Cargando…
Efficacy Evaluation of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag Cryogenic Device on Skin Tags in a Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized, Comparative Clinical Trial
INTRODUCTION: Cryotherapy is an efficient method to treat various cutaneous lesions. In the current clinical evaluation, the efficacy of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag cryogenic pen as a home treatment for benign skin tags was evaluated against a marketed comparator device. In addition, the safety, tolerabil...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Healthcare
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8163951/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34019230 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13555-021-00532-w |
_version_ | 1783701010399625216 |
---|---|
author | Antunes, André Rossel, Bart Adriaens, Els |
author_facet | Antunes, André Rossel, Bart Adriaens, Els |
author_sort | Antunes, André |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Cryotherapy is an efficient method to treat various cutaneous lesions. In the current clinical evaluation, the efficacy of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag cryogenic pen as a home treatment for benign skin tags was evaluated against a marketed comparator device. In addition, the safety, tolerability, and expected visual effects of the treatment were assessed. METHODS: Fifty-six healthy volunteers presenting with skin tags were included and randomized in a prospective, single-blinded, parallel, single-center, comparative trial and subjected to treatment with either Pixie(®) Skin Tag or a comparator device, Wortie(®) skin tag remover. Selected skin tags located on the neck, breast, and under the armpits were topically treated according to device prescriptions for maximally three times with a 15-day interval between treatments. RESULTS: Of the skin tags treated with Pixie(®) Skin Tag, 64.3% completely disappeared during the study, of which half of the skin tags were cleared after one treatment, compared with 7.1% of the study population treated with Wortie(®) skin tag remover (p < 0.001). Both medical devices were safe to use, painless, and very well tolerated by 64.3% in the Pixie(®) Skin Tag and 96.4% in the Wortie(®) skin tag remover group. In addition, 72% of the subjects using Pixie(®) Skin Tag were satisfied with the results, and two-thirds of this study group would buy and use the device for the treatment of other skin tags. For the comparator device, only 11.0% were satisfied and 7.0% would buy the device. CONCLUSION: Treatment of skin tags with Pixie(®) Skin Tag showed superior clinical performance when compared to Wortie(®) skin tag remover. Both treatments were safe and well tolerated, with the majority of skin response serving as a predictor for clinical performance in the Pixie(®) Skin Tag treated group. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANSL Registration: 2018-A01804-51. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8163951 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81639512021-06-17 Efficacy Evaluation of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag Cryogenic Device on Skin Tags in a Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized, Comparative Clinical Trial Antunes, André Rossel, Bart Adriaens, Els Dermatol Ther (Heidelb) Original Research INTRODUCTION: Cryotherapy is an efficient method to treat various cutaneous lesions. In the current clinical evaluation, the efficacy of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag cryogenic pen as a home treatment for benign skin tags was evaluated against a marketed comparator device. In addition, the safety, tolerability, and expected visual effects of the treatment were assessed. METHODS: Fifty-six healthy volunteers presenting with skin tags were included and randomized in a prospective, single-blinded, parallel, single-center, comparative trial and subjected to treatment with either Pixie(®) Skin Tag or a comparator device, Wortie(®) skin tag remover. Selected skin tags located on the neck, breast, and under the armpits were topically treated according to device prescriptions for maximally three times with a 15-day interval between treatments. RESULTS: Of the skin tags treated with Pixie(®) Skin Tag, 64.3% completely disappeared during the study, of which half of the skin tags were cleared after one treatment, compared with 7.1% of the study population treated with Wortie(®) skin tag remover (p < 0.001). Both medical devices were safe to use, painless, and very well tolerated by 64.3% in the Pixie(®) Skin Tag and 96.4% in the Wortie(®) skin tag remover group. In addition, 72% of the subjects using Pixie(®) Skin Tag were satisfied with the results, and two-thirds of this study group would buy and use the device for the treatment of other skin tags. For the comparator device, only 11.0% were satisfied and 7.0% would buy the device. CONCLUSION: Treatment of skin tags with Pixie(®) Skin Tag showed superior clinical performance when compared to Wortie(®) skin tag remover. Both treatments were safe and well tolerated, with the majority of skin response serving as a predictor for clinical performance in the Pixie(®) Skin Tag treated group. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANSL Registration: 2018-A01804-51. Springer Healthcare 2021-05-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8163951/ /pubmed/34019230 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13555-021-00532-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research Antunes, André Rossel, Bart Adriaens, Els Efficacy Evaluation of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag Cryogenic Device on Skin Tags in a Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized, Comparative Clinical Trial |
title | Efficacy Evaluation of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag Cryogenic Device on Skin Tags in a Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized, Comparative Clinical Trial |
title_full | Efficacy Evaluation of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag Cryogenic Device on Skin Tags in a Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized, Comparative Clinical Trial |
title_fullStr | Efficacy Evaluation of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag Cryogenic Device on Skin Tags in a Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized, Comparative Clinical Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy Evaluation of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag Cryogenic Device on Skin Tags in a Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized, Comparative Clinical Trial |
title_short | Efficacy Evaluation of the Pixie(®) Skin Tag Cryogenic Device on Skin Tags in a Prospective, Single-Blinded, Randomized, Comparative Clinical Trial |
title_sort | efficacy evaluation of the pixie(®) skin tag cryogenic device on skin tags in a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, comparative clinical trial |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8163951/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34019230 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13555-021-00532-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT antunesandre efficacyevaluationofthepixieskintagcryogenicdeviceonskintagsinaprospectivesingleblindedrandomizedcomparativeclinicaltrial AT rosselbart efficacyevaluationofthepixieskintagcryogenicdeviceonskintagsinaprospectivesingleblindedrandomizedcomparativeclinicaltrial AT adriaensels efficacyevaluationofthepixieskintagcryogenicdeviceonskintagsinaprospectivesingleblindedrandomizedcomparativeclinicaltrial |