Malassezia specific IgE in head and neck dermatitis of eczema: A systematic review & meta-analysis.

Head and neck atopic dermatitis (HNAD) is a subtype of atopic dermatitis (AD), a common inflammatory skin condition with a distinctive clinical appearance. Malassezia spp., a predominant skin yeast, is considered to exacerbate HNAD. In this study, we investigate the prevalence of Malassezia-specific IgE among HNAD patients. A comprehensive search was performed for observational studies analysing the association between Malassezia-specific IgE and HNAD. This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 checklist and quality was assessed via the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). Fourteen observational studies (840 patients) were included in the analysis. 58% of HNAD patients were male (95% CI: 45.2-69.7). Overall prevalence of Malassezia-specific IgE among HNAD patients was 79.3% (95% CI: 57.5-91.5). Prevalence of Malassezia-specific IgE among HNAD patients varied significantly between geographical regions (p = 0.0441), with 88% in non-Asian regions (95% CI: 61.06-97.17) and 54.73% in Asian regions (95% CI: 34.36-73.63). Malassezia-specific IgE prevalence among HNAD patients varied significantly among studies of higher and lower NOS quality score (p = 0.0386), with 95.42% in studies with NOS ≥7 (95% CI: 63.54-99.60) and 58.05% in studies with NOS <7 (95% CI: 41.44-73.01). Malassezia-specific IgE prevalence among HNAD patients did not vary significantly between more and less predominant Malassezia species (p = 0.1048). Malassezia spp. plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis of HNAD, and IgE anti-Malassezia antibodies appeared to be a common marker for HNAD. Understanding the pathophysiology of Malassezia in HNAD can help develop more targeted therapeutic approaches in managing AD.

Remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices using smart device interface versus radiofrequency-based interface: A systematic review.

Background: Guidelines recommended remote monitoring (RM) in managing patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices. In recent years, smart device (phone or tablet) monitoring-based RM (SM-RM) was introduced. This study aims to systematically review SM-RM versus bedside monitor RM (BM-RM) using radiofrequency in terms of compliance, connectivity, and episode transmission time. Methods: We conducted a systematic review, searching three international databases from inception until July 2023 for studies comparing SM-RM (intervention group) versus BM-RM (control group). Results: Two matched studies (21 978 patients) were retrieved (SM-RM arm: 9642 patients, BM-RM arm: 12 336 patients). There is significantly higher compliance among SM-RM patients compared with BM-RM patients in both pacemaker and defibrillator patients. Manyam et al. found that more SM-RM patients than BM-RM patients transmitted at least once (98.1% vs. 94.3%, p < .001), and Tarakji et al. showed that SM-RM patients have higher success rates of scheduled transmissions than traditional BM-RM methods (SM-RM: 94.6%, pacemaker manual: 56.3%, pacemaker wireless: 77.0%, defibrillator wireless: 87.1%). There were higher enrolment rates, completed scheduled and patient-initiated transmissions, shorter episode transmission time, and higher connectivity among SM-RM patients compared to BM-RM patients. Younger patients (aged <75) had more patient-initiated transmissions, and a higher proportion had ≥10 transmissions compared with older patients (aged ≥75) in both SM-RM and BM-RM groups. Conclusion: SM-RM is a step in the right direction, with good compliance, connectivity, and shorter episode transmission time, empowering patients to be in control of their health. Further research on cost-effectiveness and long-term clinical outcomes can be carried out.