Table 1 Outcome measure: Healing Time (n = 14)
Author (Year) | Interventions | Timepoint | Healing Time (mean ± SD)* | Significance (p value) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Conservative treatment (e.g., braces and gutter treatment) v’s Chemical matrixectomy (n = 1 study) | ||||
AlGhamdi (2014) [19] | A: Lateral nail avulsion with phenol (n = 30) | 1, 3 and 6 months | Not reported | The healing period ranged from 1–2 weeks. No statistical analysis reported |
B: Nail tube splinting (n = 23) | Not reported | |||
Chemical matrixectomy v’s Surgical matrixectomy (n = 4 studies) | ||||
Varma (1983) [29] | A: Surgical wedge excision (n = 35) | 1 week, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months | Average of 2 weeks to heal | No statistical analysis reported |
B: Phenol wedge cauterisation (n = 28) | Average of 2 weeks to heal | |||
Van der Ham (1990) [28] | A: Wedge excision (n = 124) | Seven days and then at weekly intervals until the wound had healed | 2.5 weeks no SD reported | No statistical analysis reported |
B: Segmental phenol cauterisation (n = 125) | 2.2 weeks no SD reported | |||
Akkus (2018) [18] | A: Chemical matrixectomy with NaOH (n = 30) | Healing time assessed at day 3, Week 1, Month 1, 6, and 12 | 17.3 ± 14.2 days | p = 0.040 |
B: Wedge resection (n = 30 | 28.8 ± 17 days | |||
Muriel-Sánchez (2020) [24] | A: Chemical matrixectomy with phenol (n = 10) | The period of time between the surgical action and the solving of the draining and/or inflammatory changes | 21.3 ± 3.1 days [95% CI 20.20 to 22.39] | p < 0.001 |
B: “Aesthetic reconstruction” (describes partial nail ablation with wedge excision of matrix) (n = 24) | 8.2 ± 1.4 days [95% CI 7.92 to 8.55] | |||
Chemical v’s Other chemical (n = 1 study) | ||||
Gem (1990) Study 1[21] | A: Chemical ablation with 3-min application of 80% phenol (n = 109) | Until healing occurred | The average time to complete healing was 40 days, again with no statistical difference between the groups | No statistical analysis information provided |
B: Chemical ablation with 2-min application of 10% sodium hydroxide (n = 110) | The average time to complete healing was 40 days, again with no statistical difference between the groups | |||
Chemical timings (n = 3 studies) | ||||
Gem (1990) Study 2[21] | A: Chemical ablation with 2-min application of 10% sodium hydroxide (n = 110) | Until healing occurred | The average time to complete healing was 40 days, again with no statistical difference between the groups | No statistical analysis information provided |
B: Chemical ablation with 1-min application of 10% sodium hydroxide (n = 93) | The average time to complete healing was 40 days, again with no statistical difference between the groups | |||
Tatlican (2009) [28] | A: Partial nail avulsion with 1 min phenol cauterisation (n = 37) | Patients were examined on alternate days until the complete healing was achieved | 13.5 ± 3.9 days | A vs B = p = < 0.001 |
B: Partial nail avulsion with 2-min phenol cauterisation (n = 36) | 17.5 ± 2.8 days | A vs C = p = < 0.001 | ||
C: Partial nail avulsion with 3-min phenol cauterisation (n = 37) | 17.1 ± 2.6 days | B vs C = p = 0.853 | ||
Muriel-Sánchez (2021) [27] | A: Partial nail avulsion with 30 s application of phenol (n = 27 halluces [54 nail folds]) | Until healing was achieved | 14.9 ± 2.8 days | p < 0.001 |
B: Partial nail avulsion with 60 s application of phenol (n = 27 halluces [54 nail folds]) | 22 ± 3.2 days | |||
Chemical matrixectomy v’s Surgical + chemical matrixectomy (n = 1 study) | ||||
Alvarez-Jimenez (2011) [31] | A: Phenol and curettage (n = 73 nail folds) | 1 month (digital photographs) | 7.5 ± 1.8 days | p = 0.001 |
B: Phenol (n = 79 nail folds) | 12.4 ± 3 days | |||
Chemical matrixectomy v’s ‘Other’ (e.g., laser and electrocautery) (n = 1 study) | ||||
Misiak (2014) [23] | A: Partial nail extraction + phenolisation (n = 30) | 10 days | n = 10/30 (33.3%) | OR 4.5 [95% CI 1.09 to 18.50 p = 0.020) |
B: Partial nail extraction + electrocautery (n = 30) | n = 3/30 (10%) | |||
Surgical matrixectomy v’s ‘Other’ (e.g., laser and electrocautery) (n = 2 studies) | ||||
Kavoussi (2020) [22] | A: Partial Nail Matrixectomy using CO2 laser (n = 62) | Timepoint unclear. Participants were followed over 24 months | 13 ± 2.5 days | p = 0.620 |
B: Lateral Nail Fold Excision (LNFE) (n = 65) | 12.2 ± 2.2 days | |||
Awad (2020) [20] | A: Partial nail matrixectomy with electrocautery (n = 100) | 3rd and 7th day, 1 and 6 months | > 12 days: n = 51 (25.5%) 12 days: n = 49 (24.5%) | p = 0.02a |
B: Partial nail matrixectomy (n = 100) | > 12 days: n = 53 (26.5%) 12 days: n = 47 (23.5%) | |||
Antibiotics (n = 1 study) | ||||
Reyzelman (2000) [26] | A: 1 week course of oral antibiotics and simultaneous phenol matrixectomy (n = 53) | Until healing occurred | 1.9 ± 0.7 weeks | Group A healed significantly sooner than group B (P < 0.04). No further information is provided |
B: 1 week course of oral antibiotics and phenol matrixectomy 1 week later (n = 51) | 2.3 ± 0.8 weeks | |||
C: Phenol matrixectomy without antibiotic therapy (n = 50) | 2.0 ± 0.8 weeks | |||