Efficacy of photodynamic therapy for warts induced by human papilloma virus infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis
•PDT showed a statistically significant improvement in hand and foot wart treatment.•In the treatment of condyloma acuminata the immediate effect of PDT was not superior.•Advantages of PDT were observed during follow-up period, such as low recurrence rate.•PDT was considered to be a safe method, and...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Photodiagnosis and photodynamic therapy 2022-09, Vol.39, p.102913-102913, Article 102913 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | •PDT showed a statistically significant improvement in hand and foot wart treatment.•In the treatment of condyloma acuminata the immediate effect of PDT was not superior.•Advantages of PDT were observed during follow-up period, such as low recurrence rate.•PDT was considered to be a safe method, and patients were satisfied with it.•The use of PDT as first-line therapy was recommended.
The incidence of warts caused by human papilloma virus (HPV) infection is very high in the population. Photodynamic therapy (PDT), as an emerging method for wart treatment, has been demonstrated to be effective and safe by an increasing number of studies. This meta-analysis of previous literature aimed to investigate the potential of PDT as a first-line treatment for warts.
To acquire proper and accurate information from relevant literature, the four databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched. The wart clearance rate and patient cure rate were analysed as the primary outcomes. The recurrence rate, patient satisfaction and adverse reactions were also recorded.
A total of 19 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included based on our search strategy. In the hand and foot wart group, PDT showed a statistically significant improvement in the wart clearance rate compared with placebo (P = 0.02), other lasers (P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1572-1000 1873-1597 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2022.102913 |