Short‐term growth and bone turnover in children undergoing occlusive steroid (‘Wet‐Wrap’) dressings for treatment of atopic eczema

Is This Medication Safe for My Child? How to Discuss Safety of Commonly Used Medications With Parents

All drugs have potential side effects, but thoughtful use can maximize benefits while minimizing risks. Children should not be considered just small adults regarding drug safety because their growth and development are discordant with their ability to sense and self-report drug side effects. Detecting side effects requires vigilance and education from prescribers to parents, who are tasked with monitoring their child over time. A drug's safety profile is published in the package label after pivotal trials are conducted in relatively small and sometimes narrow segments of the population during the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval process. Drug safety profiles can change as data from postmarketing reports and long-term monitoring during phase IV trials emerge. As such, prescribers are obligated to maintain current understanding of any changes to drug labels. Discussing potential side effects, monitoring, and when to report concerns can be a time-consuming process during patient encounters. This review offers current information regarding potential side effects of some of the most commonly used medications for allergic conditions, asthma, and atopic dermatitis. This information and discussion will hopefully assist clinicians in their conversations with parents, including advice surrounding prescribing medication to minimize adverse effects, parental monitoring, and documentation.

Safety of topical corticosteroids in atopic eczema: an umbrella review

OBJECTIVE

An umbrella review summarising all safety data from systematic reviews of topical corticosteroids (TCS) in adults and children with atopic eczema.

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology map of eczema systematic reviews were searched until 7 November 2018 and Epistemonikos until 2 March 2021. Reviews were included if they assessed the safety of TCS in atopic eczema and searched >1 database using a reproducible search strategy. Review quality was assessed using version 2 of 'A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews' (AMSTAR 2 tool).

RESULTS

38 systematic reviews included, 34 low/critically low quality. Treatment and follow-up were usually short (2-4 weeks).

KEY FINDINGS

TCS versus emollient/vehicle: No meta-analyses identified for skin-thinning. Two 2-week randomised controlled trials (RCTs) found no significant increased risk with very potent TCS (0/196 TCS vs 0/33 vehicle in children and 6/109 TCS vs 2/50 vehicle, age unknown). Biochemical adrenal suppression (cortisol) was 3.8% (95% CI 2.4% to 5.8%) in a meta-analysis of 11 uncontrolled observational studies (any potency TCS, 522 children). Effects reversed when treatment ceased.TCS versus topical calcineurin inhibitors: Meta-analysis showed higher relative risk of skin thinning with TCS (4.86, 95% CI 1.06 to 22.28, n=4128, four RCTs, including one 5-year RCT). Eight cases in 2068 participants, 7 using potent TCS. No evidence of growth suppression.Once daily versus more frequent TCS: No meta-analyses identified. No skin-thinning in one RCT (3 weeks potent TCS, n=94) or biochemical adrenal suppression in two RCTs (up to 2 weeks very potent/moderate TCS, n=129).TCS twice/week to prevent flares ('weekend therapy') versus vehicle: No meta-analyses identified. No evidence of skin thinning in five RCTs. One RCT found biochemical adrenal suppression (2/44 children, potent TCS).

CONCLUSIONS

W e found no evidence of harm when TCS were used intermittently 'as required' to treat flares or 'weekend therapy' to prevent flares. However, long-term safety data were limited.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018079409.

Atopic Dermatitis: Early Treatment in Children

Therapeutic regimens for the treatment and long-term management of AD traditionally had a two-fold objective of decreasing skin inflammation and repairing the defective skin barrier. Essential treatments for AD in children should include topical moisturizers for skin hydration and prevention of flares, topical anti-inflammatory medications (e.g. corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, PDE4 inhibitor), allergen/irritant avoidance, and treatment of skin infections. Treatment regimens should be severity-based, and implemented in a stepwise approach tailored to the individual patient. This stepwise approach includes initial use of emollients, gentle skin care, and escalating to more potent anti-inflammatory treatments as the disease severity increases. Currently available systemic medications should be reserved for the presence of recalcitrance to topical therapies due to associated toxicities. We believe that early treatment of AD is not only essential in treating the skin disease, but also in preventing the development of additional atopic diseases, such as food allergy, asthma and allergic rhinitis. The defective skin barrier of AD permits a route of entry for food and environmental allergens, and upon exposure, keratinocytes secrete TSLP, which activates the T_H2 pathway. This T_H2 differentiation sets off the atopic march and the subsequent diseases that are seen. This review highlights treatment options and strategies in pediatric AD therapy with an emphasis on early therapy. Supporting evidence on the efficacy and safety of each intervention will be discussed.

Efficacy and safety of wet wrap therapy for patients with atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Wet wrap therapy (WWT) consists of topical steroids administered under a layer of wet cotton bandages or garments. Several trials with WWT have reported promising results in atopic dermatitis (AD). However, no systematic review and meta-analysis on its efficacy and safety has been published. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of the literature on WWT in AD to assess its efficacy and safety. We included randomized controlled trials among patients of all ages with a diagnosis of AD based on predefined criteria or made by a dermatologist. Electronic searches were performed from 1970 to 30 March 2016 in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry. Selection of studies and data extraction were performed independently by two researchers, and discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Six trials comparing WWT with topical steroids in children or adults with AD were included. Sample sizes ranged from 19 to 51 patients. Results on clinical severity and quality of life were reported incompletely and proved heterogeneous across studies. A nonsignificant tendency to increased risk of mild skin infections was observed in those treated with WWT (pooled relative risk 6·35, 95% confidence interval 0·83-48·55). The overall grade of quality of evidence for the efficacy and safety outcomes was low. In conclusion, the evidence that WWT is more effective than conventional treatment with topical steroids in AD is of low quality. Further clinical trials should establish the efficacy of WWT in AD.

Bathing and Associated Treatments in Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is one of the most common complaints presenting to dermatologists, and patients typically inquire as to appropriate bathing recommendations. Although many dermatologists, allergists, and primary-care practitioners provide explicit bathing instructions, recommendations regarding frequency of bathing, duration of bathing, and timing related to emollient and medication application relative to bathing vary widely. Conflicting and vague guidelines stem from knowledge related to the disparate effects of water on skin, as well as a dearth of studies, especially randomized controlled trials, evaluating the effects of water and bathing on the skin of patients with atopic dermatitis. We critically review the literature related to bathing and associated atopic dermatitis treatments, such as wet wraps, bleach baths, bath additives, and balneotherapy. We aim to provide readers with a comprehensive understanding of the impact of water and related therapies on atopic dermatitis as well as recommendations based upon the published data.

Wet-wrap treatment in children with atopic dermatitis: a practical guideline

Treatment of children with severe atopic dermatitis (AD) can be especially challenging because several possible intervention treatments have (relative) contraindications in childhood. In recent years, wet-wrap treatment (WWT) has been advocated as a relatively safe and efficacious intervention in children with severe or refractory AD. The goal of this article is to provide a practical guideline as a starting point for clinicians who are interested in using WWT in their own clinical practice. We will address several practical issues surrounding the use of WWT by describing our own experiences, supplemented with data from the literature.

Wet dressing therapy in conjunction with topical corticosteroids is effective for rapid control of severe pediatric atopic dermatitis: experience with 218 patients over 30 years at Mayo Clinic

BACKGROUND

At our institution, hospitalization for intensive treatment (combining wet dressings and topical corticosteroids) is a primary intervention for severe pediatric atopic dermatitis. Prior reports of this treatment are limited.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to review the efficacy of wet dressings for pediatric atopic dermatitis.

METHODS

We reviewed records of pediatric patients hospitalized from January 1, 1980, through April 20, 2010, who received intensive topical treatments for atopic dermatitis.

RESULTS

In total, 218 pediatric patients had widespread atopic dermatitis severe enough to warrant hospitalization, despite prior outpatient topical treatments and other interventions such as immunomodulating agents, phototherapy, dietary manipulation, or contact allergen avoidance. Mean (SD) age was 5.97 (4.91) years (range, 2 months-17 years); 141 patients (65%) were female. There were 266 hospitalizations: 192 patients (72%) had one admission, 15 (6%) had two admissions, and 11 (4%) had 3 or more admissions. Mean (SD) duration of hospitalization was 3.61 (2.23) days (range, 1-16 days). Upon discharge, all patients showed improvement. In 239 of 266 hospitalizations, patient records showed quantification of improvement (global assessment): 121 (45%) had 75% to 100% improvement, 102 (38%) had 50% to 75% improvement, and 16 (6%) had 25% to 50% improvement.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective study.

CONCLUSION

Intensive inpatient treatment (with wet dressings and topical corticosteroids) was highly effective in controlling severe and recalcitrant atopic dermatitis. Intensive topical treatment, although underused, is an effective first-line approach for patients with severe atopic dermatitis.

Update on the management of chronic eczema: new approaches and emerging treatment options

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common disease with worldwide prevalence, affecting up to 20% of children and 3% of adults. Recent evidence regarding pathogenesis has implicated epidermal barrier defects deriving from filagrin mutations with resulting secondary inflammation. In this report, the authors comprehensively review the literature on atopic dermatitis therapy, including topical and systemic options. Most cases of AD will benefit from emollients to enhance the barrier function of skin. Topical corticosteroids are first-line therapy for most cases of AD. Topical calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus ointment, pimecrolimus cream) are considered second line therapy. Several novel barrier-enhancing prescription creams are also available. Moderate to severe cases inadequately controlled with topical therapy may require phototherapy or systemic therapy. The most commonly employed phototherapy modalites are narrow-band UVB, broadband UVB, and UVA1. Traditional systemic therapies include short-term corticosteroids, cyclosporine (considered to be the gold standard), methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and most recently leflunamide. Biologic therapies include recombinant monoclonal antibodies acting on the immunoglobulin E / interleukin-5 pathway (omalizumab, mepolizumab), acting as tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab), and acting as T-cell (alefacept) and B-cell (rituxumab) inhibitors, as well as interferon γ and intravenous immunoglobulin. Efficacy, safety, and tolerability are reviewed for each medication.

Oral cyclosporin plus topical corticosteroid therapy diminishes bone mass in children with eczema

Topical corticosteroids remain the most common treatment for eczema; however, it is uncertain whether long-term use of these agents has any adverse effect on bone mass. Cyclosporin is very useful in patients with severe atopic dermatitis who have failed conventional therapy. It has been shown to induce bone loss. We compared 43 children with severe eczema who were using topical corticosteroids with 73 healthy children. Of the 43 patients, six were also taking cyclosporin. Bone mineral density was measured in the lumbar spine and in the femoral neck using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. In multivariate analysis, subjects with eczema had lower lumbar spine bone mineral density (-0.03 g/cm(2); p = 0.015) and bone mineral apparent density (-0.01 g/cm(3); p = 0.008) but higher FN BMAD (+0.02 g/cm(3); p = 0.029) compared with controls. Patients with eczema on topical corticosteroids who had used cyclosporin had lower lumbar spine bone mineral apparent density (-0.01; p = 0.006) compared with those only on topical corticosteroids in both adjusted and unadjusted analysis. In conclusion, children with severe eczema have decreased lumbar spine bone mass, which is primarily mediated by cyclosporin use rather than by topical corticosteroid use. This effect is likely to lead to a modest increase in the risk of wrist and forearm fractures in children using this agent.

Short-term growth in children with eczema during treatment with topical mometasone furoate and tacrolimus

BACKGROUND

Treatment with topical glucocorticoids in children with atopic eczema may be associated with systemic adverse effects, such as suppression of growth.

AIM

To asses if treatment with topical mometasone furoate 0.1% or topical tacrolimus 0.1% affects short-term growth in children with atopic eczema. Primary outcome measures were lower leg growth rates measured by knemometry.

METHODS

Twenty 5- to 12-year-old prepubertal children with atopic eczema were included in a randomised, investigator-blind crossover study with five periods: two treatment periods, a run in, a wash out and a run out. All periods were of 2-week duration. The subjects applied mometasone furoate ointment 0.1% once daily during one treatment period and tacrolimus ointment 0.1% twice daily during the other treatment period.

RESULTS

As compared to run in mean lower leg growth rate during mometasone furoate and tacrolimus treatment was reduced by 0.09 and 0.06 mm/week, respectively, (F = 1.12, p = 0.35). Consistently, no statistically significant effects on urine levels of eosinophil protein X and crossed-linked N-telopeptides were detected.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with mometasone furoate or tacrolimus does not affect short-term growth in children with mild to moderate atopic eczema.

A systematic review of the safety of topical therapies for atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

The safety of topical therapies for atopic dermatitis (AD), a common and morbid disease, has recently been the focus of increased scrutiny, adding confusion as how best to manage these patients.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of these systematic reviews was to determine the safety of topical therapies for AD.

METHODS

Databases searched included: OVID Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. In addition to the articles identified by this search, investigators were also referred to a list of links (most recently updated 25 September 2005) to recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) studies, reports and meetings regarding the topical calcineurin inhibitors for further potential references. Only fully published papers available in English and data obtained from FDA sites were included. Furthermore, the criteria for inclusion and exclusion for each systematic review were further evaluated at a meeting of all of the content and evidence-based medicine experts participating in this process and alteration of the inclusion criteria was done at that time when it was felt necessary to avoid inclusion of lower-quality data in the review. Qualitative review of the abstracted data was performed and reviewed at a meeting of all of the content and evidence-based medicine experts.

RESULTS

While systemic exposure to these topical agents does occur, physiological changes appear to be uncommon and systemic complications rare and have only been found with use of topical corticosteroids.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the data that are available the overall safety of AD therapies appears to be good with the only documented systemic side-effects of therapy those occasionally seen with use of topical corticosteroids.

Treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis using wet-wrap dressings with diluted steroids and/or emollients. An expert panel's opinion and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The use of dampened bandages to reduce inflamed eczema (synonyme dermatitis) is an old remedy. In order to evaluate the current indications for so-called wet-wrap treatment (WWT) for atopic dermatitis (AD), and to compare the different currently recognized methods, a group of experts critically reviewed their own expertise on WWT in respect to the existing literature on the subject.

RESULTS

WWT is well tolerated in eczema due to the cooling effect on the skin and the rapid improvement in skin inflammation. It has been shown to be an extremely effective treatment for acute erythrodermic dermatitis, therapy-resistant AD and intolerable pruritus. Advantages of WWT include rapid response to therapy, reduction in itch and sleep disturbance, and potential for reduction in usage of topical corticosteroids (TCS). However, disadvantages include high cost, the necessity for special training in usage, potential for increased TCS absorption, increased cutaneous infections and folliculitis, and poor tolerability. Precautions to reduce the risks of long-term treatment should include education, monitoring of weight and height and, if necessary, serum cortisol levels. In adolescents the risk of striae from TCS absorption around puberty is high, and WWT with TCS in this age group should be used as a short-term therapy only and with extreme caution. To reduce risks, dilutions of steroids may be used ranging from 5 to 10%. In the maintenance phase this treatment can be rotated with the use of emollients only. Low potency TCS should be used on the face (with a mask).

CONCLUSION

WWT using diluted steroids is a relatively safe addition to the therapeutic treatment options for children and adults with severe and/or refractory AD. Explanation and education is extremely important in the treatment of AD and WWT should only be employed by practitioners trained in its use. Specialized nursing care is essential, especially when using WWT for prolonged periods.

Efficacy and safety of ‘wet-wrap’ dressings as an intervention treatment in children with severe and/or refractory atopic dermatitis: a critical review of the literature

BACKGROUND

During the last two decades wet-wrap treatment (WWT) has been advocated as a relatively safe and effective treatment modality in children with severe and/or refractory atopic dermatitis (AD). Unfortunately, there are still many unsolved issues concerning the use of wet-wrap dressings in patients with AD.

OBJECTIVES

To make an inventory of the different methodologies and to evaluate the currently available evidence for the use of WWT as an intervention treatment in children with severe and/or refractory AD.

METHODS

We performed a search of the literature via the online PubMed database. Reference lists from relevant articles were scanned for additional publications. Publications describing a treatment modality for children with severe and/or refractory AD, which included the application of wet dressings, were collected and evaluated using the guidelines of the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York.

RESULTS

Twenty-four publications were included for evaluation. Eleven of the publications detailed original clinical studies (study design level 2-4), while 13 revealed expert opinions (study design level 5). Evidence levels did not exceed level 4.

CONCLUSIONS

Large prospective studies evaluating the efficacy and safety profile of WWT are lacking. We were able to formulate the following conclusions with a grade C of recommendation. (i) WWT using cream or ointment and a double layer of cotton bandages, with a moist first layer and a dry second layer, is an efficacious short-term intervention treatment in children with severe and/or refractory AD. (ii) The use of wet-wrap dressings with diluted topical corticosteroids is a more efficacious short-term intervention treatment in children with severe and/or refractory AD than wet-wrap dressings with emollients only. (iii) The use of wet-wrap dressings with diluted topical corticosteroids for up to 14 days is a safe intervention treatment in children with severe and/or refractory AD, with temporary systemic bioactivity of the corticosteroids as the only reported serious side-effect. (iv) Lowering the absolute amount of applied topical corticosteroid to once daily application and further dilution of the product can reduce the risk of systemic bioactivity.