• DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2230.2011.04078.x
• Corpus ID: 42321918

What’s new in atopic eczema? An analysis of systematic reviews published in 2009–2010

@article{Shams2011WhatsNI,
  title={What’s new in atopic eczema? An analysis of systematic reviews published in 2009–2010},
  author={Kave Shams and Douglas J. C. Grindlay and Hywel C. Williams},
  journal={Clinical and Experimental Dermatology},
  year={2011},
  volume={36}
}

• K. Shams, D. Grindlay, H. Williams
• Published 1 August 2011
• Medicine
• Clinical and Experimental Dermatology

This review provides a summary of key findings from 18 systematic reviews on atopic eczema, published or indexed between January 2009 and 24 August 2010. There was no good evidence on the possible benefit of organic food consumption and eczema. Maternal intake of fish or fish oil may be associated with a reduced risk of eczema in offspring, although further studies are needed. There is some evidence that partially hydrolysed infant formulas rather than standard formulas may be associated with a reduced risk of eczema in infants, but there are shortcomings in the existing evidence. An inverse relationship has been found between gliomas/acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and allergic disease/eczema, but there appears to be no association between multiple sclerosis and eczema. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder does appear to be associated with eczema, but there is no evidence of a causal link. The risk of eczema seems to be increased in urban compared with rural areas. Some new evidence has suggested superiority of 1% pimecrolimus over potent and mild corticosteroids at 6 months but not 12 months, and there is some evidence for superiority of 0.03% and 0.1% tacrolimus over 1% pimecrolimus. An updated Cochrane Review still found no evidence of a benefit from any form of antistaphylococcal treatment in managing clinically infected or uninfected eczema. The evidence base is poor for bath emollients, occlusive treatments (e.g. wet and dry wraps) and woven silk clothing in treating eczema. In general, the methods used in most systematic reviews of eczema need to be reported more clearly, especially with regard to a more vigorous quality assessment of included studies. Included studies are frequently heterogeneous, proxy reporting is common, and appropriate disease definitions are often lacking. Better adherence to existing guidance on trial reporting and prospective registration of clinical trials may help improve the quality of studies.