Lasers in surgery and medicine · 2022
Fractional microneedle radiofrequency versus fractional carbon dioxide laser in the treatment of postburn hypertrophic scars.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tawfic Shereen O, Hassan Akmal S, El-Zahraa Sh Aly Fatma, Elbendary Amira, Shaker Olfat G, AlOrbani Aya M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: New and improved treatment modalities, including lasers and energy-based devices, are promising treatment options for hypertrophic scars. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of fractional microneedle radiofrequency (FMR) compared with fractional carbon dioxide (CO2 ) laser in the treatment of postburn hypertrophic scars.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with hypertrophic scars were enrolled in the study. Two areas in each patient were randomly assigned to fractional CO2 laser or FMR. Four sessions, 6-8 weeks apart were performed. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) was used for clinical evaluation, H & E and orcein-stained samples were examined for histopathological assessment, and tissue transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGFβ1 ) levels were measured for biochemical evaluation.
RESULTS: Both fractional CO2 and FMR-treated areas showed significant improvement in all parameters 1 month after treatment. Fractional CO2-treated areas showed a higher degree of improvement compared with FMR in OSAS (p = 0.025), elastin grading (p = 0.004), and TGFβ1 levels (p = 0.000). Patients reported less downtime and showed less postinflammatory hyperpigmentation with FMR compared with fractional CO2, but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.327, p = 0.231; respectively).
CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate the value of FMR as an effective alternative to fractional CO2 in the treatment of hypertrophic scars, with a potentially favorable safety profile.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with hypertrophic scars were enrolled in the study. Two areas in each patient were randomly assigned to fractional CO2 laser or FMR. Four sessions, 6-8 weeks apart were performed. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) was used for clinical evaluation, H & E and orcein-stained samples were examined for histopathological assessment, and tissue transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGFβ1 ) levels were measured for biochemical evaluation.
RESULTS: Both fractional CO2 and FMR-treated areas showed significant improvement in all parameters 1 month after treatment. Fractional CO2-treated areas showed a higher degree of improvement compared with FMR in OSAS (p = 0.025), elastin grading (p = 0.004), and TGFβ1 levels (p = 0.000). Patients reported less downtime and showed less postinflammatory hyperpigmentation with FMR compared with fractional CO2, but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.327, p = 0.231; respectively).
CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate the value of FMR as an effective alternative to fractional CO2 in the treatment of hypertrophic scars, with a potentially favorable safety profile.