| Title |
Efficacy and Safety of Three Cryotherapy Devices for Wart Treatment: A Randomized, Controlled, Investigator-Blinded, Comparative Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Dermatology and Therapy, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13555-017-0210-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Imko Walczuk, Frank Eertmans, Bart Rossel, Agnieszka Cegielska, Eggert Stockfleth, Andre Antunes, Els Adriaens |
| Abstract |
Cutaneous warts are common skin lesions, caused by human papillomavirus. For years, liquid nitrogen is the cryogen of choice for wart treatment. Alternatively, several cryogenic devices for home treatment are commercially available. The present trial assessed efficacy and safety of a novel nitrous oxide-based cryogenic device for home use (EndWarts Freeze® in Europe, Compound W® Nitro-Freeze in the USA). This investigator-blinded, controlled, randomized study compared the nitrous oxide device (test product) with a dimethylether propane-based product (Wartner®; comparator 1). Subjects with common or plantar warts (50/50 ratio) were randomized into two groups (n = 58, test product; n = 40, comparator 1). Sequentially, an extra treatment arm (n = 40) was added to compare with a dimethylether-based product with metal nib (Wortie®; comparator 2). Main objective implied comparison of the percentage cured subjects after one to maximum three treatments. Efficacy and safety was evaluated by a blinded investigator. After a maximum of three applications, a significantly (p = 0.001) higher cure rate of 70.7% (Intention-to-Treat analysis) was observed with test product versus 46.2% (comparator 1) and 47.5% (comparator 2). Almost three times more subjects were cured after 1 test product application (29.3%), versus comparator 1 (10.4%) and comparator 2 (12.5%). Reported side effects were transient and typical of cryotherapy. All treatments were well-tolerated. The superior cure rates for the test product versus two comparators can be explained by its design. Combination of nitrous oxide (cooling agent), the specific activation method (holding the liquid coolant in the cap), and skin-conforming polyurethane foam, results in higher cooling efficiency (- 80 °C) and more effective wart freezing. This trial demonstrated that the nitrous oxide device is a safe, user-friendly and effective wart treatment for home use, comparing favourably to dimethylether (propane) devices with higher freezing temperature, regardless of the applicator type. Oystershell Laboratories. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT03129373. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 89 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 42 | 47% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 7% |
| Engineering | 4 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 38 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 March 2021.
All research outputs
#2,303,392
of 23,508,125 outputs
Outputs from Dermatology and Therapy
#87
of 820 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,438
of 442,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dermatology and Therapy
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,508,125 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 820 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 442,583 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.