Adverse Events of Botulinum Toxin Type A in Facial Rejuvenation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 769-777 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhenhua Jia ◽  
Haibin Lu ◽  
Xiaonan Yang ◽  
Xiaolei Jin ◽  
Rongwei Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Botulinum Toxin ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type A ◽  
Type A ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type ◽  
Facial Rejuvenation

scholarly journals CGRP-antibodies, topiramate and botulinum toxin type A in episodic and chronic migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cephalalgia ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 033310242110181
Author(s):  
Florian Frank ◽  
Hanno Ulmer ◽  
Victoria Sidoroff ◽  
Gregor Broessner
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Monoclonal Antibodies ◽  
Botulinum Toxin ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type A ◽  
Type A ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type ◽  
Odds Ratios

Background The approval of monoclonal antibodies for prevention of migraine has revolutionized treatment for patients. Oral preventatives are still considered first line treatments as head-to-head trials comparing them with antibodies are lacking. Methods The main purpose of this study was to provide a comparative overview of the efficacy of three commonly prescribed migraine preventative medication classes. For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched the databases CENTRAL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE until 20 March 2020. We included RCTs reporting the 50% response rates for topiramate, Botulinum Toxin Type A and monoclonal antibodies against CGRP(r). Studies were excluded if response rates were not reported, treatment allocation was unclear, or if study quality was insufficient. Primary outcome measure were the 50% response rates. The pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated with the random effects model. The study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020222880). Findings We identified 6552 reports. Thirty-two were eligible for our review. Studies assessing monoclonal antibodies included 13,302 patients and yielded pooled odds ratios for the 50% response rate of 2.30 (CI: 2.11–2.50). Topiramate had an overall effect estimate of 2.70 (CI: 1.97–3.69) with 1989 included patients and Botulinum Toxin Type A achieved 1.28 (CI: 0.98–1. 67) with 2472 patients included. Interpretation Topiramate, botulinum toxin type A and monoclonal antibodies showed higher odds ratios in achieving a 50% response rate compared to placebo. Topiramate numerically demonstrated the greatest effect size but also the highest drop-out rate.

scholarly journals The efficacy and safety of Botulinum Toxin Type A in painful knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 030006051989586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuchao Zhai ◽  
Botao Huang ◽  
Kai Yu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Botulinum Toxin ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type A ◽  
Type A ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Painful Knee

Objective A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Botulinum Toxin Type A in painful knee osteoarthritis. Methods The EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Botulinum Toxin Type A in the treatment of painful knee osteoarthritis. The references of included literature were also searched. Results Five articles involving 5 RCTs including 314 patients were included in this analysis. There was a significant difference between Botulinum Toxin Type A and placebo in the visual analog scale (VAS) pain scale and Western Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire score in both the short-term (≤4 weeks) and long-term (≥8 weeks) treatment period. There were no serious adverse events in the Botulinum Toxin Type A groups. Conclusions This meta-analysis suggests that Botulinum Toxin Type A is effective and safe in the painful knee OA treatment. However, high-quality randomized controlled studies are still needed to further confirm our findings.

Efficacy of Botulinum Toxin Type A in Improving Scar Quality and Wound Healing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. NP273-NP285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoshuang Guo ◽  
Guodong Song ◽  
Dong Zhang ◽  
Xiaolei Jin
Keyword(s):  
Wound Healing ◽  
Botulinum Toxin ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type A ◽  
Type A ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type ◽  
Control Group ◽  
The Face ◽  
Scar Quality

Abstract Background Botulinum toxin type A-induced “chemoimmobilization” has long been utilized for improved scar quality and wound healing; however, current evidence is limited to small studies, and evidence-based information is inadequate to make well-informed decisions. Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of botulinum toxin type A (BTA) to improve scars and wound healing. Methods The authors searched databases, including Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared outcomes of surgical scars and wounds treated with BTA vs those treated with blank or placebo controls. The Visual Analog Scale, Vancouver Scar Score, scar width, and reported patient satisfaction were utilized in evaluating outcomes. Adverse events were also recorded. Results Eleven RCTs involved a total of 486 cases (374 patients). Quantitative synthesis suggested that compared with the control group, patients in the BTA treatment group had significantly higher Visual Analog Scale scores (mean difference [MD] = 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05 to 1.55), lower Vancouver Scar Scores (MD = −1.62, 95% CI: −2.49 to −0.75, P = 0.0003), and thinner scars (MD = −0.15, 95% CI: −0.20 to −0.11, P < 0.00001). Patient satisfaction was higher in the BTA group than in the control group (risk ratio: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.49, P = 0.01). Trivial adverse events were reported. Conclusions This meta-analysis of RCTs provides reliable evidence that BTA injection is superior to placebo or blank control group in improving scar quality and wound healing in the face and neck for Asians, and negative outcomes for BTA treatment in these patients include only trivial adverse events. However, inadequate evidence supports utilization of BTA in Caucasians for primary surgical scars or for scars in locations other than the face and neck. Further studies on the standardized injection regimen and technique of BTA are warranted for clinical practice. Level of Evidence: 1

Botulinum Toxin Type A for Painful Temporomandibular Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 281-293
Author(s):  
Daniel Machado ◽  
Ana Luiza Cabrera Martimbianco ◽  
Sandra Kalil Bussadori ◽  
Rafael Leite Pacheco ◽  
Rachel Riera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Botulinum Toxin ◽  
Temporomandibular Disorders ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type A ◽  
Type A ◽  
Botulinum Toxin Type
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document