Dataset Information

Hypertrophic Scar Outcomes in Fractional Laser Monotherapy Versus Fractional Laser-Assisted Topical Corticosteroid Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Topical corticosteroid delivery following fractional laser treatment is an effective means of treating hypertrophic scars. However, the relative efficacy of adjuvant corticosteroid treatment vs fractional laser mono-therapy alone is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of fractional laser-assisted topical corticosteroid delivery with fractional laser monotherapy in the treatment of hyper-trophic scars. In this randomized, comparative, split-scar trial of 19 subjects, a borderline significant reduction in scar thickness was observed at 3-month follow-up in the laser+steroid group compared with laser+petrolatum (p = 0.049). However, no significant long-term difference in scar flattening was observed between the 2 groups. Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale scores showed significant improvement in scar appearance from baseline without significant differences between treatment groups. In conclusion, fractional laser monotherapy is an effective treatment for hypertrophic scars, and the application of topical corticosteroid provides no long-term synergistic effect to fractional laser monotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Manuskiatti W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9366502 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hypertrophic Scar Outcomes in Fractional Laser Monotherapy Versus Fractional Laser-Assisted Topical Corticosteroid Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Manuskiatti Woraphong W Kaewkes Arisa A Yan Chadakan C Ng Janice Natasha JN Glahn Joshua Zev JZ Wanitphakdeedecha Rungsima R

Acta dermato-venereologica 20210317 3

Topical corticosteroid delivery following fractional laser treatment is an effective means of treating hypertrophic scars. However, the relative efficacy of adjuvant corticosteroid treatment vs fractional laser mono-therapy alone is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of fractional laser-assisted topical corticosteroid delivery with fractional laser monotherapy in the treatment of hyper-trophic scars. In this randomized, comparative, split-scar trial of 19 subje ...[more]

PMID: 33686446

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPoor sleep quality is associated with a decrease in quality of life in patients with major burn scars, combined with pruritus and pain. Few interventions have been reported to improve the sleep quality of patients with scars. In the current prospective cohort study, we investigated the efficacy of CO2-ablative fractional laser (AFL) surgery vs conventional surgery in post-burn patients with hypertrophic scars with sleep quality as the primary study outcome.MethodsIn total 68 consecutive patients undergoing scar surgical treatment were recruited, including a CO2-AFL surgery cohort (n = 35) and a conventional surgery cohort (n = 33). A subgroup from the AFL cohort was selected. Sleep quality, pain and pruritus were evaluated. Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to reveal the effect of CO2-AFL surgery.ResultsThe CO2-AFL surgery cohort had significantly lower Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) global scores than the conventional surgery cohort after the last surgical treatment. In the subgroup of patients receiving hardware sleep monitoring, CO2-AFL markedly increased deep sleep time, deep sleep efficiency and reduced initial sleep latency. Compared to the conventional surgery cohort, the CO2-AFL cohort presented significantly lower pain and pruritus scores. Correlation analysis showed pain and pruritus were significantly associated with PSQI scores, and there were also significant correlations between pain and pruritus scores. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that surgery method was negatively linearly correlated with visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, brief pain inventory (BPI) total, VAS pruritus score, 5-D itch scale total, four-item itch questionnaire (FIIQ) total and PSQI total.ConclusionsCO2-AFL surgery significantly improved sleep quality and reduced pain and pruritus of hypertrophic scar patients. The alleviation of sleep disorder was associated with improvement of deep sleep quality including deep sleep time and deep sleep deficiency.Trial registrationThe Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR200035268) approved retrospectively registration on 5 May 2020.

Project description:BackgroundIntralesional corticosteroid injection (ILCSI) has been proven to successfully treat hypertrophic scars (HTSs) and keloids and attain remission in 50% of keloids. Pain is a significant problem with ILCSI, which can affect treatment compliance and effectiveness. To date, many techniques involving ILCSI have been described and used to achieve scar treatment while reducing side effects. The injection technique remains the most widely available method in many healthcare centres.ObjectiveThis scoping review explores strategies for alleviating pain while administering ILCSIs for hypertrophic scarring and keloid management. ILCSI is a second-line treatment for HTSs and a first-line treatment for keloids.Eligibility criteriaThis scoping review included studies where HTSs and keloids were treated with ILCSI and considered diverse demographics and injection methods. This review excludes other methods of corticosteroid drug delivery where injection is not involved and where the pain assessed is unrelated to injection or infiltration of the scar.Sources of evidenceThis review systematically searched critical databases from inception to December 2023, including ScienceDirect, PubMed and Web of Science, and handpicked articles traced from available review papers. Only English-language publications focused on pain management during ILCSIs for HTSs and keloids were included. All levels of scientific evidence were considered. An in-depth evaluation of the injection technique, type of analgesia or anaesthesia administered, effectiveness of pain management and overall treatment outcomes was conducted.Charting methodsCitations were compiled in an Excel spreadsheet, with three authors screening the titles and abstracts based on inclusion criteria. Decisions were finalised collaboratively, exclusions were documented and results were presented using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram.Results16 prospective studies, 2 retrospective studies, 1 case study and 15 journal articles were included. These studies examined ILCSI for hypertrophic scarring and keloid treatment. No differences in pain intensity between HTSs and keloids were reported. 11 studies systematically explored pain reduction methods such as topical analgesia, cryoanaesthesia, mixing triamcinolone acetonide with local analgesics, slow infiltration techniques, vibration analgesia and needle-free injectors.ConclusionPain can significantly impact patient compliance and treatment outcomes. This review offers a foundational reference for healthcare providers and researchers in the field of scar management, providing insights into current practices and highlighting areas for future research and development.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the relative efficacy of ranibizumab (RBZ) monotherapy or combined with laser (RBZ + Laser) versus laser monotherapy for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME).MethodsA comprehensive literature search using PUBMED, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RBZ or RBZ + Laser to laser monotherapy in patients with DME. Efficacy estimates were determined by comparing weighted mean differences (WMD) in the change of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) from baseline, and the risk ratios (RR) for the proportions of patients with at least 15 letters change from baseline. Safety analysis estimated the RR of cardiac disorders at 6 to 12 months in RBZ therapy vs. laser monotherapy. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.1 software.ResultsSeven RCTs were selected for this meta-analysis, including 1749 patients (394 patients in the RBZ group, 642 patients in the RBZ + Laser group, and 713 patients in the laser group). RBZ and RBZ + Laser were superior to laser monotherapy in the mean change of BCVA and CMT from baseline (WMD = 5.65, 95% confidence interval (CI), 4.44-6.87, P<0.00001; WMD = 5.02, 95% CI, 3.83-6.20, P<0.00001, and WMD = -57.91, 95% CI, -77.62 to -38.20, P<0.00001; WMD = -56.63, 95% CI, -104.81 to -8.44, P = 0.02, respectively). The pooled RR comparing the proportions of patients with at least 15 letters improvement or deterioration were also in favor of RBZ and RBZ + Laser (RR = 2.94, 95% CI, 1.82-4.77, P<0.00001; RR = 2.04, 95% CI, 1.50-2.78, P<0.00001, and RR = 0.21, 95% CI, 0.06-0.71, P = 0.01; RR = 0.52, 95% CI, 0.29-0.95, P = 0.03, respectively). There were no significant differences between RBZ and RBZ + Laser for any of the parameters. There were no difference in the safety profile between RBZ and laser.ConclusionRBZ and RBZ + Laser had better visual and anatomic outcomes than laser monotherapy in the treatment of DME. RBZ + Laser seemed to be equivalent to RBZ.

Dataset Information

Hypertrophic Scar Outcomes in Fractional Laser Monotherapy Versus Fractional Laser-Assisted Topical Corticosteroid Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Publications

Hypertrophic Scar Outcomes in Fractional Laser Monotherapy Versus Fractional Laser-Assisted Topical Corticosteroid Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets