Effect of Laser and Energy-based Device Therapies to Minimize Surgical Scar Formation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

Utilization of lasers and energy-based devices for surgical scar minimization has been substantially evaluated in placebo-controlled trials. The aim of this study was to compare reported measures of efficacy of lasers and energy-based devices in clinical trials in preventing surgical scar formation in a systematic review and network meta-analyses. Five electronic databases, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library, were searched to retrieve relevant articles. The search was limited to randomized controlled trials that reported on clinical outcomes of surgical scars with treatment initiation no later than 6 months after surgery and a follow-up period of at least 3 months. A total of 18 randomized controlled trials involving 482 participants and 671 postsurgical wounds were included in the network meta-analyses. The results showed that the most efficacious treatments were achieved using low-level laser therapy) (weighted mean difference -3.78; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -6.32, -1.24) and pulsed dye laser (weighted mean difference -2.46; 95% CI -4.53, -0.38). Nevertheless, low-level laser therapy and pulsed dye laser demonstrated comparable outcomes in surgical scar minimization (weighted mean difference -1.32, 95% CI -3.53, 0.89). The findings of this network meta-analyses suggest that low-level laser therapy and pulsed dye laser are both effective treatments for minimization of scar formation following primary closure of surgical wounds with comparable treatment outcomes.

Anti-Influenza with Green Tea Catechins: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Influenza is one of the most serious respiratory viral infections worldwide. Although several studies have reported that green tea catechins (GTCs) might prevent influenza virus infection, this remains controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of eight studies with 5,048 participants that examined the effect of GTC administration on influenza prevention. In a random-effects meta-analysis of five RCTs, 884 participants treated with GTCs showed statistically significant effects on the prevention of influenza infection compared to the control group (risk ratio (RR) 0.67, 95%CIs 0.51-0.89, P = 0.005) without evidence of heterogeneity (I2= 0%, P = 0.629). Similarly, in three cohort studies with 2,223 participants treated with GTCs, there were also statistically significant effects (RR 0.52, 95%CIs 0.35-0.77, P = 0.001) with very low evidence of heterogeneity (I2 = 3%, P = 0.358). Additionally, the overall effect in the subgroup analysis of gargling and orally ingested items (taking capsules and drinking) showed a pooled RR of 0.62 (95% CIs 0.49-0.77, P = 0.003) without heterogeneity (I2= 0%, P = 0.554). There were no obvious publication biases (Egger's test (P = 0.138) and Begg's test (P = 0.103)). Our analysis suggests that green tea consumption is effective in the prophylaxis of influenza infections. To confirm the findings before implementation, longitudinal clinical trials with specific doses of green tea consumption are warranted.