Premium
Comparison between an oral hydrolytic enzyme combination and oral acyclovir in the treatment of acute zoster:a double‐blind, controlled multicentre trial
Author(s) -
Kleine MichaelW.
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
journal of the european academy of dermatology and venereology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.655
H-Index - 107
eISSN - 1468-3083
pISSN - 0926-9959
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-3083.1993.tb00057.x
Subject(s) - medicine , clinical trial , double blind , aciclovir , surgery , dermatology , gastroenterology , viral disease , virus , immunology , herpesviridae , pathology , alternative medicine , placebo
Background Today's standard treatment of zoster in immunocompetent patients is oral acyclovir. Other therapies are no longer customary because of their insufficient efficacy and frequent side effects. The positive results obtained with an orally administered enzyme combination led to the assumption that this might represent an alternative therapy. The purpose of our study was therefore to determine whether the enzyme combination differs from acyclovir with regard to efficacy and tolerance. Patients and Methods In a double‐blind, controlled multicenter trial immunocompetent patients with zoster were randomly assigned to receive one of the two test drugs for 7 days. Parameters of pain and skin lesions were measured over 14–21 days. Forty‐four patients were enrolled in the enzyme group (ET) and 46 in the acyclovir group (AT). Results There were no significant differences with respect to anamnestic and clinical data at entry into the study. Neither were there significant differences regarding the statistically evaluated parameters of efficacy: “segmental pain on day 7” ( P = 0.496) and “vesicle duration” ( P = 0.803). Paracetamol use and total pain over 14 days also failed to show any notable differences between the two groups. The beginning of crust formation and the duration of skin lesions showed a very similar frequency distribution. Side effects occurred in four patients in the ET group and in three in the AT group. Conclusions Our trial suggests that the therapy of zoster with an orally applied enzyme combination is a valid alternative to the therapy using acyclovir.