ArticleSaudi medical journal2024
Isotretinoin-induced epistaxis among acne vulgaris patients: A cross sectional study from Saudi Arabia.
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the prevalence and risk factors of isotretinoin-related epistaxis, among patients of acne vulgaris.
methodsA retrospective cohort of 230 Saudi patients who received isotretinoin for treatment of acne vulgaris, was included in the study. An online questionnaire was used to collect data regarding demographics and treatment-related adverse events.
resultsThe prevalence of isotretinoin-induced epistaxis was found to be 45.2%, which was a 5-fold increase in epistaxis, versus baseline. Epistaxis was reported by 90% patients who had a prior history of nasal bleeding. Patients with 'obstructed nose', reported a prevalence of 68.8%. The large majority of patients had a mild form of epistaxis, while nearly one-fourth reported moderate severity. A small subgroup of patients reported severe epistaxis warranting emergency room (ER) visits and blood transfusion. A staggering 93.5% and 61.3% patients were not advised by their dermatologists, regarding the importance of an ear-nose-throat (ENT) specialist consultation and nasal moisturization respectively, while taking isotretinoin.
conclusionThe prevalence of isotretinoin-induced epistaxis is significantly high among Saudi patients; the complication can affect nearly half of the patients receiving this drug. Key risk factors include a prior history of nasal bleeding, nasal obstruction, poor awareness regarding the nasal adverse effects of epistaxis and its preventive measures. Isotretinoin should be prescribed judiciously by dermatologists, in consultation with ENT specialists, and with adequate patient education regarding its potential nasal adverse effects and steps to mitigate the same.
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.