmonary function [Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) less than 60% of the predicted value or FEV1<1.0 L]; (4) Severe urticaria; (5) Other situations inappropriate for forced vital capacity (FVC) measurement, such as myocardial infarction or stroke in the past three months, poorly controlled hypertension, aortic aneurysm, recent eye surgery, or increased intracranial pressure.Relative contraindications: (1) Moderate or more severe impairment of baseline lung function (FEV1%pred<70%), but individuals with FEV1%pred>60% may still be considered for MCT with strict observation and adequate preparation; (2) Experiencing asthma acute exacerbation; (3) Poor cooperation with baseline lung function tests that do not meet quality control requirements; (4) Recent respiratory tract infection (<4 weeks); (5) Pregnant or lactating women; (6) Patients currently using cholinesterase inhibitors (for the treatment of myasthenia gravis); (7) Patients who have previously experienced airway spasm during pulmonary function tests, with a significant decrease in FEV1 even without the inhalation of provocative.Question 2: How to prepare and store the challenge solution for MCT?Before use, the drug must be reconstituted and then diluted into various concentrations for provocation. The dilution concentration and steps for MCh vary depending on the inhalation method and provocation protocol used. It is important to follow specific steps. Typically, a specified amount of diluent is added to the methacholine reagent bottle for reconstitution, and the mixture is shaken until the solution becomes clear. The diluent is usually physiological saline, but saline with phenol (0.4%) can also be used. Phenol can reduce the possibility of bacterial contamination, and its presence does not interfere with the provocation test. After reconstitution, other concentrations of MCh solution are prepared using the same diluent, following the dilution steps, and then stored separately in sterile containers. Preparers should carefully verify and label the concentration and preparation time of the solution and complete a preparation record form. The reconstituted and diluted MCh solution is ready for immediate use without the need for freezing. It can be stored for two weeks if refrigerated (2-8 ℃). The reconstituted solution should not be stored directly in the nebulizer reservoir to prevent crystallization from blocking the capillary opening and affecting aerosol output. The temperature of the solution can affect the production of the nebulizer and cause airway spasms in the subject upon inhaling cold droplets. Thus, refrigerated solutions should be brought to room temperature before use.Question 3: What preparation is required for subjects prior to MCT?(1) Detailed medical history inquiry and exclusion of contraindications.(2) Inquiring about factors and medications that may affect airway reactivity and assessing compliance with medication washout requirements: When the goal is to evaluate the effectiveness of asthma treatment, bronchodilators other than those used for asthma treatment do not need to be discontinued. Antihistamines and cromolyn have no effect on MCT responses, and the effects of a single dose of inhaled corticosteroids and leukotriene modifiers are minimal, thus not requiring cessation before the test. For patients routinely using corticosteroids, whether to discontinue the medication depends on the objective of the test: if assisting in the diagnosis of asthma, differential diagnosis, aiding in step-down therapy for asthma, or exploring the effect of discontinuing anti-inflammatory treatment, corticosteroids should be stopped before the provocation test; if the patient is already diagnosed with asthma and the objective is to observe the level of airway reactivity under controlled medication conditions, then discontinuation is not necessary. Medications such as IgE monoclonal antibodies, IL-4Rα monoclonal antibodies, traditional Chinese medicine, and ethnic medicines may interfere with test results, and clinicians should decide whether to discontinue these based on the specific circumstances.(3) Explaining the test procedure and potential adverse reactions, and obtaining informed consent if necessary.Question 4: What are the methods of the MCT? And which ones are recommended in current clinical practice?Commonly used methods for MCT in clinical practice include the quantitative nebulization method (APS method), Forced Oscillalion method (Astograph method), 2-minute tidal breathing method (Cockcroft method), hand-held quantitative nebulization method (Yan method), and 5-breath method (Chai 5-breath method). The APS method allows for precise dosing of inhaled Methacholine, ensuring accurate and reliable results. The Astograph method, which uses respiratory resistance as an assessment indicator, is easy for subjects to perform and is the simplest operation. These two methods are currently the most commonly used clinical practice in China.Question 5: What are the steps involved in MCT?The MCT consists of the following four steps:(1) Baseline lung function test: After a 15-minute rest period, the subjects assumes a seated position and wear a nose clip for the measurement of pulmonary function indicators [such as FEV1 or respiratory resistance (Rrs)]. FEV1 should be measured at least three times according to spirometer quality control standards, ensuring that the best two measurements differ by less than 150 ml and recording the highest value as the baseline. Usually, if FEV1%pred is below 70%, proceeding with the challenge test is not suitable, and a bronchodilation test should be considered. However, if clinical assessment of airway reactivity is necessary and FEV1%pred is between 60% and 70%, the provocation test may still be conducted under close observation, ensuring the subject's safety. If FEV1%pred is below 60%, it is an absolute contraindication for MCT.(2) Inhalation of diluent and repeat lung function test for control values: the diluent, serving as a control for the inhaled MCh, usually does not significantly impact the subject's lung function. the higher one between baseline value and the post-dilution FEV1 is used as the reference for calculating the rate of FEV1 decline. If post-inhalation FEV1 decreases, there are usually three scenarios: ①If FEV1 decreases by less than 10% compared to the baseline, the test can proceed, continue the test and administer the first dose of MCh. ②If the FEV1 decreases by≥10% and<20%, indicating a heightened airway reactivity to the diluent, proceed with the lowest concentration (dose) of the provoking if FEV1%pred has not yet reached the contraindication criteria for the MCT. if FEV1%pred<60% and the risk of continuing the challenge test is considerable, it is advisable to switch to a bronchodilation test and indicate the change in the test results report. ③If FEV1 decreases by≥20%, it can be directly classified as a positive challenge test, and the test should be discontinued, with bronchodilators administered to alleviate airway obstruction.(3) Inhalation of MCh and repeat lung function test to assess decline: prepare a series of MCh concentrations, starting from the lowest and gradually increasing the inhaled concentration (dose) using different methods. Perform pulmonaryfunction tests at 30 seconds and 90 seconds after completing nebulization, with the number of measurements limited to 3-4 times. A complete Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) measurement is unnecessary during testing; only an acceptable FEV1 measurement is required. The interval between two consecutive concentrations (doses) generally should not exceed 3 minutes. If FEV1 declines by≥10% compared to the control value, reduce the increment of methacholine concentration (dose) and adjust the inhalation protocol accordingly. If FEV1 declines by≥20% or more compared to the control value or if the maximum concentration (amount) has been inhaled, the test should be stopped. After inhaling the MCh, close observation of the subject's response is necessary. If necessary, monitor blood oxygen saturation and auscultate lung breath sounds. The test should be promptly discontinued in case of noticeable clinical symptoms or signs.(4) Inhalation of bronchodilator and repeat lung function test to assess recovery: when the bronchial challenge test shows a positive response (FEV1 decline≥20%) or suspiciously positive, the subject should receive inhaled rapid-acting bronchodilators, such as short-acting beta-agonists (SABA) or short-acting muscarinic antagonists (SAMA). Suppose the subject exhibits obvious symptoms of breathlessness, wheezing, or typical asthma manifestations, and wheezing is audible in the lungs, even if the positive criteria are not met. In that case, the challenge test should be immediately stopped, and rapid-acting bronchodilators should be administered. Taking salbutamol as an example, inhale 200-400 µg (100 µg per puff, 2-4 puffs, as determined by the physician based on the subject's condition). Reassess pulmonary function after 5-10 minutes. If FEV1 recovers to within 10% of the baseline value, the test can be concluded. However, if there is no noticeable improvement (FEV1 decline still≥10%), record the symptoms and signs and repeat the bronchodilation procedure as mentioned earlier. Alternatively, add Ipratropium bromide (SAMA) or further administer nebulized bronchodilators and corticosteroids for intensified treatment while keeping the subject under observation until FEV1 recovers to within 90% of the baseline value before allowing the subject to leave.Question 6: What are the quality control requirements for the APS and Astograph MCT equipment?(1) APS Method Equipment Quality Control: The APS method for MCT uses a nebulizing inhalation device that requires standardized flowmeters, compressed air power source pressure and flow, and nebulizer aerosol output. Specific quality control methods are as follows:a. Flow and volume calibration of the quantitative nebulization device: Connect the flowmeter, an empty nebulization chamber, and a nebulization filter in sequence, attaching the compressed air source to the bottom of the chamber to ensure airtight connections. Then, attach a 3 L calibration syringe to the subject's breathing interface and simulate the flow during nebulization (typically low flow:<2 L/s) to calibrate the flow and volume. If calibration results exceed the acceptable range of the device's technical standards, investigate and address potential issues such as air leaks or increased resistance due to a damp filter, then recalibrate. Cleaning the flowmeter or replacing the filter can change the resistance in the breathing circuit, requiring re-calibration of the flow.b. Testing the compressed air power source: Regularly test the device, connecting the components as mentioned above. Then, block the opening of the nebulization device with a stopper or hand, start the compressed air power source, and test its pressure and flow. If the test results do not meet the technical standards, professional maintenance of the equipment may be required.c. Verification of aerosol output of the nebulization chamber: Regularly verify all nebulization chambers used in provocation tests. Steps include adding a certain amount of saline to the chamber, weighing and recording the chamber's weight (including saline), connecting the nebulizer to the quantitative nebulization device, setting the nebulization time, starting nebulization, then weighing and recording the post-nebulization weight. Calculate the unit time aerosol output using the formula [(weight before nebulization-weight after nebulization)/nebulization time]. Finally, set the nebulization plan for the provocation test based on the aerosol output, considering the MCh concentration, single inhalation nebulization duration, number of nebulization, and cumulative dose to ensure precise dosing of the inhaled MCh.(2) Astograph method equipment quality control: Astograph method equipment for MCT consists of a respiratory resistance monitoring device and a nebulization medication device. Perform zero-point calibration, volume calibration, impedance verification, and nebulization chamber checks daily before tests to ensure the resistance measurement system and nebulization system function properly. Calibration is needed every time the equipment is turned on, and more frequently if there are significant changes in environmental conditions.a. Zero-point calibration: Perform zero-point calibration before testing each subject. Ensure the nebulization chamber is properly installed and plugged with no air leaks.b. Volume calibration: Use a 3 L calibration syringe to calibrate the flow sensor at a low flow rate (approximately 1 L/s).c. Resistance verification: Connect low impedance tubes (1.9-2.2 cmH2O·L-1·s-1) and high impedance tubes (10.2-10.7 cmH2O·L-1·s-1) to the device interface for verification.d. Bypass check: Start the bypass check and record the bypass value; a value>150 ml/s is normal.e. Nebulization chamber check: Check each of the 12 nebulization chambers daily, especially those containing bronchodilators, to ensure normal spraying. The software can control each nebulization chamber to produce spray automatically for a preset duration (e.g., 2 seconds). Observe the formation of water droplets on the chamber walls, indicating normal spraying. If no nebulization occurs, check for incorrect connections or blockages.Question 7: How to set up and select the APS method in MCT?The software program of the aerosol provocation system in the quantitative nebulization method can independently set the nebulizer output, concentration of the methacholine agent, administration time, and number of administrations and combine these parameters to create the challenge test process. In principle, the concentration of the methacholine agent should increase from low to high, and the dose should increase from small to large. According to the standard, a 2-fold or 4-fold incremental challenge process is generally used. In clinical practice, the dose can be simplified for subjects with good baseline lung function and no history of wheezing, such as using a recommended 2-concentration, 5-step method (25 and 50 g/L) and (6.25 and 25 g/L). Suppose FEV1 decreases by more than 10% compared to the baseline during the test to ensure subject safety. In that case, the incremental dose of the methacholine agent can be reduced, and the inhalation program can be adjusted appropriately. If the subject's baseline lung function declines or has recent daytime or nighttime symptoms such as wheezing or chest tightness, a low concentration, low dose incremental process should be selected.Question 8: What are the precautions for the operation process of the Astograph method in MCT?(1) Test equipment: The Astograph method utilizes the forced oscillation technique, applying a sinusoidal oscillating pressure at the mouthpiece during calm breathing. Subjects inhale nebulized MCh of increasing concentrations while continuous monitoring of respiratory resistance (Rrs) plots the changes, assessing airway reactivity and sensitivity. The nebulization system employs jet nebulization technology, comprising a compressed air pump and 12 nebulization cups. The first cup contains saline, cups 2 to 11 contain increasing concentrations of MCh, and the 12th cup contains a bronchodilator solution.(2) Provocation process: Prepare 10 solutions of MCh provocant with gradually increasing concentrations.(3) Operational procedure: The oscillation frequency is usually set to 3 Hz (7 Hz for children) during the test. The subject breathes calmly, inhales saline solution nebulized first, and records the baseline resistance value (if the subject's baseline resistance value is higher than 10 cmH2O·L-1·s-1, the challenge test should not be performed). Then, the subject gradually inhales increasing concentrations of methacholine solution. Each concentration solution is inhaled for 1 minute, and the nebulization system automatically switches to the next concentration for inhalation according to the set time. Each nebulizer cup contains 2-3 ml of solution, the output is 0.15 ml/min, and each concentration is inhaled for 1 minute. The dose-response curve is recorded automatically. Subjects should breathe tidally during the test, avoiding deep breaths and swallowing. Continue until Rrs significantly rises to more than double the baseline value, or if the subject experiences notable respiratory symptoms or other discomfort, such as wheezing in both lungs upon auscultation. At this point, the inhalation of the provocant should be stopped and the subject switchs to inhaling a bronchodilator until Rrs returns to pre-provocation levels. If there is no significant increase in Rrs, stop the test after inhaling the highest concentration of MCh.Question 9: How to interpret the results of the MCT?The method chosen for the MCT determines the specific indicators used for interpretation. The most commonly used indicator is FEV1, although other parameters such as Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) and Rrs can also be used to assess airway hyperresponsiveness.Qualitative judgment: The test results can be classified as positive, suspiciously positive, or negative, based on a combination of the judgment indicators and changes in the subject's symptoms. If FEV1 decreases by≥20% compared to the baseline value after not completely inhaling at the highest concentration, the result can be judged as positive for Methacholine bronchial challenge test. If the patient has obvious wheezing symptoms or wheezing is heard in both lungs, but the challenge test does not meet the positive criteria (the highest dose/concentration has been inhaled), and FEV1 decreases between 10% and 20% compared to the baseline level, the result can also be judged as positive. If FEV1 decreases between 15% and 20% compared to the baseline value without dyspnea or wheezing attacks, the result can be judged as suspiciously positive. Astograph method: If Rrs rises to 2 times or more of the baseline resistance before reaching the highest inhalation concentration, or if the subject's lungs have wheezing and severe coughing, the challenge test can be judged as positive. Regardless of the result of the Methacholine bronchial challenge test, factors that affect airway reactivity, such as drugs, seasons, climate, diurnal variations, and respiratory tract infections, should be excluded.Quantitative judgment: When using the APS method, the severity of airway hyperresponsiveness can be graded based on PD20-FEV1 or PC20-FEV1. Existing evidence suggests that PD20 shows good consistency when different nebulizers, inhalation times, and starting concentrations of MCh are used for bronchial provocation tests, whereas there is more variability with PC20. Therefore, PD20 is often recommended as the quantitative assessment indicator. The threshold value for PD20 with the APS method is 2.5 mg.The Astograph method often uses the minimum cumulative dose (Dmin value, in Units) to reflect airway sensitivity. Dmin is the minimum cumulative dose of MCh required to produce a linear increase in Rrs. A dose of 1 g/L of the drug concentration inhaled for 1-minute equals 1 unit. It's important to note that with the continuous increase in inhaled provocant concentration, the concept of cumulative dose in the Astograph method should not be directly compared to other methods. Most asthma patients have a Dmin<10 Units, according to Japanese guidelines. The Astograph method, having been used in China for over twenty years, suggests a high likelihood of asthma when Dmin≤6 Units, with a smaller Dmin value indicating a higher probability. When Dmin is between 6 and 10 Units, further differential diagnosis is advised to ascertain whether the condition is asthma.Precautions:A negative methacholine challenge test (MCT) does not entirely rule out asthma. The test may yield negative results due to the following reasons:(1) Prior use of medications that reduce airway responsiveness, such as ß2 agonists, anticholinergic drugs, antihistamines, leukotriene receptor antagonists, theophylline, corticosteroids, etc., and insufficient washout time.(2) Failure to meet quality control standards in terms of pressure, flow rate, particle size, and nebulization volume of the aerosol delivery device.(3) Poor subject cooperation leads to inadequate inhalation of the methacholine agent.(4) Some exercise-induced asthma patients may not be sensitive to direct bronchial challenge tests like the Methacholine challenge and require indirect bronchial challenge tests such as hyperventilation, cold air, or exercise challenge to induce a positive response.(5) A few cases of occupational asthma may only react to specific antigens or sensitizing agents, requiring specific allergen exposure to elicit a positive response.A positive MCT does not necessarily indicate asthma. Other conditions can also present with airway hyperresponsiveness and yield positive results in the challenge test, such as allergic rhinitis, chronic bronchitis, viral upper respiratory infections, allergic alveolitis, tropical eosinophilia, cystic fibrosis, sarcoidosis, bronchiectasis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, post-cardiopulmonary transplant, congestive heart failure, and more. Furthermore, factors like smoking, air pollution, or exercise before the test may also result in a positive bronchial challenge test.Question 10: What are the standardized requirements for the MCT report?The report should include: (1) basic information about the subject; (2) examination data and graphics: present baseline data, measurement data after the last two challenge doses or concentrations in tabular form, and the percentage of actual measured values compared to the baseline; flow-volume curve and volume-time curve before and after challenge test; dose-response curve: showing the threshold for positive challenge; (3) opinions and conclusions of the report: including the operator's opinions, quality rating of the examination, and review opinions of the reviewing physician.Question 11: What are the adverse reactions and safety measures of MCT?During the MCT, the subject needs to repeatedly breathe forcefully and inhale bronchial challenge agents, which may induce or exacerbate bronchospasm and contraction and may even cause life-threatening situations. Medical staff should be fully aware of the indications, contraindications, medication use procedures, and emergency response plans for the MCT.

The Early Care (0-3 Years) In Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Meeting Report.

Objective: This report summarizes the key discussions from the "Early Care (0-3 years) in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy" meeting, which aimed to address the challenges and opportunities in the diagnosis and care of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) and female carriers within the 0-3-year age group. Methods: The meeting brought together experts and healthcare providers who shared insights, discussed advancements in DMD care, and identified research needs. Presentations covered diagnostic challenges, approved therapies, clinical trials, identification of young female carriers, and the importance of clinical care and support for families. Results: The meeting highlighted the importance of timely diagnosis and the lack of evidence-based guidelines for the care of children with DMD aged 0-3 years. Diagnostic challenges were discussed, including delays in receiving a DMD diagnosis and disparities based on ethnicity. The potential benefits and process of newborn screening were addressed.Approved therapeutic interventions, such as corticosteroids and exon-skipping drugs, were explored, with studies indicating the potential benefits of early initiation of corticosteroid therapy and the safety of exon-skipping drugs in DMD. Clinical trials involving infants and young boys were discussed, focusing on drugs like ataluren, vamorolone, and gene therapies.The meeting emphasized the importance of clinical care and support for families, including comprehensive information provision, early intervention services, and individualized support. The identification and care of young female carriers were also addressed. Conclusion: The meeting provided a platform for experts and healthcare providers to discuss and identify key aspects of early care for children with DMD aged 0-3 years. The meeting emphasized the need for early diagnosis, evidence-based guidelines, and comprehensive care and support for affected children and their families. Further research, collaboration, and the development of consensus guidelines are needed to improve early diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes in this population.

Corticosteroid-resistant immune-related adverse events: a systematic review.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment has become an important therapeutic option for various cancer types. Although the treatment is effective, ICI can overstimulate the patient's immune system, leading to potentially severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs), including hepatitis, colitis, pneumonitis and myocarditis. The initial mainstay of treatments includes the administration of corticosteroids. There is little evidence how to treat steroid-resistant (sr) irAEs. It is mainly based on small case series or single case reports. This systematic review summarizes available evidence about sr-irAEs. We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed. Additionally, we included European Society for Medical Oncology, Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer, National Comprehensive Cancer Network and American Society of Clinical Oncology Guidelines for irAEs in our assessment. The study population of all selected publications had to include patients with cancer who developed hepatitis, colitis, pneumonitis or myocarditis during or after an immunotherapy treatment and for whom corticosteroid therapy was not sufficient. Our literature search was not restricted to any specific cancer diagnosis. Case reports were also included. There is limited data regarding life-threatening sr-irAEs of colon/liver/lung/heart and the majority of publications are single case reports. Most publications investigated sr colitis (n=26), followed by hepatitis (n=21), pneumonitis (n=17) and myocarditis (n=15). There is most data for mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) to treat sr hepatitis and for infliximab, followed by vedolizumab, to treat sr colitis. Regarding sr pneumonitis there is most data for MMF and intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) while data regarding infliximab are conflicting. In sr myocarditis, most evidence is available for the use of abatacept or anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) (both with or without MMF) or ruxolitinib with abatacept. This review highlights the need for prompt recognition and treatment of sr hepatitis, colitis, pneumonitis and myocarditis. Guideline recommendations for sr situations are not defined precisely. Based on our search, we recommend-as first line treatment-(1) MMF for sr hepatitis, (2) infliximab for sr colitis, followed by vedolizumab, (3) MMF and IVIG for sr pneumonitis and (4) abatacept or ATG (both with or without MMF) or ruxolitinib with abatacept for sr myocarditis. These additional immunosuppressive agents should be initiated promptly if there is no sufficient response to corticosteroids within 3 days.

Non-Systemic Medication for the Treatment of Prurigo Nodularis: A Systematic Review.

Prurigo nodularis (PN) is a skin disease characterized by firm, itchy, erythematous lesions. Treatment consists of systemic and non-systemic modes of therapy. Non-systemic forms of treatment are first-line and include topical corticosteroids, topical steroid-sparing agents, and phototherapy. The objective was to review the efficacy of non-systemic treatment used to treat PN. A systematic search was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023412012). The search consisted of keywords and Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and translated to Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus. Google Scholar was also searched for the first 200 articles. Article quality of evidence was scored using GRADE criteria. The search yielded 1151 results; 37 met criteria for inclusion. There were 14 studies on phototherapy, and 11 studies on topical corticosteroids, most of which were also combined with topical antihistamines, antipruritics, and/or phototherapy. There were 2 studies each on topical antipruritics used in isolation, vitamin D analogues, and intralesional triamcinolone acetonide. There was 1 study each on topical pimecrolimus, tacrolimus, 2% dinitrochlorobenzene, cryotherapy, acupuncture, and the Paul Gerson Unna boot. Most were case reports and case series, although 2 randomized controlled trials on phototherapy and topical pimecrolimus were included. Corticosteroids had varying levels of positive response in patients and appeared more effective when used in combination or under occlusive dressing. Phototherapy is likely effective, but the risk of relapse is high. Cryotherapy may also be a lesion-directed agent to circumvent challenges to adherence and avoidance of systemic medication.

Long-term effects of high-dose systemic corticosteroids on growth and bone mineral density in patients treated for childhood interstitial lung disease (chILD).

BACKGROUND: Children's interstitial lung disease (chILD) is a rare and potentially life-threatening condition. For many chILD conditions, systemic corticosteroids (sCCS) are considered the primary treatment despite a broad spectrum of potential side effects. AIM: We aimed to determine the long-term effects of sCCS treatment on growth, bone mineral density (BMD), and body composition after chILD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This descriptive cross-sectional single-center study included patients diagnosed with chILD before the age of 18 years treated with sCCS in the period 1998-2020. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, anthropometric measurements, bone age determination, and blood tests were performed in 53 (55% males) of 89 eligible patients. RESULTS: Median (range) age was 19.3 (6.4;30.7 years). Participants received a median (range) cumulative sCCS dose of 1144 (135; 6178) mg over a 2.0 (0.1; 13.8) years period and latest dose was administered 11.7 (1.2; 19.6) years before follow-up. Mean delta height (height standard deviation scores [SDS] - target height SDS) was reduced at sCCS treatment initiation (mean: -0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.91; -0.20, p < .005) and at sCCS treatment cessation (mean: -0.86, 95% CI:-1.22; -0.51, p < .001), but normalized in the majority at follow-up (mean: -0.29, 95% CI:-0.61; 0.03, p = .07). Mean (SD) BMD z-score for the spine and whole body was -0.34 (1.06) and 0.52 (1.13), with no significant correlation to sCCS dose. Excess body fat (>30% in females, >25% in males) was found in 58% of patients. CONCLUSION: Long-term treatment with sCCS did not cause significant long-term reduction of height but showed subtle effects on fat mass percentage and BMD. Given the severity of chILD, the observed long-term effects of sCCS on growth and BMD appear acceptable.

Effect of Buteyko breathing technique on clinical and functional parameters in adult patients with asthma: a randomized, controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The established therapy of asthma might be supported by additional non-pharmaceutical measures, such as the Buteyko breathing technique (BBT); however, the available data are mixed. To clarify the effects of BBT in patients with asthma, we investigated whether it led to clinical improvements with correlation to functional parameters. METHODS: Using a randomized, controlled design, we studied two groups (n = 30 each) of patients with asthma under either BBT or usual therapy (UT) w/o BBT over a period of 3 months. The primary outcome comprised the voluntary control pause (CP) after 3 months, secondary outcomes an additional breathhold parameter, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), capnovolumetry, exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) and Nijmegen Questionnaire (NQ), and the use of medication (ß2-agonists; inhaled corticosteroids, ICS). RESULTS: CP showed significant time-by-group interaction [F(1,58.09) = 28.70, p < 0.001] as well as main effects for study group [F(1,58.27) = 5.91, p = 0.018] and time [F(1,58.36) = 17.67, p < 0.001]. ACQ and NQ scores were significantly (p < 0.05 each) improved with BBT. This was associated with reductions in the use of ß2-agonists and ICS (p < 0.05 each) by about 20% each. None of these effects occurred in the UT group. While FEV1 and the slopes of the capnovolumetric expiratory phases 2 and 3 did not significantly change, the capnovolumetric threshold volume at tidal breathing increased (p < 0.05) with BBT by about 10 mL or 10%, compared to baseline, suggesting a larger volume of the central airways. No significant changes were seen for FeNO. CONCLUSIONS: BBT was clinically effective, as indicated by the fact that the improvement in symptom scores and the small increase in bronchial volume occurred despite the significant reduction of respiratory pharmacotherapy. As the self-controlled Buteyko breathing therapy was well-accepted by the participants, it could be considered as supporting tool in asthma therapy being worth of wider attention in clinical practice. Trial registration Retrospectively registered on 10 March 2017 at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03098849).

Zinc Supplementation and an Improved Quality of Life in Patients with Autoimmune Hepatitis.

Objecive Patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) reportedly have an impaired quality of life (QOL), mainly due to depression, even during remission. In addition, hypozincaemia has been demonstrated in patients with chronic liver disease, including AIH, and is known to be related to depression. Corticosteroids are known to cause mental instability. We therefore investigated the longitudinal association between zinc supplementation and changes in the mental status among AIH patients treated with corticosteroids. Materials This study enrolled 26 patients with serological remission of AIH routinely treated at our facility after excluding 15 patients who either discontinued polaprezinc (150 mg/day) within 24 months or interrupted treatment. Two questionnaires, the Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire (CLDQ) and SF-36, were adopted to evaluate the QOL before and after zinc supplementation. Results Serum zinc levels were significantly elevated after zinc supplementation (p<0.0001). The CLDQ worry subscale significantly improved after zinc supplementation (p=0.017), but none of the SF-36 subscales was affected. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that daily prednisolone dosing was inversely related to both the CLDQ worry domain score (p=0.036) and the SF-36 mental health component (p=0.031). There was a significant negative correlation between the changes in the daily steroid dose and the CLDQ worry domain scores before and after zinc supplementation (p=0.006). No serious adverse events occurred during the observation period. Conclusion Zinc supplementation safely and efficiently improved mental impairment, possibly caused by continuous treatment with corticosteroids, in patients with AIH.

Healthcare costs and resources utilization in children with difficult-to-control asthma treated with biologic therapies: A population-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Asthma is one of the most common diseases in children, with a variable range of severity. In recent years, treatment for severe asthma has been largely improved by the availability of targeted biologic therapies. Nevertheless, studies reporting real-world data and cost-effectiveness analyses are lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate, on a population-based cohort of children with asthma, the impact of the treatment with biologics on healthcare service utilization and associated costs. METHODS: Data were retrieved from Healthcare Utilization database of Lombardy region (Italy). A cohort of 46 asthmatic children aged 6-11 in treatment with dupilumab, mepolizumab or omalizumab was identified during 2017-2021. We compared healthcare resources use between the year before ("baseline period") and the year after the treatment initiation ("follow-up period"). Average 1-year healthcare costs were also calculated. RESULTS: Comparing the baseline with the follow-up period, the number of patients with at least one exacerbation-related hospitalization and ER access decreased by 75.0% and 85.7%, respectively. The use of biologic agents, namely omalizumab, mepolizumab and dupilumab, significantly reduced oral corticosteroids (OCS), short-acting ß2-agonists and the association inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ß2-agonists use. ER admissions for non-respiratory causes were also significantly reduced, while discontinuation rate was low (6.5%). The overall costs increased, due to the costs of the biologic agents, but the hospital admission-related costs due to respiratory causes reduced significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world investigation suggests that biologic agents reduced hospital admissions for respiratory causes and use of anti-asthmatic drugs, including OCS. However, long-term healthcare sustainability still needs more in-depth assessments.

Pharmaceutical management of acute radiation dermatitis in the German speaking radiation oncology community.

BACKGROUND: Radiation dermatitis (RD) remains the most common side effect in radiation therapy (RT) with various pharmaceutical options available for prevention and treatment. We sought to determine pharmaceutical management patterns of radiation dermatitis among radiation oncology professionals. METHODS: We conducted a survey on RD among the German-speaking community of radiation oncologists inquiring for their opinion on preventive and therapeutic pharmaceutical approaches for acute RD. RESULTS: 244 health professionals participated. Dexpanthenol lotion is the agent most widely used both for prevention (53.0%) and treatment (76.9%) of RD, followed by urea (29.8%) for prevention and corticosteroids (46.9%) for treatment. A wide range of substances is used by participants, though the overall experience with them is rather limited. 32.5% of participants do generally not recommend any preventative treatment. 53.4% of participants recommend alternative medicine for RD management. While seldomly used, corticosteroids were considered most effective in RD therapy, followed by dexpanthenol and low-level laser therapy. A majority of participants prefers moist over dry treatment of moist desquamation and 43.8% prescribe antiseptics. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmaceutical management of RD in the German-speaking radiation oncology community remains controversial, inconsistent, and partially not supported by evidence-based medicine. Stronger evidence level and interdisciplinary consensus is required amongst practitioners to improve these care patterns.

Super-responder and clinical remission in patients with asthma on treatment with single biologic therapy or cycling therapy using dupilumab in a real-world setting.

BACKGROUND: Regarding the therapeutic target in asthma, super-responder status (SR) is a status without systemic corticosteroids. Recently, clinical remission (CR), being a status of prolonged absence of asthma symptoms without systemic corticosteroids and/or normal pulmonary function, has gained attention as a new therapeutic target in asthma. Here, we examined the percentage and features of asthma patients on treatment with dupilumab showing SR and CR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 49 asthma patients used subcutaneous dupilumab for > 1 year between April 2019 and November 2022. The status of SR and CR for 1 year was evaluated. Patients without any maintenance oral corticosteroids and exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids were classified as SR. CR was defined using three definitions based on changes in asthma symptoms and pulmonary function in addition to achieving SR for 1 year: CR without pulmonary function criteria (CR w/o F), fulfilment of asthma symptom improvement (asthma control questionnaire score < 0.75 or asthma control test score ≥ 23); and CR-70 or CR-80, pulmonary function improvement (%forced expiratory volume in 1 second ≥ 70% or ≥ 80%) in addition to achieving CR w/o F, respectively. RESULTS: 38 (77.6%), 22 (44.9%), 13 (26.5%), 12 (24.5%) of patients had SR, CR w/o F, CR-70, and CR-80, respectively. Severe eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis was significantly more found in patients with SR and CR based on all three definitions than in those without. CONCLUSION: This study identified the percentage and features of patients on treatment with dupilumab showing SR and CR in a real-world setting. The outcome beyond CR on biologic treatment should be clarified.

Factors Affecting the Ability to Discontinue Oral Corticosteroid Use in Patients with EGPA Treated with Anti-Interleukin-5 Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) and some with severe eosinophilic asthma require continuous long-term oral corticosteroid (OCS) treatment for disease control. The anti-interleukin-5 agent, mepolizumab, has recently become available for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma and EGPA, with promising results and safety profiles. The proportion of patients with EGPA who discontinued oral steroids was 18% in the MIRRA trial. To compare patients with EGPA who were able to discontinue steroids with mepolizumab with those who could not. METHODS: Twenty patients with EGPA treated with mepolizumab were evaluated at Osaka Habikino Medical Center. The OCS dose, asthma control test score, fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels, peripheral eosinophil count, and spirometric parameters were evaluated before and after treatment. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in the mean OCS dose from a prednisolone equivalent of 8.88 ± 4.99 mg/day to 3.18 ± 3.47 mg/day (p < 0.001). In this study, 40% of patients discontinued oral steroids. The most common reason for the failure to discontinue steroids in patients was poor asthma control. The percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s significantly improved in patients with EGPA who could discontinue steroids after receiving mepolizumab. CONCLUSION: In this real-world study, treatment with mepolizumab for EGPA was associated with a significant reduction in OCS use; however, poor asthma control was identified as an inhibiting factor for steroid reduction.

Clinical Response and Remission in Patients With Severe Asthma Treated With Biologic Therapies.

BACKGROUND: The development of novel targeted biologic therapies for severe asthma has provided an opportunity to consider remission as a new treatment goal. RESEARCH QUESTION: How many patients with severe asthma treated with biologic therapy achieve clinical remission, and what predicts response to treatment? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The Danish Severe Asthma Register is a nationwide cohort including all adult patients receiving biologic therapy for severe asthma in Denmark. This observational cohort study defined "clinical response" to treatment following 12 months as a ≥ 50% reduction in exacerbations and/or a ≥ 50% reduction in maintenance oral corticosteroid dose, if required. "Clinical remission" was defined by cessation of exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroids, as well as a normalization of lung function (FEV1 > 80%) and a six-question Asthma Control Questionnaire score ≤ 1.5 following 12 months of treatment. RESULTS: Following 12 months of treatment, 104 (21%) of 501 biologic-naive patients had no response to treatment, and 397 (79%) had a clinical response. Among the latter, 97 (24%) fulfilled the study criteria of clinical remission, corresponding to 19% of the entire population. Remission was predicted by shorter duration of disease and lower BMI in the entire population of patients treated with biologic therapy. INTERPRETATION: Clinical response was achieved in most adult patients initiating biologic therapy, and clinical remission was observed in 19% of the patients following 12 months of treatment. Further studies are required to assess the long-term outcome of achieving clinical remission with biologic therapy.

A Review on Comparison of Allopathic Medicines to other Drug Therapies in the Management of Asthma.

Asthma, is a chronic disease of the airways and is characterized by exacerbations of bronchospasm and noticeable airway inflammation. Current asthma therapy has emerged from naturally occurring compounds through rational pharmaceutical advancements, and it is very beneficial. In this review, we have discussed the different drug therapies i.e., Ayurvedic, Homeopathic, Unani, and Allopathic affecting asthma treatment. Allopathic medicines are used as a controller medication for regular maintenance of asthma i.e., long-acting ß-agonists, inhaled corticosteroids, anti-leukotriene medicines, and novel biologic agents. Pharmacological research is more important in generating effective, long-lasting, and safe asthma treatments, but it has been difficult to produce new classes of anti-asthmatic therapies. A combination inhaler that contains a long-acting ß2-agonist and a corticosteroid is currently the "gold standard" for treating asthma. Allopathic treatments for asthma have been proven effective in reducing the probability of asthma attacks and for improving symptoms along with lung functions as compared to other therapies. The level of asthma management and the possible risk of future worsening are used to determine the treatment's strategies. This review article describes the comparison of allopathic therapy of asthma with homeopathy, ayurvedic and Unani system and gives justification supported by a number of case studies for being allopathic, a better therapy when compared with others.

Ultrasound-Guided Pes Anserine Bursitis Injection Choices: Prolotherapy or Oxygen-Ozone or Corticosteroid: A Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Pes anserine bursitis is the most common cause of periarticular knee pain. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of local injection-based therapies with different materials. DESIGN: The enrolled patients were randomly allocated to three groups to receive different interventions. Outcome measures included pain severity using the visual analog scale and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index that was evaluated before the intervention, 1 and 8 wks after that. RESULTS: This trial was performed on 72 participants, with male-to-female ratio of 0.14 and with a mean age of 61.49 ± 9.35 yrs. Corticosteroids in the first group, oxygen-ozone in the second group, and dextrose 20% in the third group, were injected into the pes anserine bursa under ultrasound guidance. Interaction between time and group showed a statistically significant improvement in visual analog scale and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index ( P ≤ 0.05) in favor of corticosteroids and oxygen-ozone groups after 1 wk and in favor of oxygen-ozone and prolotherapy groups after 8 wks. CONCLUSIONS: All three treatment options are effective for patients with pes anserine bursitis. This study showed that the effects of oxygen-ozone injection and prolotherapy last longer than those of corticosteroid injection.