Cargando…

Does Scientific Evidence for the Use of Natural Products in the Treatment of Oral Candidiasis Exist? A Systematic Review

In view of the limitations of antifungal agents used in the treatment of oral candidiasis and the wide variety of natural products that have been studied as treatment of this disease, this systematic literature review proposed to evaluate whether scientific evidence attesting to the efficacy of natu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ferreira, Gabriela Lacet Silva, Pérez, Ana Luíza Alves de Lima, Rocha, Ítalo Martins, Pinheiro, Mayara Abreu, de Castro, Ricardo Dias, Carlo, Hugo Lemes, Lima, Edeltrudes de Oliveira, Castellano, Lúcio Roberto
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4391323/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25883668
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/147804
Descripción
Sumario:In view of the limitations of antifungal agents used in the treatment of oral candidiasis and the wide variety of natural products that have been studied as treatment of this disease, this systematic literature review proposed to evaluate whether scientific evidence attesting to the efficacy of natural products in the treatment of this disease exists. A systematic search in PubMed, MEDLINE, SciELO, Lilacs, and Cochrane Library databases was accomplished using the associations among the keywords Candida albicans, phytotherapy, biological products, denture stomatitis, and oral candidiasis in both English and Portuguese. Four independent observers evaluated the methodological quality of the resulting articles. Three studies were included for detailed analysis and evaluated according to the analysis protocol based on the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) 2010 statement. The tested products were different in all studies. Two studies mentioned random samples, but no study described the sample allocation. No study mentioned sample calculations, a prior pilot study, or examiner calibration, and only one trial reported sample losses. Differences between the tested products and the methodological designs among these studies did not allow the existence of scientific evidence related to the effectiveness of these products for the proposed subjects to be confirmed.