The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Topical capsaicin—a novel and effective treatment for idiopathic intractable pruritus ani: a randomised, placebo controlled, crossover study
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: Pruritus ani is a common and embarrassing proctological condition which can be very difficult to treat. We report the results of a double blind placebo controlled study of treatment with capsaicin. Methods: Firstly, a pilot open study was carried out on five patients to establish which of two doses was the most acceptable by comparing effectiveness and side effects. Secondly, a double blind, placebo controlled, crossover study of topical capsaicin was performed. This study involved two four week treatment phases separated by a one week washout phase. Forty four patients were randomised to receive locally either active capsaicin (0.006%) or placebo (menthol 1%) ointment over a four week period (22 patients per group). After four weeks of treatment and a one week washout period, the placebo group began to receive capsaicin while the treated group received placebo (menthol 1%) for another four weeks. At the end of the controlled study, responders from both groups continued with capsaicin treatment in an open labelled manner. Results: Thirty one of 44 patients experienced relief during capsaicin treatment periods and did not respond to menthol; all patients not responding to capsaicin also failed on menthol (p<0.0001). In 13 patients, treatment with capsaicin was unsuccessful: eight patients did not respond to capsaicin treatment, one responded equally to capsaicin and placebo, and four others dropped out because of side effects. During the follow up period (mean 10.9 (SD 5.8) months), 29 “responders” needed a mean application of capsaicin every day (1.6 (SD 1.2); range 0.5–7 days) to remain symptom free (or nearly symptom free). Conclusion: Capsaicin is a new, safe, and highly effective treatment for severe intractable idiopathic pruritus ani.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Baenas, N., Belović, M., Ilic, N., Moreno, D. A., & García-Viguera, C. (2019) · Food Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.09.047 · Cited by 394
Transient receptor potential (TRP) channels: a clinical perspective
Kaneko, Y., & Szallasi, A. (2014) · British Journal of Pharmacology · doi:10.1111/bph.12414 · Cited by 370
Batiha, G. E.-S., Alqahtani, A., Ojo, O. A., Shaheen, H. M., Wasef, L., Elzeiny, M., Ismail, M., Shalaby, M., Murata, T., Zaragoza-Bastida, A., et al. (2020) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms21155179 · Cited by 259
Re, G., Barbero, R., Miolo, A., & Di Marzo, V. (2007) · The Veterinary Journal · doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2005.10.003 · Cited by 199
Metadata
- Authors
- Lysy, J., Sistiery-Ittah, M., Israelit, Y., Shmueli, A., Strauss-Liviatan, N., Mindrul, V, Keret, D., & Goldin, E.
- Venue
- Gut
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2003-08-11
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1323-1326
- ISSN
- 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-3288
- OpenAlex
- W2155222340
- Cited by
- 202
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Topical capsaicin—a novel and effective treatment for idiopathic intractable pruritus ani: a randomised, placebo controlled, crossover study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.52.9.1323
- The paper
- Lysy, J., Sistiery-Ittah, M., Israelit, Y., Shmueli, A., Strauss-Liviatan, N., Mindrul, V, Keret, D., & Goldin, E. (2003). Topical capsaicin—a novel and effective treatment for idiopathic intractable pruritus ani: a randomised, placebo controlled, crossover study. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.52.9.1323
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.