What's new in atopic eczema? An analysis of systematic reviews published in 2017. Part 1: treatment and prevention

This review forms part of a series of annual updates that summarize the evidence base for atopic eczema (AE). It provides a summary of key findings from 25 systematic reviews that were published or indexed during 2017, and focuses on the treatment and prevention of AE. There is high‐quality evidence to demonstrate that dupilumab is better than placebo for the treatment of AE, is not associated with a higher incidence of adverse effects and does not increase the risk of infection compared with placebo; however, comparison studies with other systemic treatments are necessary. Topical tofacitinib is a promising treatment for mild–moderate AE, but currently lacks sufficient evidence from well‐designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing with other active treatments. Topical doxepin may be effective for pruritus in AE, but available studies have short follow‐up periods and longer‐term outcomes are needed. Bleach baths were no more effective than water baths alone at reducing AE severity. Topical antibiotics cannot be recommended for infected AE, owing to insufficient evidence of benefit. There is little comparison of different emollients in RCTs, but overall evidence indicates that they reduce AE severity, are steroid‐sparing and lead to better outcomes in combination with topical corticosteroids (TCS) than TCS alone. No clear benefit was demonstrated for vitamin D/C/E supplementation in pregnancy for eczema prevention.     

What’s new in atopic eczema? An analysis of systematic reviews published in 2017. Part 2: epidemiology,aetiology and risk factors

This article forms part of a series of annual updates that summarizes the evidence base for atopic eczema (AE). It provides a summary of key findings from 28 systematic reviews that were published or indexed during 2017, and focuses on the epidemiology, aetiology and risk factors of AE. AE is the largest single contributor to morbidity associated with skin disease worldwide, once mortality has been excluded. There is a high prevalence of sleep disturbance in individuals with AE and they take more sick leave than controls. While there is a lack of skin bacterial diversity in patients with AE, there is a relative abundance of Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Compared with controls, affected individuals more often show an IgE response to S. aureus antigens and have higher serum interleukin‐31 levels. Early antibiotic exposure, environmental pollutants, maternal atopy and food allergy are associated with an increased risk of AE, and very preterm birth is associated with decreased risk. Patients with AE have a reduced risk of meningioma, but are more likely to develop attention‐deficit hyperactivity disorder compared with controls. Patients with eosinophilic oesophagitis are significantly more likely than unaffected individuals to have AE. There is no significant overall association between AE and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), and in children referred for patch testing, ACD was more common in those without AE. Hand eczema is more prevalent in patients with AE. There is no association between AE and Type 2 diabetes, hypertension, stroke or myocardial infarction.     

Preparing for the 2019‐2020 influenza season

Although the 2017‐2018 influenza season had very high rates of influenza‐associated illness, the 2018‐2019 influenza season was comparable to previous seasons. Influenza A was the most commonly identified type worldwide, although variations in influenza A subtype prevalence existed. Influenza vaccination remains the single most effective way to prevent influenza‐associated illness. A novel influenza antiviral, baloxavir, has demonstrated promising results; however, concerns about development of resistance exist.     

Functionally navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation to evoke lingual pressure in stroke survivors with dysphagia and healthy adults: a proof of concept trial

ABSTRACT

Background

Post-stroke dysphagia is characterized by reduced corticolingual excitability and lingual pressure; however, it remains unknown if transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) directly facilitates lingual pressure generation.