ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2026
Efficacy and safety of digoxin/furosemide for cutaneous warts: a systematic review and meta-analysis of eight randomized controlled trials.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cutaneous warts, caused by human papillomavirus, are common and often resistant to standard treatments, such as cryotherapy, which have high recurrence rates and side effects. Ionic contra-viral therapy (ICVT), combining digoxin and furosemide, has emerged as a novel therapeutic approach, but its clinical effectiveness remains uncertain. Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, CENTRAL, and Web of Science was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to October 2025. Primary outcomes were clinical and dermoscopic response rates; secondary outcomes included recurrence, changes in wart size and number, and adverse events. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) were pooled using Stata 19 with 95% confidence intervals. Results: Eight RCTs comprising 456 patients were included. Compared with placebo, ICVT significantly improved complete clinical response (RR: 9.27, Conclusion: ICVT demonstrated promising efficacy and a favorable safety profile compared to standard treatments for cutaneous warts. However, due to the low to very low certainty of the current evidence, these findings are preliminary. Further robust, large-scale RCTs are required to confirm its clinical utility and definitively establish its role in standard practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.