-
Journal of Alternative and... Oct 2020The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to describe the status on the effects of physical scar treatments on pain, pigmentation, pliability, pruritus,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to describe the status on the effects of physical scar treatments on pain, pigmentation, pliability, pruritus, scar thickening, and surface area. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Adults with any kind of scar tissue. Physical scar management versus control or no scar management. Pain, pigmentation, pliability, pruritus, surface area, scar thickness. The overall results revealed that physical scar management is beneficial compared with the control treatment regarding the management of pain ( = 0.012), pruritus ( < 0.001), pigmentation ( = 0.010), pliability ( < 0.001), surface area ( < 0.001), and thickness ( = 0.022) of scar tissue in adults. The observed risk of bias was high for blinding of participants and personnel (47%) and low for other bias (100%). Physical scar management demonstrates moderate-to-strong effects on improvement of scar issues as related to signs and symptoms. These results show the importance of specific physical management of scar tissue.
Topics: Cicatrix; Female; Humans; Male; Pigmentation Disorders; Postoperative Complications; Pruritus; Wound Healing
PubMed: 32589450
DOI: 10.1089/acm.2020.0109 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Nov 2019People with multiple sclerosis (MS) often experience limitations in joint range of motion, which is linked to spasticity and continued inactivity. Low flexibility... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
People with multiple sclerosis (MS) often experience limitations in joint range of motion, which is linked to spasticity and continued inactivity. Low flexibility levels in this population have been linked to postural problems and muscular pain. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and a meta-analysis aimed at identifying the characteristics and methodological quality of investigations studying the effects of exercise interventions on the flexibility levels of people with MS. Three electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Scopus) were systematically searched up to May 2019 for intervention studies focused on the effects of exercise on the flexibility levels of people with MS. A meta-analysis, including randomized controlled trials (RCT), which reported information regarding the effects of exercise on flexibility, was also conducted. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and the Quality Assessment Tool for Before-After Studies, with no control group. The quality of the information reported, regarding the programs conducted, was assessed by means of the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) scale. Seven studies, four RCTs and three uncontrolled investigations were finally selected. The methodological quality of the RCTs was considered "poor" in one study, and "good" and "excellent" in two studies and one investigation, respectively. The three uncontrolled studies showed a methodological quality between "fair" and "poor". Following the CERT scale, four studies were graded as "high" and three as "low". Findings from the meta-analysis indicated no significant effects on hamstring flexibility, or the range of motion in the hips, knees or ankles. There is preliminary evidence from individual studies which indicates that people with MS can improve their lower limb flexibility following participation in physical exercise programs, but the meta-analysis did not confirm these findings.
Topics: Exercise Therapy; Humans; Multiple Sclerosis; Pliability; Range of Motion, Articular
PubMed: 31684026
DOI: 10.3390/medicina55110726 -
Journal of Voice : Official Journal of... Dec 2023Vocal fold fat injection is a technique for treating glottic insufficiency (GI) resulting from various conditions. The use of fat as a graft has several advantages over... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
Vocal fold fat injection is a technique for treating glottic insufficiency (GI) resulting from various conditions. The use of fat as a graft has several advantages over other grafts. Similar pliability, and vibratory characteristics as a normal vocal fold, not causing foreign body reactions, having the potential to contain stem cells, and often can be done in the office. Long-term results, however, are unpredictable. The objective of this study is to carry out a systematic review of published articles using the technique of fat injection in the vocal folds.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review.
REVIEW METHODS
A literature search was conducted utilizing the combination of the following keywords "vocal folds fat injection," "laryngoplasty," and "autologous fat injection vocal folds." The criteria inclusion of the study for the systematic review were based on PICOTS (population, intervention, comparison outcome, timing, and setting) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statements. Outcomes reviewed included technique, study duration, perceptual and acoustic analysis, and quality of life preoperation and 1-year postoperation.
RESULTS
A systematic review on PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases included 13 studies analyzing the data of 472 patients, that had fat injection laryngoplasty for treatment of GI. The causes of GI varied substantially across studies. Considerable heterogeneity across studies was found, including technique for harvest, processing the fat, site of injection, and acoustic analysis. In the studies that measured maximum phonation time (MPT) there was a significant improvement in a follow-up of at least 1 year after the injection. The patient's perception of vocal quality, measured by the Voice Handicap Index, also showed significant improvement in several studies after fat injection laryngoplasty.
CONCLUSION
Fat injection laryngoplasty seems to be safe and effective for GI for at least 12 months. Multiple studies show favorable outcomes, but the lack of control groups, the heterogeneity in inclusion criteria, nonstandardized techniques, and objective voice evaluations limit this evaluation.
PubMed: 38142186
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2023.09.029 -
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Oct 2023At present, there are many kinds of hypertrophic scar treatment methods, among which pressure therapy and silicone therapy are very common and standard therapies, but... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Efficacy and Safety of Pressure Therapy Alone and in Combination with Silicone in Prevention of Hypertrophic Scars: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
BACKGROUND
At present, there are many kinds of hypertrophic scar treatment methods, among which pressure therapy and silicone therapy are very common and standard therapies, but whether they are used alone or in combination is still controversial. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review was to compare the efficacy and safety of the combination of pressure therapy and silicone therapy (PTS) with pressure therapy alone (PT) in the treatment of hypertrophic scars to provide clinicians with information so that they can make better decisions.
METHODS
Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were collected by searching PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases to assess scar scores (The Vancouver Scar Scale, VSS; Visual Analog Scale, VAS) and adverse effects.
RESULTS
We screened 1270 articles and included 6 RCTs including 228 patients. We found that height (MD = 0.15, 95%CI 0.10-0.21, p < 0.01) and pliability (MD = 0.35, 95%CI 0.25-0.46, p <0.01) had a significant difference, these two measures showed that the PTS group was superior to the PT group. Results in other aspects, such as VSS, vascularity, pigmentation, VAS, and adverse effects were similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
There was no significant difference between PTS and PT in the overall treatment efficacy of hypertrophic scars with similar VSS and adverse effects, but PTS might have potential benefits for height and pliability. Additional studies with larger sample size and sound methodological quality are needed to confirm our conclusions. Level of Evidence IV This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Topics: Humans; Cicatrix, Hypertrophic; Silicones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37648929
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-023-03591-w -
Burns : Journal of the International... Aug 2021Triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) is widely used for hypertrophic scars and keloids; however, TAC has variable efficacy and safety in different individuals. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) is widely used for hypertrophic scars and keloids; however, TAC has variable efficacy and safety in different individuals.
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intralesional TAC for treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids.
DATA SOURCES
Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov prior to 25 March 2020.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials in English that compared TAC with a placebo or other medications that are commonly used for intralesional injection in hypertrophic scars and keloids.
DATA EXTRACTION
Primary outcomes were reduction in scar height, vascularity, pliability, pigmentation, total scores on the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) or patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS), telangiectasia, and skin atrophy. Secondary outcomes included overall scar improvement.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Fifteen trials met the inclusion criteria. In the short term, TAC was associated with a significant improvement in vascularity (MD: -0.22, 95% CI: -0.42 to -0.02) and pliability (MD: -0.25, 95% CI: -0.44 to -0.06) compared to verapamil. In the medium term, compared to TAC, 5-FU showed a significant improvement in scar height (SMD: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.15-1.75), while TAC led to a significant improvement in vascularity compared to 5-FU (MD: -0.45, 95% CI: -0.76 to -0.14). Compared to TAC, TAC+5-FU showed a significant improvement in pliability (SMD: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.17-1.78) and pigmentation (MD: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.12-0.78). Botulinum toxin type A resulted in significantly better pliability (SMD: 1.99, 95% CI: 0.98-3.00) compared to TAC. In the long term, compared to TAC, 5-FU led to a significant improvement in scar height (MD: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.17-0.93), but significantly less vascularity (MD: -0.35, 95% CI: -0.65 to -0.05). Compared to TAC, TAC+5-FU produced a significant improvement in scar height (MD: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.12-1.88), pliability (MD: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.10-0.80), and pigmentation (MD: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.24-0.86).
CONCLUSION
TAC may be beneficial for the short-term treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids; however, 5-FU, 5-FU+TAC, and verapamil may produce superior results for medium- and long-term treatments. TAC injections at concentrations of 20 mg/ml or 40 mg/ml are more likely to result in skin atrophy compared to 5-FU or verapamil, and are more likely to cause telangiectasia than 5-FU, 5-FU+TAC, or bleomycin.
Topics: Atrophy; Burns; Cicatrix, Hypertrophic; Culture Media; Fluorouracil; Humans; Injections, Intralesional; Keloid; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Telangiectasis; Treatment Outcome; Triamcinolone Acetonide; Verapamil
PubMed: 33814214
DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2021.02.013 -
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Feb 2023Keloids and hypertrophic scars can affect the appearance and normal function of patients, and may severely affect patients' physical and mental health. Many methods have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Keloids and hypertrophic scars can affect the appearance and normal function of patients, and may severely affect patients' physical and mental health. Many methods have been used for the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars, there is no standardized method so far. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of verapamil and triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) in treating keloids and hypertrophic scars.
METHODS
All studies from their inception date up to August 2022 were searched using four databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE). The weighted mean differences and the risk ratio were calculated for comparing continuous variables and dichotomous variables, respectively.
RESULTS
A total of nine randomized controlled trials involving 567 patients were identified. This meta-analysis indicated that TAC group showed significantly better effects compared with verapamil group in the reduction of height at 3 and 9 weeks, pliability at 3, 9, and 18 weeks, vascularity at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 weeks, whereas verapamil group showed significantly better effects compared with TAC group in the reduction of pliability at 21 and 24 weeks. Verapamil group showed a significantly lower incidence of skin atrophy, telangiectasia, and hypopigmentation compared with TAC group. However, the incidence of burning sensation in verapamil group was higher than that in TAC group.
CONCLUSION
Concerning the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars, TAC was more effective than verapamil for improving vascularity; TAC was superior to verapamil in improving height within 9 weeks of treatment; TAC produced superior result for improving pliability within 18 weeks of treatment, whereas verapamil produced superior result between 18 and 24 weeks of treatment. Verapamil had fewer adverse events than TAC and can be used as a safer alternative for the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Topics: Humans; Triamcinolone Acetonide; Cicatrix, Hypertrophic; Keloid; Verapamil; Injections, Intralesional; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36562775
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-022-03229-3 -
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery May 2024Laser therapy has emerged as a promising treatment modality for improving the appearance and symptoms associated with hypertrophic and keloid scars. In this network... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Laser therapy has emerged as a promising treatment modality for improving the appearance and symptoms associated with hypertrophic and keloid scars. In this network meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of different laser types in treating hypertrophic and keloid scars.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of four databases was conducted to identify relevant studies published up until July 2023. Data were extracted from eligible studies and pooled as mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data in a network meta-analysis (NMA) model, using R software.
RESULTS
A total of 18 studies, comprising 550 patients, were included in the analysis. Pooling our data showed that fractional carbon dioxide (FCO2) plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) was superior to control in terms of Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), pliability score, and thickness; [MD = - 5.97; 95% CI (- 7.30; - 4.65)], [MD = - 2.68; 95% CI (- 4.03; - 1.33)], [MD = - 2.22; 95% CI (- 3.13; - 1.31)], respectively. However, insignificant difference was observed among FCO2 plus 5-FU compared to control group in terms of erythema, vascularity, redness and perfusion, and pigmentation [MD = - 0.71; 95% CI (- 2.72; 1.30)], [MD = - 0.44; 95% CI (- 1.26; 0.38)], respectively.
CONCLUSION
Our NMA found that the FCO2 plus 5-FU was the most effective intervention in decreasing the VSS and thickness, while FCO2 plus CO2 was the most effective intervention in decreasing the pliability score. Further research is needed to determine the optimal laser parameters and long-term efficacy of laser therapy in hypertrophic and keloid scars.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these evidence-based medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
PubMed: 38760539
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-024-04027-9 -
Lasers in Medical Science Mar 2022Various clinical trials have explored whether the pulsed dye laser (PDL) method is safe to treat scars, especially surgical scars. However, comprehensive evidence... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Various clinical trials have explored whether the pulsed dye laser (PDL) method is safe to treat scars, especially surgical scars. However, comprehensive evidence confirming the exact outcomes of PDL for treating surgical scars is lacking. The efficacy and safety of PDL in the treatment of surgical scars were determined through a review of several studies. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched, and the main clinical outcomes were Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores in terms of pigmentation, vascularity, pliability, and height. Review Manager 5.4 software was used for statistical analyses of the data; we chose a standardized mean difference (SMZ) to present the results with 95% confidence interval (CI). Overall, seven randomized controlled trials were used for this meta-analysis, all of these papers used 585 nm or 595 nm PDL with 7 mm or 10 mm spot size and a fluence of 3.5 to 10 J/cm for treating surgical scars; besides, the pulse duration ranged from 450 μs to 10 ms. We found that PDL significantly resulted in decreased VSS scores (P = 0.02) in four aspects: pigmentation (P = 0.0002), vascularity (P < 0.00001), pliability (P = 0.0002), and height (P = 0.0002). Moreover, scar improvement was similar when using 585 nm and 595 nm PDL in terms of pigmentation (P = 0.76), vascularity (P = 0.34), pliability (P = 0.64), and height (P = 0.57). Furthermore, our review indicated that PDL has no obvious adverse effects for most people, except transitory erythema and purpura. The meta-analysis showed that both 585 nm and 595 nm PDL therapy can effectively reduce the VSS score, suggesting that PDL can be a safe and effective method for the treatment of surgical scars.
Topics: Cicatrix; Erythema; Humans; Lasers, Dye; Low-Level Light Therapy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34351564
DOI: 10.1007/s10103-021-03385-z -
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 -
Dermatologic Therapy Jul 2020The treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars remains a challenge. Although triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) is one of the most common and effective treatments for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars remains a challenge. Although triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) is one of the most common and effective treatments for keloids and hypertrophic scars, TAC is not effective in some patients, and some may even experience adverse outcomes. Verapamil might be considered a safe alternative to TAC. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of verapamil and TAC for the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars. Three databases (Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL database) were electronically searched from 1997 to December 2019. Article selection was limited to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs). Two authors independently assessed the selection of studies, risk of bias, and extracted the data. Mean differences (MDs) were computed for continuous variables, risk ratios (RRs) were computed for dichotomous variables, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for both assessments. Five RCTs were included, comprising a total of 215 patients (273 scars). Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) parameters (such as height, vascularity, pliability, and pigmentation) were reported as the outcome measures and provided detailed values in four studies. No significant differences were observed between verapamil and TAC in the reduction of height (MD 0.57, 95% CI -0.94 to 2.08, P = .46), vascularity (MD 0.30, 95% CI -0.42 to 1.02, P = .41), pliability (MD 0.67, 95% CI -1.12 to 2.47, P = .46), and degree of pigmentation (MD 0.14, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.69, P = .61). Adverse outcomes were reported in four studies. The results showed that the incidence of telangiectasia and skin atrophy that used verapamil was significantly lower than that for TAC. Concerning the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars, even though verapamil was safer than TAC, TAC worked faster than verapamil. Furthermore, we did not find any clear evidence that verapamil was more or less effective than TAC. Considering the high degree of safety of verapamil, we suggest that verapamil might be used as an alternative treatment when TAC results in adverse outcomes.
Topics: Cicatrix, Hypertrophic; Humans; Injections, Intralesional; Keloid; Triamcinolone Acetonide; Verapamil
PubMed: 32400925
DOI: 10.1111/dth.13564