diclofenac (Oxa Gel / diclofenac, topical)

Comparative short-term effects of topical piroxicam gel, diclofenac gel, and EMLA cream on pain reduction during intravenous cannulation: A randomized clinical trial.

Amini Nazanin N, Mohammadi Elham E, Babaei Parvin P, Modir Hesameddin H et al.

Intravenous (IV) cannulation is a common invasive procedure associated with pain and discomfort. This study compared the short-term effects of topical Piroxicam gel, Diclofenac gel, and EMLA cream on pain during IV cannulation. This participant- and outcome assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial included 123 hospitalized patients randomly allocated to three equal groups receiving topical Diclofenac gel, Piroxicam gel, or EMLA cream (n = 41/group). Pain intensity was assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale immediately after cannulation and at 5, 10, 15, 30, and 45 min. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models, with Kruskal-Wallis/Dunn and Friedman tests performed as sensitivity analyses. Categorical variables were analyzed using Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. Baseline characteristics were comparable among groups (all p > .05). The linear mixed-effects model showed significant effects of treatment group (p = .002), time (p < .001), and treatment-by-time interaction (p < .001). Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons showed lower pain intensity in the Diclofenac and EMLA groups than in the Piroxicam group immediately after cannulation and at 5 min; no significant pairwise differences were observed from 10 to 45 min. Sensitivity analyses supported the overall temporal decline in pain but showed some differences in individual pairwise comparisons. No serious adverse events were reported. Pain intensity declined substantially over time in all groups. In the primary analysis, Diclofenac and EMLA were associated with lower early pain intensity than Piroxicam, although some pairwise findings were sensitive to the analytical approach. Because no placebo control was included, findings should be interpreted as relative rather than absolute treatment effects. The trial was prospectively registered with the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT) under registration number IRCT20180107038251N8 on June 12, 2023 (1402/03/22), prior to the initiation of participant recruitment in October 2025. Available at: https://www.irct.ir/search/result?query=IRCT20180107038251N8.

Topical Glyceryl Trinitrate for Levator Ani Syndrome: Promising Findings Requiring Prospective Confirmation.

Herek Celalettin C, Yıldırım Süleyman S

Ruxolitinib in Dermatology: A Review of its Uses in Cutaneous Disorders.

Saraswat Neerja N, Tripathy Durga Madhab DM, Neema Shekhar S, Banerjee Santanu S et al.

Recent studies have highlighted the role of the JAK/STAT signalling pathway in chronic skin conditions such as atopic dermatitis, vitiligo, alopecia areata, lichen planus, and various granulomatous disorders like sarcoidosis, necrobiosis lipoidica, and granuloma annulare. Ruxolitinib is a first-generation JAK inhibitor that the US Food and Drug Administration approved for treating intermediate or high-risk myelofibrosis in 2011. Recently, the topical formulation has been approved to manage mild to moderate atopic dermatitis and non-segmental vitiligo in adults. Encouraging results have been demonstrated with topical ruxolitinib in multiple other skin diseases. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the use of ruxolitinib in dermatological conditions through a PubMed literature search.

Therapeutic potential of herbal topical agents in evidence-based wound care: a systematic research review.

Kumari Rasna R, Kumar Tarun T, Pandey Shriram S, Jain Neha N et al.

Herbal interventions are increasingly investigated for wound infection due to their potential for antimicrobial, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, tissue-repair and angiogenic activities. Despite this, their clinical relevance is uncertain owing to substantial heterogeneity in botanical materials, phytochemical composition, formulations, experimental models and level of evidence. This systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020. Literature published between 2000 and 2025 was systematically searched in PubMed for original peer-reviewed studies evaluating herbal extracts or purified phytoconstituents, alone or incorporated into topical formulations, for wound infection. In vitro, animal, observational, and clinical studies were included and critically interpreted as per the evidence. Other than this, data on botanical authentication, extraction, standardization, bioactive constituents, wound type, formulation characteristics, and antimicrobial and antifilm activity, efficacy and safety were extracted. The evidence indicated that selected herbal interventions can modulate multiple processes involved in wound repair, including inflammation, oxidative stress, angiogenesis, fibroblast activity, collagen deposition, re-epithelialization, and microbial growth. Nevertheless, substantial heterogeneity in plant sources, extraction methods, concentrations, formulations, wound models, and outcome measures limited direct comparison. Evidence for activity against clinically relevant biofilms and chronic wounds was comparatively limited, while clinical evidence remained less extensive than preclinical evidence. Advanced formulations may improve delivery and wound-site retention, although their independent contribution to therapeutic efficacy requires further clarification. Herbal extracts and phytoconstituents represent potential candidates for topical wound management; however, current evidence does not support their routine replacement of established therapies. Standardized preparations, reproducible formulations, rigorous safety evaluation, clinically relevant chronic-wound models, and adequately powered clinical trials are required for translation into evidence-based wound care.