No abstract

In recent years, there have been continuing efforts to understand the effects of baby skin care routines and products on the healthy development of baby skin. Such efforts aim ultimately to determine the best infant skin care practices. The pediatric and dermatologic communities have not reached consensus on what constitutes an appropriate cleansing practice. In the United States, guidelines for neonatal skin care have been developed, propagated, and implemented. The accumulated knowledge has promoted evidence-based clinical practices and, therefore, may help to improve clinical outcomes, although these guidelines primarily cover the care of preterm newborns and the treatment of those with other health problems. High-level, long-term clinical evidence of the effective and safe cleansing of healthy, full-term newborns and infants is scarce. This review presents a comprehensive analysis of the scientific literature on baby skin development, cleansing practices, and related products (for healthy newborns and babies) since 1970. The evidence drawn from the reviewed literature can be summarized as follows: Bathing immersed in water seems generally superior to washing alone. Bathing or washing with synthetic detergents (syndets) or mild liquid baby cleansers seems comparable with or even superior to water alone. Nevertheless, larger randomized clinical trials with age-defined cohorts of babies as well as more-defined parameters are required to identify optimal practices and products for skin cleansing of healthy infants. These parameters may include standardized skin function parameters such as transepidermal water loss, stratum corneum hydration, skin surface pH, and sebum production. Clinical skin scores such as the Neonatal Skin Condition Score may be employed as outcome measures.

Tissue factor was down-regulated in the myocardium of DCM patients. The reduction in TF expression and change in localization may influence cell-to-cell contact stability and contractility, thereby contributing to cardiac dysfunction in DCM.

The time necessary for a treatment to become effective is crucial for patients and physicians but has been largely neglected in the reporting and comparison of clinical trials in dermatology. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the time until the onset of action (TOA) of systemic agents approved for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Primary outcome is the TOA defined as the weighted mean time until 25% of the patients achieved a psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) 75 response. Among the biologics, infliximab has the shortest TOA (3.5 weeks), followed by ustekinumab (high dose 4.6/low dose 5.1 weeks/not weight adapted), adalimumab (4.6 weeks), etanercept (high dose 6.6/low dose 9.5 weeks), and alefacept (high dose 15.4 weeks/low dose: no data). Among the conventional treatments, good data are available for cyclosporine A (CsA; TOA: 6.0 weeks) and limited data are found for methotrexate (MTX; TOA: high dose 3.2/low dose 9.9 weeks). No data are available for fumaric acid esters and retinoids. This systematic review provides clinically relevant information on the onset of action of antipsoriatic agents, although the data currently available allow only a limited assessment. Psoriasis trials should consider including TOA as an additional outcome measure.

The development of European evidence based guidelines requires a coordinated structure which can be achieved by the integration of an experienced group of methodologists. Nevertheless further improvements are imaginable and might be considered for an update or other European evidence based guidelines.