Evidence of invasive and noninvasive treatment modalities for hypertrophic scars: A systematic review

Mona Kafka, Vanessa Collins, Lars Peter Kamolz, Thomas Rappl, Ludwik Branski, Paul Wurzer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Currently, there are various therapeutic approaches to reduce hypertrophic scarring; however, there is no standard evidence-based treatment protocol. Hence, a systematic review was performed to obtain a summary of the latest clinical trials to evaluate evidence for the treatment of hypertrophic scars. The review protocol was registered and approved by PROSPERO (CRD42015027040). PubMed and Web of Science were searched using predefined MeSH-Terms to identify studies published within the last 10 years regarding treatment for hypertrophic scars. Exclusion criteria included a level of evidence (LoE) lower than I, nonhuman in vivo studies, in vitro studies, studies on keloids, literature reviews, and non-English articles. The literature search identified 1,029 unique articles, whereas 6 articles were prospective, randomized, blinded, controlled clinical trials with a LoE I, and were thus included in the systematic analysis. Three clinical trials evaluated silicone products and pressure garments, and the other three studies investigated the efficacy of intralesional injections of triamcinolone (TAC), 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) combined with TAC as well as the additional irradiation with a 585 nm pulsed-dye laser (PDL). Intralesional injections revealed significant improvements of the scar quality in terms of height, thickness, erythema, and pigmentation. Pressure garments showed favorable results but there was no evidence that silicone products were able to improve the scar quality. The systematic review demonstrated that there are just a few clinical trials with a LoE of I. Consequently, evidence is still lacking especially for noninvasive treatment regimens for hypertrophic scars. Intralesional injections of 5-FU mixed with a low dose of TAC can be seen as most appropriate treatment modality. Prospective clinical trials to determine the efficiency of silicone products are warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalWound Repair and Regeneration
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2017

Fingerprint

Hypertrophic Cicatrix
Intralesional Injections
Triamcinolone
Silicones
Clinical Trials
Cicatrix
Clothing
Fluorouracil
Dye Lasers
Therapeutics
Pressure
Keloid
Pigmentation
Erythema
Clinical Protocols
Quality Improvement
PubMed
Randomized Controlled Trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Dermatology

Cite this

Evidence of invasive and noninvasive treatment modalities for hypertrophic scars : A systematic review. / Kafka, Mona; Collins, Vanessa; Kamolz, Lars Peter; Rappl, Thomas; Branski, Ludwik; Wurzer, Paul.

In: Wound Repair and Regeneration, 2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a945ad80fcf24ade9c18e9b50de43c5e,
title = "Evidence of invasive and noninvasive treatment modalities for hypertrophic scars: A systematic review",
abstract = "Currently, there are various therapeutic approaches to reduce hypertrophic scarring; however, there is no standard evidence-based treatment protocol. Hence, a systematic review was performed to obtain a summary of the latest clinical trials to evaluate evidence for the treatment of hypertrophic scars. The review protocol was registered and approved by PROSPERO (CRD42015027040). PubMed and Web of Science were searched using predefined MeSH-Terms to identify studies published within the last 10 years regarding treatment for hypertrophic scars. Exclusion criteria included a level of evidence (LoE) lower than I, nonhuman in vivo studies, in vitro studies, studies on keloids, literature reviews, and non-English articles. The literature search identified 1,029 unique articles, whereas 6 articles were prospective, randomized, blinded, controlled clinical trials with a LoE I, and were thus included in the systematic analysis. Three clinical trials evaluated silicone products and pressure garments, and the other three studies investigated the efficacy of intralesional injections of triamcinolone (TAC), 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) combined with TAC as well as the additional irradiation with a 585 nm pulsed-dye laser (PDL). Intralesional injections revealed significant improvements of the scar quality in terms of height, thickness, erythema, and pigmentation. Pressure garments showed favorable results but there was no evidence that silicone products were able to improve the scar quality. The systematic review demonstrated that there are just a few clinical trials with a LoE of I. Consequently, evidence is still lacking especially for noninvasive treatment regimens for hypertrophic scars. Intralesional injections of 5-FU mixed with a low dose of TAC can be seen as most appropriate treatment modality. Prospective clinical trials to determine the efficiency of silicone products are warranted.",
author = "Mona Kafka and Vanessa Collins and Kamolz, {Lars Peter} and Thomas Rappl and Ludwik Branski and Paul Wurzer",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1111/wrr.12507",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Wound Repair and Regeneration",
issn = "1067-1927",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evidence of invasive and noninvasive treatment modalities for hypertrophic scars

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Kafka, Mona

AU - Collins, Vanessa

AU - Kamolz, Lars Peter

AU - Rappl, Thomas

AU - Branski, Ludwik

AU - Wurzer, Paul

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Currently, there are various therapeutic approaches to reduce hypertrophic scarring; however, there is no standard evidence-based treatment protocol. Hence, a systematic review was performed to obtain a summary of the latest clinical trials to evaluate evidence for the treatment of hypertrophic scars. The review protocol was registered and approved by PROSPERO (CRD42015027040). PubMed and Web of Science were searched using predefined MeSH-Terms to identify studies published within the last 10 years regarding treatment for hypertrophic scars. Exclusion criteria included a level of evidence (LoE) lower than I, nonhuman in vivo studies, in vitro studies, studies on keloids, literature reviews, and non-English articles. The literature search identified 1,029 unique articles, whereas 6 articles were prospective, randomized, blinded, controlled clinical trials with a LoE I, and were thus included in the systematic analysis. Three clinical trials evaluated silicone products and pressure garments, and the other three studies investigated the efficacy of intralesional injections of triamcinolone (TAC), 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) combined with TAC as well as the additional irradiation with a 585 nm pulsed-dye laser (PDL). Intralesional injections revealed significant improvements of the scar quality in terms of height, thickness, erythema, and pigmentation. Pressure garments showed favorable results but there was no evidence that silicone products were able to improve the scar quality. The systematic review demonstrated that there are just a few clinical trials with a LoE of I. Consequently, evidence is still lacking especially for noninvasive treatment regimens for hypertrophic scars. Intralesional injections of 5-FU mixed with a low dose of TAC can be seen as most appropriate treatment modality. Prospective clinical trials to determine the efficiency of silicone products are warranted.

AB - Currently, there are various therapeutic approaches to reduce hypertrophic scarring; however, there is no standard evidence-based treatment protocol. Hence, a systematic review was performed to obtain a summary of the latest clinical trials to evaluate evidence for the treatment of hypertrophic scars. The review protocol was registered and approved by PROSPERO (CRD42015027040). PubMed and Web of Science were searched using predefined MeSH-Terms to identify studies published within the last 10 years regarding treatment for hypertrophic scars. Exclusion criteria included a level of evidence (LoE) lower than I, nonhuman in vivo studies, in vitro studies, studies on keloids, literature reviews, and non-English articles. The literature search identified 1,029 unique articles, whereas 6 articles were prospective, randomized, blinded, controlled clinical trials with a LoE I, and were thus included in the systematic analysis. Three clinical trials evaluated silicone products and pressure garments, and the other three studies investigated the efficacy of intralesional injections of triamcinolone (TAC), 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) combined with TAC as well as the additional irradiation with a 585 nm pulsed-dye laser (PDL). Intralesional injections revealed significant improvements of the scar quality in terms of height, thickness, erythema, and pigmentation. Pressure garments showed favorable results but there was no evidence that silicone products were able to improve the scar quality. The systematic review demonstrated that there are just a few clinical trials with a LoE of I. Consequently, evidence is still lacking especially for noninvasive treatment regimens for hypertrophic scars. Intralesional injections of 5-FU mixed with a low dose of TAC can be seen as most appropriate treatment modality. Prospective clinical trials to determine the efficiency of silicone products are warranted.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011636656&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85011636656&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/wrr.12507

DO - 10.1111/wrr.12507

M3 - Article

C2 - 28056485

AN - SCOPUS:85011636656

JO - Wound Repair and Regeneration

JF - Wound Repair and Regeneration

SN - 1067-1927

ER -