3 results
Filters
Sort By
Results Per Page
Filters
3 results
Download the following citations:
Email the following citations:
Print the following citations:
  • Han X
  • Ji D
  • Liu Y
  • Hu S
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2023 Aug;47(4):1623-1632 doi: 10.1007/s00266-023-03295-1.
BACKGROUND:

The efficacy and safety evaluation of the transplantation of autologous fat, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and stromal vascular fraction (SVF) in acne scars has not been completely unified. This article will analyze and process the data of the included studies through evidence-based medicine to evaluate the efficacy and safety of autologous fat grafting, PRP and SVF for acne scar treatment, so as to provide treatment basis and strategy for the clinical treatment of acne scars.

METHODS:

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, CNKI, Wanfang and CQVIP databases for studies published during the time between the establishment of the databases through October 2022. We included studies that report autologous fat grafting, SVF and PRP for patients with acne scars. We excluded repeated publication, researches without full text, incomplete information or inability to conduct data extraction and animal experiments, case report, reviews and systematic reviews. STATA 15.1 software was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS:

The findings showed that fat grafting had excellent improvement, marked improvement, moderate improvement and mild improvement rates of 36%, 27%, 18% and 18%, respectively, PRP had excellent improvement, marked improvement, moderate improvement and mild improvement rates of 0%, 26%, 47% and 25%, respectively, and the SVF had excellent improvement, marked improvement, moderate improvement and mild improvement rates of 73%, 25%, 3% and 0%, respectively. Additionally, the pooled results showed that there was no significant difference between PRP treatment and pre-treatment in Goodman and Baron scale score. However, Shetty et al. reported that Goodman and Baron scale score after fat grafting was significantly lower than pre-treatment. The results also showed that after fat grafting treatment, incidence of pain after fat grafting was 70%. After PRP treatment, in addition to pain (17%), there is a higher probability of postinflammatory hyperpigmentation (17%) and hematoma (6%). After SVF treatment, the incidence of postinflammatory hyperpigmentation and hematoma was all 0%.

CONCLUSION:

Autologous fat grafting, PRP and SVF are effective for the treatment of acne scars, and the safety of autologous fat grafting, PRP and SVF is acceptable. Autologous fat grafting and SVF may be a better treatment for acne scars than PRP. However, this hypothesis still needs to be tested in the future large randomized controlled trials.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III:

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

  • Jiang L
  • Liu Y
  • Zhang L
  • Santoro C
  • Rodriguez A
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Aug 3;8(8):CD010810 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010810.pub4.
BACKGROUND:

Hemophilia A and B are inherited coagulation disorders characterized by a reduced or absent level of factor VIII or factor IX respectively. The severe form is characterized by a factor level less than 0.01 international units (IU) per milliliter. The development of inhibitors in hemophilia is the main complication of treatment, because the presence of these antibodies, reduces or even nullifies the efficacy of replacement therapy, making it very difficult to control the bleeding. People with inhibitors continue to have significantly higher risks of morbidity and mortality, with considerable treatment costs. Given the wide 'off-label' use of rituximab for treating people with hemophilia and inhibitors, its efficacy and safety need to be evaluated. This is an update of a previously published Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES:

To assess the efficacy and safety of rituximab for treating inhibitors in people with inherited severe hemophilia A or B.

SEARCH METHODS:

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Coagulopathies Trials Register, complied from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We searched the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews and also searched for ongoing or unpublished studies. We also undertook further searches of other bibliographic databases and trial registries. Date of last search of the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Coagulopathies Trials Register: 19 March 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA:

Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials investigating the efficacy and safety of rituximab for treating inhibitors in people with hemophilia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:

No randomized controlled trials matching the selection criteria were eligible for inclusion.

MAIN RESULTS:

No randomized controlled trials on rituximab for treating inhibitors in people with hemophilia were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:

We were unable to identify any relevant trials on the efficacy and safety of rituximab for treating inhibitors in people with hemophilia. The research evidence available is from case reports and case series. Randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rituximab for this condition. However, prior to the publication of any possible future randomized controlled trials, meta-analysis of case reports and case series may provide some evidence.

  • Pan J
  • Xu Q
  • Hou J
  • Wu Y
  • Liu Y
  • et al.
J Am Dent Assoc. 2019 Sep;150(9):766-778 doi: 10.1016/j.adaj.2019.04.025.
BACKGROUND:

Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) is the second generation of platelet concentrates and is used in many areas of dentistry. However, whether PRF is effective for alveolar ridge preservation remains controversial. The authors conducted research to evaluate the potential of PRF to preserve the alveolar ridge.

METHODS:

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase. Only randomized controlled trials were included. A systematic review was made for postoperative pain, soft-tissue healing, bone density, horizontal and vertical ridge dimension changes, and histologic analysis. The meta-analysis was performed on the alveolar osteitis, mesial and distal bone height changes, and bone fill with Review Manager Version 5.3 software.

RESULTS:

Among the 588 eligible articles found in the initial search, 7 published studies from 2012 through 2019 were included. The authors' qualitative analysis showed that PRF may play a positive role in reducing postoperative pain and ridge dimension changes after tooth extraction. Among the 7 articles, only 2 trials assessed the effect of PRF on the alveolar osteitis, mesial and distal bone height changes, and bone fill. Results of our meta-analysis showed that smaller mesial bone height changes (standard mean difference, -1.07; 95% confidence interval, -1.92 to 0.22) and a greater percentage of bone fill (standard mean difference, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.32 to 1.33) were observed in the PRF group.

CONCLUSIONS:

Given the potential value of PRF, consideration should be given to PRF after tooth extraction. However, more high-quality trials are necessary to evaluate the exact role of PRF.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS:

Based on the authors' results, the usage of PRF was suggested in alveolar ridge preservation.