Cargando…
Efficacy and Safety of Three Cryotherapy Devices for Wart Treatment: A Randomized, Controlled, Investigator-Blinded, Comparative Study
INTRODUCTION: Cutaneous warts are common skin lesions, caused by human papillomavirus. For years, liquid nitrogen is the cryogen of choice for wart treatment. Alternatively, several cryogenic devices for home treatment are commercially available. The present trial assessed efficacy and safety of a n...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Healthcare
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6002322/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29214505 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13555-017-0210-5 |
_version_ | 1783332176185524224 |
---|---|
author | Walczuk, Imko Eertmans, Frank Rossel, Bart Cegielska, Agnieszka Stockfleth, Eggert Antunes, Andre Adriaens, Els |
author_facet | Walczuk, Imko Eertmans, Frank Rossel, Bart Cegielska, Agnieszka Stockfleth, Eggert Antunes, Andre Adriaens, Els |
author_sort | Walczuk, Imko |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Cutaneous warts are common skin lesions, caused by human papillomavirus. For years, liquid nitrogen is the cryogen of choice for wart treatment. Alternatively, several cryogenic devices for home treatment are commercially available. The present trial assessed efficacy and safety of a novel nitrous oxide-based cryogenic device for home use (EndWarts Freeze(®) in Europe, Compound W(®) Nitro-Freeze in the USA). METHODS: This investigator-blinded, controlled, randomized study compared the nitrous oxide device (test product) with a dimethylether propane-based product (Wartner(®); comparator 1). Subjects with common or plantar warts (50/50 ratio) were randomized into two groups (n = 58, test product; n = 40, comparator 1). Sequentially, an extra treatment arm (n = 40) was added to compare with a dimethylether-based product with metal nib (Wortie(®); comparator 2). Main objective implied comparison of the percentage cured subjects after one to maximum three treatments. Efficacy and safety was evaluated by a blinded investigator. RESULTS: After a maximum of three applications, a significantly (p = 0.001) higher cure rate of 70.7% (Intention-to-Treat analysis) was observed with test product versus 46.2% (comparator 1) and 47.5% (comparator 2). Almost three times more subjects were cured after 1 test product application (29.3%), versus comparator 1 (10.4%) and comparator 2 (12.5%). Reported side effects were transient and typical of cryotherapy. All treatments were well-tolerated. CONCLUSION: The superior cure rates for the test product versus two comparators can be explained by its design. Combination of nitrous oxide (cooling agent), the specific activation method (holding the liquid coolant in the cap), and skin-conforming polyurethane foam, results in higher cooling efficiency (− 80 °C) and more effective wart freezing. This trial demonstrated that the nitrous oxide device is a safe, user-friendly and effective wart treatment for home use, comparing favourably to dimethylether (propane) devices with higher freezing temperature, regardless of the applicator type. FUNDING: Oystershell Laboratories. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT03129373. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6002322 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Springer Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60023222018-06-29 Efficacy and Safety of Three Cryotherapy Devices for Wart Treatment: A Randomized, Controlled, Investigator-Blinded, Comparative Study Walczuk, Imko Eertmans, Frank Rossel, Bart Cegielska, Agnieszka Stockfleth, Eggert Antunes, Andre Adriaens, Els Dermatol Ther (Heidelb) Original Research INTRODUCTION: Cutaneous warts are common skin lesions, caused by human papillomavirus. For years, liquid nitrogen is the cryogen of choice for wart treatment. Alternatively, several cryogenic devices for home treatment are commercially available. The present trial assessed efficacy and safety of a novel nitrous oxide-based cryogenic device for home use (EndWarts Freeze(®) in Europe, Compound W(®) Nitro-Freeze in the USA). METHODS: This investigator-blinded, controlled, randomized study compared the nitrous oxide device (test product) with a dimethylether propane-based product (Wartner(®); comparator 1). Subjects with common or plantar warts (50/50 ratio) were randomized into two groups (n = 58, test product; n = 40, comparator 1). Sequentially, an extra treatment arm (n = 40) was added to compare with a dimethylether-based product with metal nib (Wortie(®); comparator 2). Main objective implied comparison of the percentage cured subjects after one to maximum three treatments. Efficacy and safety was evaluated by a blinded investigator. RESULTS: After a maximum of three applications, a significantly (p = 0.001) higher cure rate of 70.7% (Intention-to-Treat analysis) was observed with test product versus 46.2% (comparator 1) and 47.5% (comparator 2). Almost three times more subjects were cured after 1 test product application (29.3%), versus comparator 1 (10.4%) and comparator 2 (12.5%). Reported side effects were transient and typical of cryotherapy. All treatments were well-tolerated. CONCLUSION: The superior cure rates for the test product versus two comparators can be explained by its design. Combination of nitrous oxide (cooling agent), the specific activation method (holding the liquid coolant in the cap), and skin-conforming polyurethane foam, results in higher cooling efficiency (− 80 °C) and more effective wart freezing. This trial demonstrated that the nitrous oxide device is a safe, user-friendly and effective wart treatment for home use, comparing favourably to dimethylether (propane) devices with higher freezing temperature, regardless of the applicator type. FUNDING: Oystershell Laboratories. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT03129373. Springer Healthcare 2017-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6002322/ /pubmed/29214505 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13555-017-0210-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Walczuk, Imko Eertmans, Frank Rossel, Bart Cegielska, Agnieszka Stockfleth, Eggert Antunes, Andre Adriaens, Els Efficacy and Safety of Three Cryotherapy Devices for Wart Treatment: A Randomized, Controlled, Investigator-Blinded, Comparative Study |
title | Efficacy and Safety of Three Cryotherapy Devices for Wart Treatment: A Randomized, Controlled, Investigator-Blinded, Comparative Study |
title_full | Efficacy and Safety of Three Cryotherapy Devices for Wart Treatment: A Randomized, Controlled, Investigator-Blinded, Comparative Study |
title_fullStr | Efficacy and Safety of Three Cryotherapy Devices for Wart Treatment: A Randomized, Controlled, Investigator-Blinded, Comparative Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and Safety of Three Cryotherapy Devices for Wart Treatment: A Randomized, Controlled, Investigator-Blinded, Comparative Study |
title_short | Efficacy and Safety of Three Cryotherapy Devices for Wart Treatment: A Randomized, Controlled, Investigator-Blinded, Comparative Study |
title_sort | efficacy and safety of three cryotherapy devices for wart treatment: a randomized, controlled, investigator-blinded, comparative study |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6002322/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29214505 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13555-017-0210-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT walczukimko efficacyandsafetyofthreecryotherapydevicesforwarttreatmentarandomizedcontrolledinvestigatorblindedcomparativestudy AT eertmansfrank efficacyandsafetyofthreecryotherapydevicesforwarttreatmentarandomizedcontrolledinvestigatorblindedcomparativestudy AT rosselbart efficacyandsafetyofthreecryotherapydevicesforwarttreatmentarandomizedcontrolledinvestigatorblindedcomparativestudy AT cegielskaagnieszka efficacyandsafetyofthreecryotherapydevicesforwarttreatmentarandomizedcontrolledinvestigatorblindedcomparativestudy AT stockfletheggert efficacyandsafetyofthreecryotherapydevicesforwarttreatmentarandomizedcontrolledinvestigatorblindedcomparativestudy AT antunesandre efficacyandsafetyofthreecryotherapydevicesforwarttreatmentarandomizedcontrolledinvestigatorblindedcomparativestudy AT adriaensels efficacyandsafetyofthreecryotherapydevicesforwarttreatmentarandomizedcontrolledinvestigatorblindedcomparativestudy |