Treatment of equine sarcoids: A systematic review

Author:

Offer Katie S.1ORCID,Dixon Claire E.2ORCID,Sutton David G. M.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. School of Biodiversity, One Health and Veterinary Medicine, College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences University of Glasgow Glasgow UK

2. Tufts Equine Center at the Hospital for Large Animals Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University North Grafton Massachusetts USA

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe sarcoid is the most common equine cutaneous neoplasm. Evidence‐based treatment of this condition is often lacking, and selection of treatment modality based on clinical experience or anecdotal evidence.ObjectivesTo assess the quality of the currently available best evidence regarding the treatment of the equine sarcoid.Study designSystematic review.MethodsIn compliance with PRISMA guidelines, literature searches were performed in PUBMED, Web of Science, CAB Abstracts, EMBASE (Ovid) and Scopus in April 2021. Included papers were required to describe an interventional study examining sarcoid treatment strategy, of level 4 evidence or greater. The case definition required confirmation of at least some included lesions on histopathology, and a minimum of 6 months of follow‐up was required on treated cases. Studies were assessed by two independent reviewers (KO, CD). Data extraction was performed manually, followed by risk of bias assessment. Methodological quality was assessed using the GRADE system.ResultsIn total, 10 studies were included in the review. Case definition was confirmed via histopathology in all included lesions in 60% of papers. Time to follow‐up was variably reported. Overall risk of bias ranged from ‘some concerns’ to ‘critical’. Reported sarcoid regression rate ranged from 28% to 100% on an individual sarcoid level, and 9%–100% on a whole horse level. Transient local inflammation was reported following most treatment strategies, with further adverse events reported infrequently.Main limitationsReview methodology excluded a large proportion of available literature regarding the equine sarcoid. Significant heterogeneity between included studies prevented quantitative synthesis and most included papers were at significant risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision.ConclusionsThere is insufficient evidence currently available to recommend one sarcoid treatment over another. There is an urgent need for sufficiently powered, randomised, placebo‐controlled trials in order to allow more definitive comparison of the efficacy of different treatment strategies.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3