Faculty Opinions recommendation of Comparison of the effect of hyaluronic acid and estrogen on atrophic vaginitis in menopausal women: A systematic review.

This systematic review was conducted to compare the effectiveness of hyaluronic acid and estrogen on symptoms of atrophic vaginitis (primary outcomes) and corresponding side effects (secondary outcome). We reviewed all parallel clinical trials, systematically, to compare the effectiveness of hyaluronic acid and estrogen on atrophic vaginitis. We searched Pubmed, Embase, Web of Sciences, Cochrane library, Scopus, Google Scholar, Magiran, Scientific Information Database (Iran) and Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials, from inception to July 2018 and the reference lists of retrieved articles. Two reviewers used the Cochrane collaboration tool to assess the risk of bias independently. Five parallel controlled trials with 372 participants were included in the present systematic review. One trial reported estrogen superiority to hyaluronic acid in improving the symptoms of atrophic vaginitis. Three trials failed to show a significant statistical difference between the intervention groups. Only a trial with a high risk of bias in random allocation and blinding indicated that hyaluronic acid was more effective than estrogen in improving the symptoms of atrophic vaginitis. Hyaluronic acid is an effective drug with few side effects for the treatment of atrophic vaginitis symptoms; however, better designed trials are required to show the statistical superiority of hyaluronic acid to vaginal estrogen.

Download Full-text

Hyaluronic acid in vulvar and vaginal administration: evidence from a literature systematic review

Climacteric ◽

10.1080/13697137.2021.1898580 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-12

Author(s):

G. Buzzaccarini ◽

L. Marin ◽

M. Noventa ◽

A. Vitagliano ◽

A. Riva ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Hyaluronic Acid ◽

Vaginal Administration

Download Full-text

Treating Knee Osteoarthritis With Platelet-Rich Plasma and Hyaluronic Acid Combination Therapy: A Systematic Review

The American Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/0363546521998010 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 036354652199801

Author(s):

Michael R. Baria ◽

W. Kelton Vasileff ◽

James Borchers ◽

Alex DiBartola ◽

David C. Flanigan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Hyaluronic Acid ◽

Combination Therapy ◽

Knee Osteoarthritis ◽

Platelet Rich Plasma ◽

Case Series ◽

Final Analysis ◽

Preparation Technique ◽

Randomized Studies ◽

Patient Reported

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) are injectable treatments for knee osteoarthritis. The focus of previous studies has compared their efficacy against each other as monotherapy. However, a new trend of combining these 2 injections has emerged in an attempt to have a synergistic effect. Purpose: To systematically review the clinical literature examining the combined use of PRP + HA. Design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines using PubMed and Embase. The following search terms were used: knee osteoarthritis AND platelet rich plasma AND hyaluronic acid. The review was performed by 2 independent reviewers who applied the inclusion/exclusion criteria and independently extracted data, including methodologic scoring, PRP preparation technique, HA composition, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Results: A total of 431 articles were screened, 12 reviewed in full, and 8 included in the final analysis: 2 case series, 3 comparative, and 3 randomized studies. Average follow-up was 9 months. The modified Coleman Methodology Score was 38.13 ± 13.1 (mean ± SD). Combination therapy resulted in improved PROs in all studies. Of the comparative and randomized studies, 2 demonstrated that combination therapy was superior to HA alone. However, when PRP alone was used as the control arm (4 studies), combination therapy was not superior to PRP alone. Conclusion: Combination therapy with PRP + HA improves PROs and is superior to HA alone but is not superior to PRP alone.

Download Full-text

Evaluation of the Nasolabial Angle in Orthodontic Diagnosis: A Systematic Review

Applied Sciences ◽

10.3390/app11062531 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (6) ◽

pp. 2531

Author(s):

Vincenzo Quinzi ◽

Licia Coceani Paskay ◽

Nicola D’Andrea ◽

Arianna Albani ◽

Annalisa Monaco ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Hyaluronic Acid ◽

Class Ii ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Class Iii ◽

Palatal Expansion ◽

Rapid Palatal Expansion ◽

Nasolabial Angle ◽

Registration Number ◽

Teeth Extraction

Background: This study is a systematic literature review aiming at identifying the variation of the average nasolabial angle (NLA) in various orthodontic situations. The NLA is one of the key factors to be studied in an orthodontic diagnosis for the aesthetics of the nose and facial profile. Methods: Out of 3118 articles resulting from four search engines (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) and SciELO), the final study allowed the analysis and comparison of only 26 studies. These included studies have considered the NLA in the following cases: teeth extraction, class II malocclusion, class III malocclusion, rapid palatal expansion (RPE), orthognathic surgery, and non-surgical rhinoplasty with a hyaluronic acid filler. Results: The results indicate that teeth extraction and the use of hyaluronic acid fillers significantly affect the NLA. Conclusions: This systematic review shows that a statistically significant change in NLA values occurs in: extractive treatments of all four of the first or second premolars in class I patients; in class II patients with upper maxillary protrusion; in patients with maxillary biprotrusion, except for cases of severe crowding; and in patients undergoing non-surgical rhinoplasty with a hyaluronic acid filler. Trial registration number: PROSPERO CRD42020185166

Download Full-text

Melatonin and the health of menopausal women: a systematic review

Journal of Pineal Research ◽

10.1111/jpi.12743 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Yulia Treister‐Goltzman ◽

Roni Peleg

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Menopausal Women

Download Full-text

Hyaluronic Acid Fillers for Midface Augmentation: A Systematic Review

Facial Plastic Surgery ◽

10.1055/s-0041-1724122 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Lily N. Trinh ◽

Amar Gupta

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Hyaluronic Acid ◽

Subcutaneous Tissue ◽

Age Groups ◽

Medical Subject Headings ◽

Mesh Terms ◽

Full Text Review ◽

Filler Injections ◽

Subjective Measurements ◽

Meta Analyses

AbstractInjectable fillers represent one of the most requested minimally invasive treatments to rejuvenate the aging face, and its popularity is steadily rising. A vast majority of filler treatments are with hyaluronic acid (HA). The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate patient outcomes, safety profile, and administration techniques of various HA fillers for malar augmentation. A systematic review of the published literature was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and included PubMed, Embase, and Science Direct databases. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms used were “cheek” OR “midface” OR “malar” and “filler” OR “hyaluronic acid” OR “Juvederm” OR “Restylane” OR “Perlane” OR “Belotero.” The initial search identified 699 articles; 256 duplicates were removed. Additional 12 studies were identified from reference lists. A total of 455 were screened by title and abstract and 387 studies were eliminated based on criteria. Also, 68 articles underwent full-text review, and 18 articles were included in the final review and involved seven different HA formulations. Men and women from many age groups were highly satisfied with their results following HA treatment for midface augmentation up to 24 months. The most common adverse events included bruising, swelling, and tenderness, and typically lasted no more than 2 weeks. Upper cheek filler injections near the zygoma should be placed in the submuscular plane while lower cheek injections should be placed in the subcutaneous tissue. HA is an attractive choice for midface augmentation due to its high patient satisfaction, long-lasting effects, and low side-effect profile. Due to the variability in technique, level of expertise, and subjective measurements across studies, one optimal regimen could not be concluded. However, midface augmentation treatment should be personalized to each patient. Additional clinical trials are required to more conclusively determine the most appropriate approach for this procedure.

Download Full-text