Journal of cosmetic and laser therapy : official publication of the European Society for Laser Dermatology · 2016
Comparison of microwave ablation, botulinum toxin injection, and liposuction-curettage in the treatment of axillary hyperhidrosis: A systematic review.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяСистематический 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.
Nasr Marwan W, Jabbour Samer F, Haber Roger N, Kechichian Elio G, El Hachem Lena
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Primary focal axillary hyperhidrosis is a disorder of excessive sweating that can strongly impact quality of life.
OBJECTIVE: The objective if this study was to compare microwave ablation (MA), botulinum toxin (BT) injection, and liposuction-curettage (LC) in the treatment of primary axillary hyperhidrosis based on subjective and objective criteria.
METHODS: A systematic review of the literature published in French or English between 1 January 1991 and 1 February 2015 was completed using PubMed and Embase databases.
RESULTS: 16 of 775 articles were selected based on relevance and criteria of inclusion and exclusion. The three methods proved to be efficient and safe; however, MA and BT had better results when compared to LC in the short term. Both MA and LC showed longer lasting results when compared to BT. However, in the long term, MA was superior to LC.
CONCLUSION: MA, LC, and BT injections are safe and efficient minimally invasive alternatives for the treatment of axillary hyperhidrosis. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to further compare the efficacy of these techniques.
OBJECTIVE: The objective if this study was to compare microwave ablation (MA), botulinum toxin (BT) injection, and liposuction-curettage (LC) in the treatment of primary axillary hyperhidrosis based on subjective and objective criteria.
METHODS: A systematic review of the literature published in French or English between 1 January 1991 and 1 February 2015 was completed using PubMed and Embase databases.
RESULTS: 16 of 775 articles were selected based on relevance and criteria of inclusion and exclusion. The three methods proved to be efficient and safe; however, MA and BT had better results when compared to LC in the short term. Both MA and LC showed longer lasting results when compared to BT. However, in the long term, MA was superior to LC.
CONCLUSION: MA, LC, and BT injections are safe and efficient minimally invasive alternatives for the treatment of axillary hyperhidrosis. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to further compare the efficacy of these techniques.