Li Li, McGee Richard G, Isbister Geoff, Webster Angela C
Sydney School of Medicine, The University of Sydney, Edward Ford Building, A27, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 2006.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 9;2013(12):CD009688. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009688.pub2.
Jellyfish envenomations are common amongst temperate coastal regions and vary in severity depending on the species. Stings result in a variety of symptoms and signs, including pain, dermatological reactions and, in some species, Irukandji syndrome (including abdominal/back/chest pain, tachycardia, hypertension, sweating, piloerection, agitation and sometimes cardiac complications). Many treatments have been suggested for the symptoms and signs of jellyfish stings. However, it is unclear which interventions are most effective.
To determine the benefits and harms associated with the use of any intervention, in both adults and children, for the treatment of jellyfish stings, as assessed from randomised trials.
We searched the following electronic databases in October 2012 and again in October 2013: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL;The Cochrane Library, Issue 9, 2013); MEDLINE via Ovid SP (1948 to 22 October 2013); EMBASE via Ovid SP (1980 to 21 October 2013); and Web of Science (all databases; 1899 to 21 October 2013). We also searched reference lists from eligible studies and guidelines, conference proceedings and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and contacted content experts to identify trials.
We included randomised controlled trials that compared any intervention(s) to active and/or non-active controls for the treatment of symptoms and signs of jellyfish sting envenomation. No language, publication date or publication status restrictions were applied.
Two review authors independently conducted study selection and data extraction and assessed risk of bias using a standardised form. Disagreements were resolved by consensus with a third review author when necessary.
We included seven trials with a total of 435 participants. Three trials focused on Physalia (Bluebottle) jellyfish, one trial on Carukia jellyfish and three on Carybdea alata (Hawaiian box) jellyfish. Two ongoing trials were identified.Six of the seven trials were judged as having high risk of bias. Blinding was not feasible in four of the included trials because of the nature of the interventions. A wide range of interventions were assessed across trials, and a wide range of outcomes were measured. We reported results from the two trials for which data were available and reported the effects of interventions according to our definition of primary or secondary outcomes.Hot water immersion was superior to ice packs in achieving clinically significant (at least 50%) pain relief at 10 minutes (one trial, 96 participants, risk ratio (RR) 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 2.72; low-quality evidence) and 20 minutes (one trial, 88 participants, RR 2.66, 95% CI 1.71 to 4.15; low-quality evidence). No statistically significant differences between hot water immersion and ice packs were demonstrated for dermatological outcomes.Treatment with vinegar or Adolph's meat tenderizer compared with hot water made skin appear worse (one trial, 25 participants, RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.72; low-quality evidence).Adverse events due to treatment were not reported in any trial.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review located a small number of trials that assessed a variety of different interventions applied in different ways and in different settings. Although heat appears to be an effective treatment for Physalia (Bluebottle) stings, this evidence is based on a single trial of low-quality evidence. It is still unclear what type of application, temperature, duration of treatment and type of water (salt or fresh) constitute the most effective treatment. In addition, these results may not apply to other species of jellyfish with different envenomation characteristics. Future research should further assess the most effective interventions using standardised research methodology.
水母蜇伤在温带沿海地区很常见,其严重程度因水母种类而异。蜇伤会导致多种症状和体征,包括疼痛、皮肤反应,某些种类的水母蜇伤还会引发伊鲁坎吉综合征(包括腹部/背部/胸痛、心动过速、高血压、出汗、竖毛、烦躁不安,有时还会出现心脏并发症)。针对水母蜇伤的症状和体征,人们提出了许多治疗方法。然而,尚不清楚哪种干预措施最为有效。
通过随机试验评估,确定在成人和儿童中使用任何干预措施治疗水母蜇伤的益处和危害。
我们于2012年10月及2013年10月检索了以下电子数据库:Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL;《Cochrane图书馆》,2013年第9期);通过Ovid SP检索的MEDLINE(1948年至2013年10月22日);通过Ovid SP检索的EMBASE(1980年至2013年10月21日);以及Web of Science(所有数据库;1899年至2013年10月21日)。我们还检索了符合条件的研究和指南的参考文献列表、会议论文集以及世界卫生组织(WHO)国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP),并联系了内容专家以识别试验。
我们纳入了将任何干预措施与治疗水母蜇伤中毒症状和体征的活性和/或非活性对照进行比较的随机对照试验。不设语言、出版日期或出版状态限制。
两位综述作者独立进行研究选择和数据提取,并使用标准化表格评估偏倚风险。如有分歧,必要时与第三位综述作者协商解决。
我们纳入了7项试验,共435名参与者。3项试验聚焦于僧帽水母(蓝瓶僧帽水母),1项试验针对Carukia水母,3项试验针对哈氏箱水母。确定了2项正在进行的试验。7项试验中有6项被判定存在高偏倚风险。由于干预措施的性质,纳入的4项试验中设盲不可行。各试验评估了广泛的干预措施,并测量了广泛的结局。我们报告了两项可获取数据的试验结果,并根据我们对主要或次要结局的定义报告了干预措施的效果。在10分钟时,温水浸泡在实现临床上显著(至少50%)的疼痛缓解方面优于冰敷(1项试验,96名参与者,风险比(RR)1.66,95%置信区间(CI)1.01至2.72;低质量证据),在20分钟时也是如此(1项试验,88名参与者,RR 2.66,95%CI 1.71至4.15;低质量证据)。在皮肤学结局方面,温水浸泡与冰敷之间未显示出统计学上的显著差异。与温水相比,用醋或阿道夫肉类嫩化剂治疗使皮肤看起来更差(1项试验,25名参与者,RR 0.31,95%CI 0.14至0.