-
Frontiers in Medicine 2016Keloid is a cutaneous dermal outgrowth resulting from uncontrolled deposition of collagen and glycosaminoglycan around the wound. The uncontrolled and persistent growth...
Keloid is a cutaneous dermal outgrowth resulting from uncontrolled deposition of collagen and glycosaminoglycan around the wound. The uncontrolled and persistent growth of keloids scar will result in cosmetic disfigurement, functional impairment, and affect the quality of life. Triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) is traditionally employed in treating keloid scars. In this study, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of TAC and compare it with other common therapy employed in keloid treatment. Only randomized controlled trial (RCT) and controlled trial were included. Inverse variance risk ratio, weighted mean difference, and corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated to evaluate the effect of intervention. Meta-analysis indicated that TAC treatment significantly reduced the size of keloid compared to untreated control. Reduction in size was statistically different in favor of TAC compared to silicone gel sheet. Significant difference in favor of TAC was observed compared with verapamil in term of vascularity and scar pliability. TAC treatment was more effective in reducing scar thickness in comparison with cryotherapy. However, the current meta-analysis has several limitations. Only a limited number of trials with the same comparison are available. Most trials recruited a small number of patients and used inconsistent outcome assessment. Most trials did not provide detail information on allocation concealment and blinding. Therefore, further evaluation in multi-center RCTs with consistent comparisons and outcome measurements are warrant to reach a consensus on the selection between TAC and different treatment modalities.
PubMed: 28083534
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2016.00071 -
Burns & Trauma 2016Problematic scarring remains a challenging aspect to address in the treatment of burns and can significantly affect the quality of life of the burn survivor. At present,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Problematic scarring remains a challenging aspect to address in the treatment of burns and can significantly affect the quality of life of the burn survivor. At present, there are few treatments available in the clinic to control adverse scarring, but experimental pharmacological anti-scarring strategies are now beginning to emerge. Their comparative success must be based on objective measurements of scarring, yet currently the clinical assessment of scars is not carried out systematically and is mostly based on subjective review of patients. However, several techniques and devices are being introduced that allow objective analysis of the burn scar. The aim of this article is to evaluate various objective measurement tools currently available and recommend a useful panel that is suitable for use in clinical trials of anti-scarring therapies.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was done using the Web of Science, PubMed and Cochrane databases. The identified devices were then classified and grouped according to the parameters they measured. The tools were then compared and assessed in terms of inter- and intra-rater reproducibility, ease of use and cost.
RESULTS
After duplicates were removed, 5062 articles were obtained in the search. After further screening, 157 articles which utilised objective burn scar measurement systems or tools were obtained. The scar measurement devices can be broadly classified into those measuring colour, metric variables, texture, biomechanical properties and pathophysiological disturbances.
CONCLUSIONS
Objective scar measurement tools allow the accurate and reproducible evaluation of scars, which is important for both clinical and scientific use. However, studies to evaluate their relative performance and merits of these tools are scarce, and there remain factors, such as itch and pain, which cannot be measured objectively. On reviewing the available evidence, a panel of devices for objective scar measurement is recommended consisting of the 3D cameras (Eykona/Lifeviz/Vectra H1) for surface area and volume, DSM II colorimeter for colour, Dermascan high-frequency ultrasound for scar thickness and Cutometer for skin elasticity and pliability.
PubMed: 27574684
DOI: 10.1186/s41038-016-0036-x -
International Wound Journal Jun 2016Growth factor (GF) therapy has shown promise in treating a variety of refractory wounds. However, evidence supporting its routine use in burn injury remains uncertain.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Growth factor (GF) therapy has shown promise in treating a variety of refractory wounds. However, evidence supporting its routine use in burn injury remains uncertain. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis assessing randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate efficacy and safety of GFs in the management of partial-thickness burns. Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed and the Cochrane databases. Endpoint results analysed included wound healing and scar formation. Thirteen studies comprising a total of 1924 participants with 2130 wounds (1131 GF receiving patients versus 999 controls) were identified and included, evaluating the effect of fibroblast growth factor (FGF), epidermal growth factor (EGF) and granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) on partial-thickness burns. Topical application of these agents significantly reduced healing time by 5·02 (95% confidence interval, 2·62 to 7·42), 3·12 (95% CI, 1·11 to 5·13) and 5·1 (95% CI, 4·02 to 6·18) days, respectively, compared with standard wound care alone. In addition, scar improvement following therapy with FGF and EGF was evident in terms of pigmentation, pliability, height and vascularity. No significant increase in adverse events was observed in patients receiving GFs. These results suggested that GF therapy could be an effective and safe add-on to standard wound care for partial-thickness burns. High-quality, adequately powered trials are needed to further confirm the conclusion.
Topics: Burns; Cicatrix; Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor; Humans; Intercellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins; Wound Healing
PubMed: 25040572
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.12313