The British journal of dermatology · 2018
Cryosurgery combined with topical interventions for actinic keratosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Heppt M V, Steeb T, Ruzicka T, Berking C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Actinic keratoses (AKs) are early in situ carcinomas of the skin caused by cumulative sun exposure. Cryosurgery is an easy and practicable lesion-directed approach for treatment of isolated lesions.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether an upfront combination of cryosurgery with a topical intervention is superior to cryosurgery alone for treatment of AK.
METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL and hand searched pertinent trial registers for eligible randomized controlled trials until 17 July 2018. Results from individual studies were pooled using a random effects model. The risk of bias was estimated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the quality of evidence of the outcomes with the GRADE approach.
RESULTS: Out of 1758 records initially identified, nine studies with a total sample size of 1644 patients were included. Cryosurgery in combination with a topical approach showed significantly higher participant complete clearance rates than monotherapy [risk ratio (RR) 1·74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1·25-2·43, I2 = 73%, eight studies]. The participant partial clearance rate was not statistically different (RR 1·64, 95% CI 0·88-3·03, I2 = 77%, three studies). The number of patients who completed the study protocol and did not withdraw due to adverse events was equal in both groups (RR 0·98, 95% CI 0·95-1·01, I2 = 75%, seven studies). The studies were estimated to have high risk for selective reporting bias.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest the superiority of a combination regimen for AK clearance, with equal tolerability. This study highlights the importance of a field-directed approach in patients with multiple AKs or field cancerization.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether an upfront combination of cryosurgery with a topical intervention is superior to cryosurgery alone for treatment of AK.
METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL and hand searched pertinent trial registers for eligible randomized controlled trials until 17 July 2018. Results from individual studies were pooled using a random effects model. The risk of bias was estimated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the quality of evidence of the outcomes with the GRADE approach.
RESULTS: Out of 1758 records initially identified, nine studies with a total sample size of 1644 patients were included. Cryosurgery in combination with a topical approach showed significantly higher participant complete clearance rates than monotherapy [risk ratio (RR) 1·74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1·25-2·43, I2 = 73%, eight studies]. The participant partial clearance rate was not statistically different (RR 1·64, 95% CI 0·88-3·03, I2 = 77%, three studies). The number of patients who completed the study protocol and did not withdraw due to adverse events was equal in both groups (RR 0·98, 95% CI 0·95-1·01, I2 = 75%, seven studies). The studies were estimated to have high risk for selective reporting bias.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest the superiority of a combination regimen for AK clearance, with equal tolerability. This study highlights the importance of a field-directed approach in patients with multiple AKs or field cancerization.