Abstract:Onychomycosis refers to fungal infections of the nail apparatus that may cause pain, discomfort, and disfigurement. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2007; a substantial amount of new research warrants a review exclusively on toenails. To assess the clinical and mycological effects of topical drugs and device‐based therapies for toenail onychomycosis. We searched the following databases up to May 2019: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers, and checked the reference lists of included and excluded studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials. Randomised controlled trials of topical and device‐based therapies for onychomycosis in participants with toenail onychomycosis, confirmed by positive cultures, direct microscopy, or histological nail examination. Eligible comparators were placebo, vehicle, no treatment, or an active topical or device‐based treatment. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were complete cure rate (normal‐looking nail plus fungus elimination, determined with laboratory methods) and number of participants reporting treatment‐related adverse events. We included 56 studies (12,501 participants, average age: 27 to 68 years), with mainly mild‐to‐moderate onychomycosis without matrix involvement (where reported). Participants had more than one toenail affected. Most studies lasted 48 to 52 weeks; 23% reported disease duration (variable). Thirty‐five studies specifically examined dermatophyte‐caused onychomycosis. Forty‐three studies were carried out in outpatient settings. Most studies assessed topical treatments, 9% devices, and 11% both. We rated three studies at low risk of bias across all domains. The most common high‐risk domain was performance bias. We present results for key comparisons, where treatment duration was 36 or 48 weeks, and clinical outcomes were measured at 40 to 52 weeks. Based on two studies (460 participants), compared with vehicle, ciclopirox 8% lacquer may be more effective in achieving complete cure (risk ratio (RR) 9.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72 to 50.14; low‐quality evidence) and is probably more effective in achieving mycological cure (RR 3.15, 95% CI 1.93 to 5.12; moderate‐quality evidence). Ciclopirox lacquer may lead to increased adverse events, commonly application reactions, rashes, and nail alteration (e.g. colour, shape). However, the 95% CI indicates that ciclopirox lacquer may actually make little or no difference (RR 1.61, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.92; low‐quality evidence). Efinaconazole 10% solution is more effective than vehicle in achieving complete cure (RR 3.54, 95% CI 2.24 to 5.60; 3 studies, 1716 participants) and clinical cure (RR 3.07, 95% CI 2.08 to 4.53; 2 studies, 1655 participants) (both high‐quality evidence) and is probably more effective in achieving mycological cure (RR 2.31, 95% CI 1.08 to 4.94; 3 studies, 1716 participants; moderate‐quality evidence). Risk of adverse events (such as dermatitis and vesicles) was slightly higher with efinaconazole (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.20; 3 studies, 1701 participants; high‐quality evidence). No other key comparison measured clinical cure. Based on two studies, compared with vehicle, tavaborole 5% solution is probably more effective in achieving complete cure (RR 7.40, 95% CI 2.71 to 20.24; 1198 participants), but probably has a higher risk of adverse events (application site reactions were most commonly reported) (RR 3.82, 95% CI 1.65 to 8.85; 1186 participants (both moderate‐quality evidence)). Tavaborole improves mycological cure (RR 3.40, 95% CI 2.34 to 4.93; 1198 participants; high‐quality evidence). Moderate‐quality evidence from two studies (490 participants) indicates that P‐3051 (ciclopirox 8% hydrolacquer) is probably more effective than the comparators ciclopirox 8% lacquer or amorolfine 5% in achieving complete cure (RR 2.43, 95% CI 1.32 to 4.48), but there is probably little or no difference between the treatments in achieving mycological cure (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.37). We found no difference in the risk of adverse events (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.92; 2 studies, 487 participants; low‐quality evidence). The most common events were erythema, rash, and burning. Three studies (112 participants) compared 1064‐nm Nd:YAG laser to no treatment or sham treatment. We are uncertain if there is a difference in adverse events (very low‐quality evidence) (two studies; 85 participants). There may be little or no difference in mycological cure at 52 weeks (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.85; 2 studies, 85 participants; low‐quality evidence). Complete cure was not measured. One study (293 participants) compared luliconazole 5% solution to vehicle. We are uncertain whether luliconazole leads to higher rates of complete cure (very low‐quality evidence). Low‐quality evidence i -Abstract Truncated-

The Recent Efficacy of Amorolfine in Treatment of Onychomycosis

Terbinafine versus itraconazole for treatment of dermatophyte onychomycosis: a meta-analysis

Efficacy of Amorolfine in Onychomycosis Treatment: A Mixed‐Effects Models and Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis

Combination Therapy for Onychomycosis Using a Fractional 2940-Nm Er:YAG Laser and 5 % Amorolfine Lacquer.

In Vitro Testing of Amorolfine in Combination with Terbinafine and Itraconazone Against Fungal Isolates in Onychomycosis

Activity of amorolfine or ciclopirox in combination with terbinafine against pathogenic fungi in onychomycosis—Results of an in vitro investigation

Sporicidal effect of amorolfine and other antimycotics used in the therapy of fungal nail infections

In Vitro Susceptibility Testing of Amorolfine in Pathogenic Fungi Isolated from Dermatomycosis Patients in China

Efficacy and Safety of Amorolfine Lotion 0.25% w/v Compared to Amorolfine Cream 0.25% w/w in Patients With Superficial Fungal Infections of the Skin: A Multi-center, Randomized, Open-Label, Active-Controlled, Non-inferiority Phase III Clinical Trial

Progess of topical antifungal agents for the treatment of onychomycosis

Daily Application of an Aqueous, Acidifying, Peelable Nail Polish versus Weekly Amorolfine for Topical Onychomycosis Treatment: A Prospective, Randomized, Blinded Trial

Comparative Study of Traditional Ablative CO2 Laser-Assisted Topical Antifungal with only Topical Antifungal for Treating Onychomycosis: A Multicenter Study

Meta-analysis on Efficacy and Safety of Terbinafine and Itraconazole in Treatment of Onychomycosis

Topical and device-based treatments for fungal infections of the toenails.

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF EFFICACY OF ORAL TERBINAFINE ALONE AND ORAL TERBINAFINE WITH TOPICAL 8% CICLOPIROX OLAMINE IN ONYCHOMYCOSIS

Randomized, Investigator-Masked, Controlled, Multicenter Clinical Trial of 0.25% Amorolfine Hydrochloride Cream in the Treatment of Tinea Corporis and Cruris and Tinea Pedis

Combined fractional CO2 laser with topical tioconazole versus Q-switched Nd-YAG laser in the treatment of onychomycosis; a randomized comparative trial

Effects of additional oral fosravuconazole l‐lysine ethanolate therapy following inadequate response to initial treatment for onychomycosis: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial

Antifungal Selection for the Treatment of Onychomycosis: Patient Considerations and Outcomes

In vitro antifungal oral drug and drug-combination activity against onychomycosis causative dermatophytes

Oral terbinafine in the treatment of toenail onychomycosis: North American multicenter trial