-
Cureus Dec 2023Keloids, benign fibrous growths resulting from atypical skin responses to injuries, present a complex challenge in dermatology. These lesions, characterized by excessive... (Review)
Review
Keloids, benign fibrous growths resulting from atypical skin responses to injuries, present a complex challenge in dermatology. These lesions, characterized by excessive collagen production, often lead to physical discomfort and psychological distress. While various treatment methods exist, the lack of a universally effective modality underscores the need for a systematic evaluation of current approaches. This systematic review aims to comprehensively analyze the current available treatment modalities used for the management of keloids in the pediatric population in terms of their effectiveness, safety, and quality of life outcomes. The review adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed and Google Scholar databases to identify relevant studies published in English. The review specifically focused on randomized controlled trials involving patients under 18 diagnosed with keloids, assessing different treatment modalities, and reporting validated measures of treatment efficacy, safety outcomes, and quality of life. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's Risk of Bias Tool for randomized studies to ensure the methodological quality of the included trials. Four studies met the inclusion criteria, collectively involving 196 pediatric patients. Treatment interventions included glucocorticosteroid and fusidic acid cream with silicone gel patches, botulinum toxin type A injections, and Scarban silicone gel sheets. Patient-reported outcomes exhibited varying degrees of improvement in scar size, vascularity, and pliability. Complications, such as rash and wound infection, were reported in some cases. Based on our review of the selected studies and due to the incompletely understood pathogenesis of keloids, there is an ongoing lack of universally effective treatment modality for the management of keloids resulting in their persistently high recurrence rate.
PubMed: 38205454
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.50290 -
Burns & Trauma 2024Laser therapy has emerged to play a valuable role in the treatment of paediatric burn scars; however, there is heterogeneity in the literature, particularly concerning...
BACKGROUND
Laser therapy has emerged to play a valuable role in the treatment of paediatric burn scars; however, there is heterogeneity in the literature, particularly concerning optimal timing for initiation of laser therapy. This study aims to investigate the effect of factors such as scar age, type of laser and laser treatment interval on burn scar outcomes in children by meta-analysis of previous studies.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted across seven databases in May 2022 to understand the effects of laser therapy on burn scar outcomes in paediatric patients by metanalysis of standardized mean difference (SMD) between pre- and post-laser intervention. Meta-analyses were performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 4.0. Fixed models were selected when there was no significant heterogeneity, and the random effects model was selected for analysis when significant heterogeneity was identified. For all analyses, a -value < 0.05 was considered significant.
RESULTS
Seven studies were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 467 patients. Laser therapy significantly improved Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS)/Total Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (Total POSAS), vascularity, pliability, pigmentation and scar height of burn scars. Significant heterogeneity was found between the studies and thus subgroup analyses were performed. Early laser therapy (<12 months post-injury) significantly improved VSS/POSAS scores compared to latent therapy (>12 months post-injury) {SMD -1.97 [95% confidence interval (CI) = -3.08; -0.87], < 0.001 -0.59 [95%CI = -1.10; -0.07], = 0.03} as well as vascularity {SMD -3.95 [95%CI = -4.38; -3.53], < 0.001 -0.48 [95%CI = -0.66; -0.30], < 0.001}. Non-ablative laser was most effective, significantly reducing VSS/POSAS, vascularity, pliability and scar height outcomes compared to ablative, pulse dye laser and a combination of ablative and pulse dye laser. Shorter treatment intervals of <4 weeks significantly reduced VSS/POSAS and scar height outcomes compared to intervals of 4 to 6 weeks.
CONCLUSIONS
Efficacy of laser therapy in the paediatric population is influenced by scar age, type of laser and interval between laser therapy application. The result of this study particularly challenges the currently accepted initiation time for laser treatment. Significant heterogeneity was observed within the studies, which suggests the need to explore other confounding factors influencing burn scar outcomes after laser therapy.
PubMed: 38312741
DOI: 10.1093/burnst/tkad046 -
PloS One 2023The study aims to identify whether factors such as time to initiation of laser therapy following scar formation, type of laser used, laser treatment interval and...
AIM
The study aims to identify whether factors such as time to initiation of laser therapy following scar formation, type of laser used, laser treatment interval and presence of complications influence burn scar outcomes in adults, by meta-analysis of previous studies.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted in May 2022 in seven databases to select studies on the effects of laser therapy in adult hypertrophic burn scars. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022347836).
RESULTS
Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 491 patients. Laser therapy significantly improved overall VSS/POSAS, vascularity, pliability, pigmentation and scar height of burn scars. Vascularity improvement was greater when laser therapy was performed >12 months (-1.50 [95%CI = -2.58;-0.42], p = 0.01) compared to <12 months after injury (-0.39 [95%CI = -0.68; -0.10], p = 0.01), the same was true for scar height ((-1.36 [95%CI = -2.07; -0.66], p<0.001) vs (-0.56 [95%CI = -0.70; -0.42], p<0.001)). Pulse dye laser (-4.35 [95%CI = -6.83; -1.86], p<0.001) gave a greater reduction in VSS/POSAS scores compared to non-ablative (-1.52 [95%CI = -2.24; -0.83], p<0.001) and ablative lasers (-0.95 [95%CI = -1.31; -0.59], p<0.001).
CONCLUSION
Efficacy of laser therapy is influenced by the time lapse after injury, the type of laser used and the interval between laser treatments. Significant heterogeneity was observed among studies, suggesting the need to explore other factors that may affect scar outcomes.
PubMed: 37756273
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0292097