Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.] · 2017
Treatment of Palmar Hyperhidrosis With Needle Injection Versus Low-Pressure Needle-Free Jet Injection of OnabotulinumtoxinA: An Open-Label Prospective Study.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Vadeboncoeur Sophie, Richer Vincent, Nantel-Battista Mélissa, Benohanian Antranik
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: OnabotulinumtoxinA (OnabotA) injections are effective to treat palmar hyperhidrosis (HH) but are quite painful.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy and pain of OnabotA injection using a needle-free jet apparatus compared with the traditional needle injection to treat palmar HH.
METHODS: Twenty patients were recruited for a prospective open-label study. Their right hand was injected with 1% lidocaine with a jet injector, after which OnabotA was injected with a needle. The left hand was injected with OnabotA directly using the jet injector. Pain scores were recorded for both techniques. At 0, 1, 3, and 6 months, severity of palmar HH was evaluated with the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale (HDSS).
RESULTS: One point reduction in the HDSS score at 1 month showed no statistical difference between both hands (p = .451). However, the HDSS score at 1 month from baseline dropped by 1.6 for the hand treated with traditional needle injection of OnabotA compared with 1.25 for the hand treated with jet injections (p = .031). There was no statistical difference in the pain on injection with both techniques (p = .1925).
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates effective and relatively painless use of a low-pressure jet injector for OnabotA in palmar HH.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy and pain of OnabotA injection using a needle-free jet apparatus compared with the traditional needle injection to treat palmar HH.
METHODS: Twenty patients were recruited for a prospective open-label study. Their right hand was injected with 1% lidocaine with a jet injector, after which OnabotA was injected with a needle. The left hand was injected with OnabotA directly using the jet injector. Pain scores were recorded for both techniques. At 0, 1, 3, and 6 months, severity of palmar HH was evaluated with the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale (HDSS).
RESULTS: One point reduction in the HDSS score at 1 month showed no statistical difference between both hands (p = .451). However, the HDSS score at 1 month from baseline dropped by 1.6 for the hand treated with traditional needle injection of OnabotA compared with 1.25 for the hand treated with jet injections (p = .031). There was no statistical difference in the pain on injection with both techniques (p = .1925).
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates effective and relatively painless use of a low-pressure jet injector for OnabotA in palmar HH.