Comparative efficacy of 2 topical anesthetics for the placement of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices.

This study compared the effectiveness of topical benzocaine 20% versus a combination of lidocaine, tetracaine, and phenylephrine in providing sufficient analgesia for the placement of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices (TADs). The 2 topical anesthetics were tested against each other bilaterally using a randomized, double-blind, crossover design. The agents were left in place for the amount of time prescribed by the manufacturer. The TAD was then placed, and each subject rated the degree of pain on a Heft-Parker visual analogue scale. A pulse oximeter was used to record the preoperative and postoperative pulse rates. Statistically significant differences in perceived pain (P < .05) and success rate (P < .01) between drugs were seen, but no significant difference in pulse rate change between the topical anesthetics was observed (P > .05). It was concluded that when the efficacy of topical benzocaine and of a combination product was compared as the sole anesthetic to facilitate acceptable pain control for placement of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices, the combination product was considerably more efficacious.

Is paromomycin an effective and safe treatment against cutaneous leishmaniasis? A meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: High cost, poor compliance, and systemic toxicity have limited the use of pentavalent antimony compounds (SbV), the treatment of choice for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL). Paromomycin (PR) has been developed as an alternative to SbV, but existing data are conflicting. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, without language restriction, through August 2007, to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy or safety between PR and placebo or SbV. Primary outcome was clinical cure, defined as complete healing, disappearance, or reepithelialization of all lesions. Data were extracted independently by two investigators, and pooled using a random-effects model. Fourteen trials including 1,221 patients were included. In placebo-controlled trials, topical PR appeared to have therapeutic activity against the old world and new world CL, with increased local reactions, when used with methylbenzethonium chloride (MBCL) compared to when used alone (risk ratio [RR] for clinical cure, 2.58 versus 1.01: RR for local reactions, 1.60 versus 1.07). In SbV-controlled trials, the efficacy of topical PR was not significantly different from that of intralesional SbV in the old world CL (RR, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.89), whereas topical PR was inferior to parenteral SbV in treating the new world CL (0.67; 0.54-0.82). No significant difference in efficacy was found between parenteral PR and parenteral SbV in the new world CL (0.88; 0.56-1.38). Systemic side effects were fewer with topical or parenteral PR than parenteral SbV. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Topical PR with MBCL could be a therapeutic alternative to SbV in selected cases of the old world CL. Development of new formulations with better efficacy and tolerability remains to be an area of future research.