A double-blind, randomized, comparative study of Dysport® vs. Botox® in primary palmar hyperhidrosis

被引:80
|
作者
Moreau, MS
Cauhepe, C
Magues, JP
Senard, JM
机构
[1] CHU Purpan, Federat Neurol, F-31059 Toulouse, France
[2] CHU Purpan, Dept Anesthesie, F-31059 Toulouse, France
[3] Fac Med Toulouse, INSERM, U317, Serv Pharmacol Clin, F-31073 Toulouse, France
关键词
botulinum toxin A; intradermal injections; palmar hyperhidrosis;
D O I
10.1111/j.1365-2133.2003.05620.x
中图分类号
R75 [皮肤病学与性病学];
学科分类号
100206 ;
摘要
Background Intradermal injections of type A botulinum toxin have been reported to reduce excessive sweating in patients with primary palmar hyperhidrosis. Two preparations are commercially available in Europe: Botox((R)) (Allergan; 100 U per vial) and Dysport((R)) (Beaufour Ipsen Biotech; 500 U per vial), which are not bioequivalent. A few studies have tried to find an appropriate conversion factor between the two preparations in dystonic patients but results remain controversial. Objectives To compare the efficacy of Botox and Dysport in palmar hyperhidrosis using a conversion factor of 1 : 4. Methods In a double-blind, randomized study, eight patients with severe primary palmar hyperhidrosis received in the same session intradermal injections of Dysport in one palm and Botox in the other, after regional median and ulnar nerve blocks. Quantification of sweat production was performed by Minor's iodine starch test at baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months after the treatment. Subjective assessment of sweat production was performed using a visual analogue scale. Results The mean +/- SD number of injection sites (28 +/- 1), mean volume of reconstituted solution injected (2.8 mL) and mean sweating area at baseline (BSA) were similar in each palm group. The mean +/- SD dose injected was 69.3 +/- 3.1 U for the Botox-treated palms and 283.7 +/- 11.3 U for the Dysport-treated palms (1 : 4). At 1 month, Minor's test revealed significant decreases in mean sweating area for each preparation (Dysport palms: -78.6% vs. BSA, P = 0.0002; Botox palms: -56.6% vs. BSA, P = 0.003). The percentage of decrease was more pronounced in Dysport palms compared with Botox palms but the difference did not reach statistical significance. At 3 months, the decrease in sweating area remained significant for Dysport palms (-69.4% vs. BSA, P = 0.008) but not for Botox palms (-48.8% vs. BSA). Self-evaluation showed a similar amount of improvement in both palm groups at 1 and 3 months (77% and 75% for Dysport; 68% and 72% for Botox). Local side-effects were more frequent in Dysport palms (weakness of thumb-index pinch in four cases, lasting 8-30 days) than in Botox palms (weakness of thumb-index pinch in two cases, lasting 15-21 days). The mean duration of positive effect was similar: 17 weeks in Dysport (range 8-32) and 18 weeks in Botox palms (range 8-32). Conclusions Using a conversion factor of 1 : 4, the efficacy of Botox and Dysport injections was similar. However, there was a trend towards a larger improvement after Dysport treatment but with a higher incidence of adverse effects.
引用
收藏
页码:1041 / 1045
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Double-blind, randomised, parallel comparative Dysport vs. Botox study in primary palmar hyperhidrosis
    Simonetta-Moreau, M
    Senard, JM
    MOVEMENT DISORDERS, 2002, 17 : S44 - S44
  • [2] Respective Potencies of Botox® and Dysport® in a Human Skin Model: A Randomized, Double-blind Study
    Kranz, Gottfried
    Haubenberger, Dietrich
    Voller, Bernhard
    Posch, Martin
    Schnider, Peter
    Auff, Eduard
    Sycha, Thomas
    MOVEMENT DISORDERS, 2009, 24 (02) : 231 - 236
  • [3] Dysport and Botox at a Ratio of 2.5:1 Units in Cervical Dystonia: A Double-Blind, Randomized Study
    Yun, Ji Young
    Kim, Jae Woo
    Kim, Hee-Tae
    Chung, Sun Ju
    Kim, Jong-Min
    Cho, Jin Whan
    Lee, Jee-Young
    Lee, Ha Neul
    You, Sooyeoun
    Oh, Eungseok
    Jeong, Heejeong
    Kim, Young Eun
    Kim, Han-Joon
    Lee, Won Yong
    Jeon, Beom S.
    MOVEMENT DISORDERS, 2015, 30 (02) : 206 - 213
  • [4] Dilution of botulinum toxin A in lidocaine vs. in normal saline for the treatment of primary axillary hyperhidrosis: a double-blind, randomized, comparative preliminary study
    Gulec, A. T.
    JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY AND VENEREOLOGY, 2012, 26 (03) : 314 - 318
  • [5] A randomized double-blind study of the effect of Botox and Dysport/Reloxin on forehead wrinkles and electromyographic activity
    Karsai, Syrus
    Adrian, Robert
    Hammes, Stefan
    Thimm, Juergen
    Raulin, Christian
    ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGY, 2007, 143 (11) : 1447 - 1449
  • [6] Biological activity of Dysport® and Botox® in the human EDB muscle:: A double-blind, randomized, dose-ranging study
    Wohlfarth, Kai
    Schwandt, Imke
    Florian, Wegner
    Juergens, Tim
    Gelbrich, Goetz
    Wagner, Armin
    Bogdahn, Ulrich
    Schulte-Mattler, Wilhelm
    TOXICON, 2008, 51 : 22 - 22
  • [7] A double-blind, randomized, comparative study of two type a botulinum toxins in the treatment of primary axillary hyperhidrosis
    Talarico-Filho, Sergio
    Do Nascimento, Mauricio Mendonca
    De Macedo, Fernando Sperandeo
    Pecora, Carla De Sanctis
    DERMATOLOGIC SURGERY, 2007, 33 : S44 - S50
  • [8] Oxybutynin gel versus nanoemulgel for treating primary palmar hyperhidrosis: A pilot double-blind randomized controlled trial
    Saki, Nasrin
    Shakouri, Negin
    Rastaghi, Fatemeh
    Hosseini, Seyed Ali
    Alipour, Shohreh
    Ahramiyanpour, Najmeh
    JOURNAL OF COSMETIC DERMATOLOGY, 2023, 22 (08) : 2268 - 2272
  • [9] Onabotulinumtoxin type A (Botox®) versus Incobotulinumtoxin type A (Xeomin®) in the treatment of focal idiopathic palmar hyperhidrosis: results of a comparative double-blind clinical trial
    A. Campanati
    K. Giuliodori
    E. Martina
    A. Giuliano
    G. Ganzetti
    A. Offidani
    Journal of Neural Transmission, 2014, 121 : 21 - 26
  • [10] Electrobrasion vs. manual dermabrasion: a randomized, double-blind, comparative effectiveness trial
    Kleinerman, R.
    Armstrong, A. W.
    Ibrahimi, O. A.
    King, T. H.
    Eisen, D. B.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, 2014, 171 (01) : 124 - 129