Walker G J, Johnstone P W
Country Support Team for Central and South Asia, UNFPA, PO Box 5940, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000(3):CD000320. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000320.
Scabies is a common public health problem with an estimated global prevalence of 300 million. Infestation can cause considerable discomfort and intense itching. Severe adverse effects have been reported for some drugs used to treat scabies.
The objective of this review is to assess the effects and toxicity of topical and systemic drug treatment for scabies.
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group trials register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, military records, traditional medicine databases. We also contacted international specialist centres and drug manufacturers.
Randomised controlled trials of any drug treatment for scabies. Tolerability and toxicity were sought in any study of humans taking any drug treatments for scabies.
Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data.
Thirteen trials were included (nine compared drug treatments, two compared treatment regimens, one compared the drug vehicle, and one was a community intervention). In one small trial, ivermectin was associated with a significant higher clinical cure rate at seven days when compared with placebo. Permethrin appeared to be more effective than crotamiton for clinical and parasitic cure rates. Permethrin appeared to be better than lindane for clinical cure rates in two small trials, but had no advantage in the largest trial (test for heterogeneity P < 0.001). Permethrin also appeared more effective in reducing itch persistence than lindane. There appeared to be no difference in clinical cure rates between crotamiton and lindane or benzyl benzoate and sulphur. Two trials assessed: the effectiveness of oral versus topical treatment (ivermectin versus benzyl benzoate and ivermectin ); single trial assessed treatment vehicle (pork fat versus cold cream); and mass community treatment (ivermectin), but all were too small to demonstrate an effect. No randomised trials of malathion were identified. Serious adverse drug reactions (including death and convulsions), most notably to lindane, permethrin and ivermectin, have been reported elsewhere.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The evidence that permethrin is more effective than lindane is inconsistent. Lindane, permethrin, and ivermectin appear to be associated with rare but serious drug reactions although this is not derived from trial data. More research is needed on the safety and effectiveness of ivermectin and malathion compared to permethrin, on community management, and on different regimens and vehicles for topical treatment.
疥疮是一个常见的公共卫生问题,全球估计患病率为3亿。感染可导致相当大的不适和剧烈瘙痒。已报道一些用于治疗疥疮的药物有严重不良反应。
本综述的目的是评估局部和全身药物治疗疥疮的效果和毒性。
我们检索了Cochrane传染病组试验注册库、Cochrane对照试验注册库、MEDLINE、EMBASE、军事记录、传统医学数据库。我们还联系了国际专家中心和药品制造商。
任何治疗疥疮药物的随机对照试验。在任何对接受任何治疗疥疮药物的人类研究中,均需评估耐受性和毒性。
两名评价员评估试验质量并提取数据。
纳入了13项试验(9项比较药物治疗,2项比较治疗方案,1项比较药物载体,1项为社区干预)。在一项小型试验中,与安慰剂相比,伊维菌素在第7天时临床治愈率显著更高。在临床治愈率和寄生虫治愈率方面,氯菊酯似乎比克罗米通更有效。在两项小型试验中,氯菊酯在临床治愈率方面似乎优于林丹,但在最大的试验中没有优势(异质性检验P<0.001)。氯菊酯在减轻瘙痒持续时间方面似乎也比林丹更有效。克罗米通与林丹或苯甲酸苄酯与硫磺之间的临床治愈率似乎没有差异。两项试验评估了:口服与局部治疗(伊维菌素与苯甲酸苄酯和伊维菌素)的有效性;一项试验评估了治疗载体(猪脂肪与冷霜);以及大规模社区治疗(伊维菌素),但所有试验规模都太小,无法证明有效果。未检索到马拉硫磷的随机试验。其他地方已报道了严重的药物不良反应(包括死亡和惊厥),最显著的是对林丹、氯菊酯和伊维菌素的不良反应。
氯菊酯比林丹更有效的证据并不一致。林丹、氯菊酯和伊维菌素似乎与罕见但严重的药物反应有关,尽管这并非来自试验数据。与氯菊酯相比,需要对伊维菌素和马拉硫磷的安全性和有效性、社区管理以及局部治疗的不同方案和载体进行更多研究。