This information is not medical advice and is not a substitute for diagnosis or treatment by a physician.Data sources and disclaimers (data limitations, copyright, etc.)The analysis on "Effective treatment of scars: A Synthesis of Findings from 65 Studies" on this page is based on PubMed data provided by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM). However, NLM does not endorse or verify these analyses.

This analysis is based on research papers included in PubMed, but medical research is constantly evolving and may not fully reflect the latest findings. There may also be biases towards certain research areas.

This information is not medical advice and is not a substitute for diagnosis or treatment by a physician. If you have concerns about "Effective treatment of scars: A Synthesis of Findings from 65 Studies", please consult your doctor.

For NLM copyright information, please see Link to NLM Copyright Page
PubMed data is obtained via Hugging Face Datasets: Link to Dataset
Please check the disclaimer.
This page's analysis is based on PubMed data provided by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM).
Original Abstract of the Article

Major research findings

Several studies have been conducted to explore effective treatments for different types of scars. For instance, 35 investigated the effects of fractional CO2 laser treatment on cesarean section scars, demonstrating improvement in scar appearance after 6 months. Additionally, 33 compared the effectiveness of nonablative fractional erbium laser 1,340 nm and microneedling for treating atrophic acne scars, finding both treatments to be effective.

compared intralesional verapamil and intralesional corticosteroids for keloids and hypertrophic scars, concluding that corticosteroids were more effective. Furthermore, 37 reported the effectiveness of skin distractors in scar treatment, particularly for extremities, with a pull speed of 2 mm/d showing better results.

57 highlighted the effectiveness of silicone gel sheeting for treating hypertrophic scars, and 28 added that silicone gel sheeting can be useful for both preventing and treating hypertrophic scars and keloids.

56 suggested the use of corticosteroids alone or in combination with botulinum toxin type A for treating keloids and hypertrophic scars. Additionally, 26 compared the effectiveness of non-ablative 1550-nm fractional Er: glass laser and ablative 2940-nm fractional Er: YAG laser for thyroidectomy scar prevention, finding both effective in improving scar appearance.

38 compared microneedling and autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for treating atrophic scars, concluding that a combination of both treatments was most effective. Furthermore, 62 compared the effectiveness of PRP in liquid or gel form combined with fractional CO2 laser for treating atrophic acne scars, demonstrating that PRP gel showed better results.

Treatment summary

Treatments for scars include laser therapy, microneedling, silicone gel sheeting, intralesional corticosteroids, and PRP. Each treatment utilizes a different mechanism to improve scar appearance. Laser therapy aims to improve scars by using heat to destroy scar tissue and promote new tissue growth. Microneedling involves creating tiny punctures in the skin to stimulate collagen production and enhance scar appearance. Silicone gel sheeting applies pressure to the scar, reducing collagen production and improving scar appearance. Intralesional corticosteroids aim to improve scars by reducing inflammation and inhibiting collagen production. PRP is rich in growth factors that promote scar healing and can contribute to scar improvement.

Benefits and Risks

Benefit summary

Scar treatment can offer numerous benefits, including improved scar appearance and function, pain and itch relief, and reduced psychological distress. Additionally, treatments can help prevent scar recurrence.

Risk summary

Scar treatment involves certain risks, including pain, swelling, redness, pigmentation changes, infection, and potential worsening of the scar.

Comparison of studies

Commonalities between studies

Many studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of treatments like laser therapy, microneedling, silicone gel sheeting, and intralesional corticosteroids in improving scar appearance.

Differences between studies

Studies vary in terms of scar type, treatment methods, evaluation techniques, and results. This can make direct comparison of results challenging.

Consistency and Contradictions in Results

Although many studies have been conducted on scar treatment, consistent results across all studies are not always observed. Some studies highlight the effectiveness of specific treatments, while others find the same treatments less effective. This can be attributed to differences in the types of scars studied, treatment methods, evaluation techniques, and individual responses to treatment.

Points to note about applying research findings to real-life situations

The most effective treatment for scars depends on the specific type of scar and the individual's condition. It's essential to consult a doctor before beginning any treatment to ensure the most appropriate approach is chosen.

Limitations of Current Research

Despite extensive research on scar treatment, certain aspects remain unclear, necessitating further research. This includes exploring effective methods to prevent scar recurrence, as well as developing novel treatments.

Future Research Directions

Future research should focus on standardizing scar types, treatment methods, evaluation techniques, and outcomes to ensure more accurate and comparable results. Studies investigating long-term effects and side effects are also crucial.

Conclusion

The choice of treatment for scars depends on the individual scar type and the patient's condition. Consulting a doctor is essential to select the most effective treatment. Continuous research in scar treatment is ongoing, and the development of safer and more effective therapies is anticipated.

List of treatments

Laser therapy, microneedling, silicone gel sheeting, intralesional corticosteroids, PRP, skin distractor, UVA light exposure, dry tattooing, 5-fluorouracil, verapamil, tazarotene gel


Keywords
Benefit Keywords
Risk Keywords
Literature analysis of 65 papers
Positive Content
61
Neutral Content
4
Negative Content
0
Article Type
50
11
10
10
65

Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : Hungarian


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : Chinese


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Author: Vijaya LakshmiYenugandula, Swetha ReddyLingaladinne, Naga Neelima DeviKolli, Phani KumarKuchimanchi, Guru KarthikGandikota, Srinivas ChakravarthyPandi, Nageswar RaoKondrakunta


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


Language : English


This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.