Efficacy and safety of combinations of H1 antihistamines in the treatment of urticaria: A scoping review.

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY
Min Luo, Kaili Shen, Xuan Dong, Wenzhi Zhang, Fushan Tang
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of combinations of H1 antihistamines in the treatment of urticaria: A scoping review.","authors":"Min Luo, Kaili Shen, Xuan Dong, Wenzhi Zhang, Fushan Tang","doi":"10.25259/IJDVL_1218_2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The efficacy and safety of combining H1 antihistamines (AHs) for treating urticaria are currently unclear. This scoping review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of H1 AH combinations in the management of urticaria up to May 2023. The search encompassed databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the China Biological Medicine Database. The inclusion criteria comprised randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised trials (NRTs), case reports, and case series focusing on urticaria treatment. Initially screening 12,887 studies, this review ultimately selected 109 studies involving 11,435 patients. These studies documented 43 different combination treatments across 11 types of urticaria. In comparison to monotherapy, combination therapy exhibited superior efficacy in 94 studies that reported treatment efficacy. Regarding adverse drug reactions (ADRs), 67 studies disclosed ADR incidences, with combination therapy showing lower ADR rates in 32 studies. Additionally, 7 studies reported similar ADR rates between combination therapy and monotherapy with AHs. Common ADRs included symptoms such as drowsiness, nausea, fatigue, dry mouth, dizziness, and headache, while less frequent side effects encompassed hypotension, otitis media, polyuria, rhinorrhoea, abnormal liver function, and rash. ADR rates ranged from 0% to 21% in the treatment group, and from 0.5% to 75% in the control group. Importantly, patients generally tolerated these ADRs well, with symptoms resolving upon discontinuation of treatment. The study's findings suggest that combining AHs leads to enhanced efficacy and reduced safety risks compared to monotherapy in the context of urticaria treatment. These results advocate for considering combination therapy as a viable option in clinical practice, especially for chronic urticaria cases. Nonetheless, caution is advised, and close monitoring for potential ADRs is crucial during treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":50376,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Dermatology Venereology & Leprology","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Dermatology Venereology & Leprology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/IJDVL_1218_2023","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The efficacy and safety of combining H1 antihistamines (AHs) for treating urticaria are currently unclear. This scoping review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of H1 AH combinations in the management of urticaria up to May 2023. The search encompassed databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the China Biological Medicine Database. The inclusion criteria comprised randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised trials (NRTs), case reports, and case series focusing on urticaria treatment. Initially screening 12,887 studies, this review ultimately selected 109 studies involving 11,435 patients. These studies documented 43 different combination treatments across 11 types of urticaria. In comparison to monotherapy, combination therapy exhibited superior efficacy in 94 studies that reported treatment efficacy. Regarding adverse drug reactions (ADRs), 67 studies disclosed ADR incidences, with combination therapy showing lower ADR rates in 32 studies. Additionally, 7 studies reported similar ADR rates between combination therapy and monotherapy with AHs. Common ADRs included symptoms such as drowsiness, nausea, fatigue, dry mouth, dizziness, and headache, while less frequent side effects encompassed hypotension, otitis media, polyuria, rhinorrhoea, abnormal liver function, and rash. ADR rates ranged from 0% to 21% in the treatment group, and from 0.5% to 75% in the control group. Importantly, patients generally tolerated these ADRs well, with symptoms resolving upon discontinuation of treatment. The study's findings suggest that combining AHs leads to enhanced efficacy and reduced safety risks compared to monotherapy in the context of urticaria treatment. These results advocate for considering combination therapy as a viable option in clinical practice, especially for chronic urticaria cases. Nonetheless, caution is advised, and close monitoring for potential ADRs is crucial during treatment.

H1抗组胺药组合治疗荨麻疹的疗效和安全性:范围界定综述。
目前,联合使用 H1 抗组胺药 (AH) 治疗荨麻疹的疗效和安全性尚不明确。本范围界定综述旨在全面概述截至 2023 年 5 月有关 H1 抗组胺药联合用药治疗荨麻疹的疗效和安全性的证据。检索范围包括 PubMed、Web of Science、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 和中国生物医学数据库等数据库。纳入标准包括随机对照试验(RCT)、非随机对照试验(NRT)、病例报告和以荨麻疹治疗为重点的系列病例。本综述初步筛选了 12,887 项研究,最终选出了 109 项研究,涉及 11,435 名患者。这些研究记录了 11 种类型荨麻疹的 43 种不同的联合疗法。与单一疗法相比,在94项报告疗效的研究中,联合疗法显示出更优越的疗效。关于药物不良反应(ADR),有 67 项研究披露了 ADR 发生率,其中 32 项研究显示联合疗法的 ADR 发生率较低。此外,有 7 项研究报告了 AHs 联合疗法和单一疗法之间相似的 ADR 发生率。常见的不良反应包括嗜睡、恶心、疲劳、口干、头晕和头痛等症状,较少见的副作用包括低血压、中耳炎、多尿、鼻出血、肝功能异常和皮疹。治疗组的不良反应率为 0% 至 21%,对照组为 0.5% 至 75%。重要的是,患者一般都能很好地耐受这些不良反应,在停止治疗后症状就会消失。研究结果表明,在荨麻疹治疗中,与单一疗法相比,联合使用抗荨麻疹药物可提高疗效,降低安全风险。这些结果主张在临床实践中将联合疗法作为一种可行的选择,尤其是对于慢性荨麻疹病例。尽管如此,在治疗过程中仍需谨慎,密切监测潜在的不良反应至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
10.30%
发文量
247
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Indian Association of Dermatologists, Venereologists & Leprologists (IADVL) is the national association of Indian medical specialists who manage patients with skin disorders, sexually transmitted infections (STIs) or leprosy. The current member strength of the association is about 3800. The association works for the betterment of the specialty by holding academic meetings, printing a journal and publishing a textbook. The IADVL has several state branches, each with their own office bearers, which function independently within the constitution of the IADVL. Established in 1940, the Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology (IJDVL, ISSN 0378-6323) is the official publication of the IADVL (Indian Association of Dermatologists, Venereologists and Leprologists).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信