Trial reportClinical and experimental dental research2022
A novel drug delivery system using acyclovir nanofiber patch for topical treatment of recurrent herpes labialis: A randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- A novel drug delivery system using acyclovir nanofiber patch for topical treatment of recurrent herpes labialis: A randomized clinical trial.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2022Trial
- The hypothalamus as a therapeutic target: Towards novel approaches for managing antipsychotic-induced weight gain.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2026Review
- Review
- Intelligent transdermal nanoparticles as synergizing advanced delivery systems for precision therapeutics.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Article
- Vitamin D serum level in participants with positive history of recurrent herpes labialis.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Nanofiber Carriers of Therapeutic Load: Current Trends.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTopical treatment with acyclovir cream has shown low efficacy in recent studies. Nano drug delivery systems, have received much attention in recent decades. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of acyclovir nanofiber patch with acyclovir cream. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn this double-blind three-armed randomized clinical trial, a total of 60 patients with recurrent labial herpes, were randomly divided into three groups, each consisting of 20. The patients in the first, second, and third groups were treated with acyclovir nanofiber patch, placebo nanofiber patch, and acyclovir cream, respectively. A numerical scale was used by the patients to record the self-reported symptoms. Symptoms score, crusting time and healing time were assessed by the clinician. Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the symptoms between the three groups, a survival test was also performed to evaluate the crusting and healing time. Data were analyzed in SPSS V22 at P-value < 0.05.
resultsThe mean scores of symptoms at baseline were 1.6, 1.5, and 1.4 in the first, second, and third groups, respectively. The symptoms were not significantly different between the three groups on different treatment days. The mean crusting time was 2.3, 2.4, and 2.6 days in the three groups, and the mean healing time was 7.4, 7.2, and 7.7 days, respectively. Crusting time and healing time were not significantly different between the three groups.
conclusionsAcyclovir nanofiber patches are recommended for accelerating symptom relief in recurrent labial herpes, however, they are not effective in shortening the crusting or healing time. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: IRCT20141124020073N2. Registered in: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (www.irct.ir).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.