OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, tolerance and safety of two types of cryotherapy, performed by family physicians, for benign cutaneous lesions: low freezing (-59 degrees C) with dimethyl either-propane cryogenic spray (DMEP) and intense freezing (196 degrees C) with conventional liquid nitrogen (LN). DESIGN: A randomised, multi-centered, controlled clinical trial, with single-blind assessment. SETTING: Three primary care teaching teams in the Community of Madrid. PATIENTS AND OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Ten MIR from family &; community medicine intervened. There were 124 patients, who had 174 benign cutaneous lesions, suitable for cryotherapy. There were 3 voluntary withdrawals, none because of an adverse reaction. Interventions, in each case there was local application for a standard time of the randomised agent. Control-group intervention, 81 cases: swab soaked in LN. Study-group intervention, 93 cases: swab saturated with DMEP spray. Maximum of three freezings per case, at weekly intervals. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A doctor made a blind assessment of the results (elimination, adverse reaction, aesthetic result) 15 days after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: No clinically relevant differences between the efficacy, tolerance and safety of the two cryogenic agents used in primary care were found. The low freezing of DMEP was sufficient for the cryotherapy of benign lesions.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, tolerance and safety of two types of cryotherapy, performed by family physicians, for benign cutaneous lesions: low freezing (-59 degrees C) with dimethyl either-propane cryogenic spray (DMEP) and intense freezing (196 degrees C) with conventional liquid nitrogen (LN). DESIGN: A randomised, multi-centered, controlled clinical trial, with single-blind assessment. SETTING: Three primary care teaching teams in the Community of Madrid. PATIENTS AND OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Ten MIR from family & community medicine intervened. There were 124 patients, who had 174 benign cutaneous lesions, suitable for cryotherapy. There were 3 voluntary withdrawals, none because of an adverse reaction. Interventions, in each case there was local application for a standard time of the randomised agent. Control-group intervention, 81 cases: swab soaked in LN. Study-group intervention, 93 cases: swab saturated with DMEP spray. Maximum of three freezings per case, at weekly intervals. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A doctor made a blind assessment of the results (elimination, adverse reaction, aesthetic result) 15 days after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: No clinically relevant differences between the efficacy, tolerance and safety of the two cryogenic agents used in primary care were found. The low freezing of DMEP was sufficient for the cryotherapy of benign lesions.
Authors: Johannes C van der Wouden; Renske van der Sande; Emma J Kruithof; Annet Sollie; Lisette Wa van Suijlekom-Smit; Sander Koning Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-05-17