COMMENT: Most non-randomized studies supported the use of montelukast for atopic dermatitis treatment. However, evidence from these studies should be interpreted with caution as it is relatively weak due to the absence of randomization, control groups and blinding processes, subjecting the results to high risk of selection and reporting biases. The inconsistent findings across RCTs may be related to the limited number of patients, nuances in study designs, varying severity of disease and the concomitant use of steroids in some of the studies.
WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Current literature evidence is limited to rationally support the use of montelukast in atopic dermatitis treatment. For now, the conventional treatments should be preferred in the clinical setting.
OBJECTIVE: This review was aimed to summarize and critically discuss the convincing evidence for the therapeutic effectiveness of phytomedicines for the treatment of AD and explore their anti-AD efficacy.
RESULTS: The critical analysis of a wide algorithm of herbal medicines revealed that their remarkable anti-AD efficacy is attributed to their potential of reducing erythema intensity, oedema, inflammation, transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and a remarkable suppression of mRNA expression of ADassociated inflammatory biomarkers including histamine, immunoglobulin (Ig)-E, prostaglandins, mast cells infiltration and production of cytokines and chemokines in the serum and skin biopsies.
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, herbal medicines hold great promise as complementary and alternative therapies for the treatment of mild-to-moderate AD when used as monotherapy and for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD when used in conjunction with other pharmacological agents.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a physiologically compatible pH moisturizer in atopic dermatitis.
METHODS: A randomized half body, double blind, controlled trial involving patients with stable atopic dermatitis was performed. pH-modified moisturizer and standard moisturizer were applied to half body for 6 weeks.
RESULTS: A total of 6 (16.7%) males and 30 (83.3%) females participated. Skin pH reductions from week 0, week 2 and 6 were significant at the forearms (5.315 [0.98] to 4.85 [0.54] to 5.04 [0.78], p=0.02) and abdomen (5.25 [1.01], 4.82 [0.64], 5.01 [0.59], p=0.00) but not at the shins (5.01 [0.80], 4.76 [0.49], 4.85 [0.79], p=0.09) with pH-modified moisturizer. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) at the forearms decreased (4.60 [2.55] to 3.70 [3.10] to 3.00 [3.55], p=0.00), abdomen (3.90 [2.90] to 2.40 [3.45] to 2.70 [2.25], p=0.046). SCORAD improved from 14.1±12.75 to 10.5±13.25 to 7±12.25, p=0.00. In standard moisturizer group, pH reductions were significant at the forearms (5.29 [0.94] to 4.84 [0.55] to 5.02 [0.70], p=0.00) and abdomen (5.25 [1.09], 4.91 [0.63], 5.12 [0.66], p=0.00). TEWL at the forearm were (4.80 [2.95], 4.10 [2.15], 4.60 [3.40], p=0.67), shins (3.80 [1.40], 3.50 [2.35], 4.00 [2.50], p=0.91) and abdomen (3.70 [2.45], 4.10 [3.60], 3.40 [2.95], p=0.80). SCORAD improved from 14.2±9.1 to 10.9±10.65 to 10.5±11, p=0.00. Reduction in pH was observed with both moisturizers while TEWL significantly improved with pH-modified moisturizer. pH-modified moisturizer resulted in greater pH, TEWL and SCORAD improvements however the differences were not significant from standard moisturizer.
STUDY LIMITATION: Skin hydration was not evaluated.
CONCLUSION: Moisturization is beneficial for atopic dermatitis; use of physiologically compatible pH moisturizer is promising.