Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2016
Measurements of scar properties by SkinFibroMeter® , SkinGlossMeter® , and Mexameter® and comparison with Vancouver Scar Scale.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Seo S R, Kang N O, Yoon M S, Lee H J, Kim D H
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: An objective measurement of scar is important for evaluating treatment outcomes. However, to date, there is no 'gold standard' for quantitative measurement of properties of hypertrophic scar. Existing objective modalities are neither portable nor easy to use.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to validate the correlation between objective measurements with SkinFibrometer® , SkinGlossMeter® , and Mexameter® and subjective assessment with Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) of keloid and hypertrophic scar.
METHODS: A total of 25 patients with keloids and hypertrophic scars were enrolled in this study. Patients were treated with intralesional triamcinolone acetonide at 2-6 week intervals. Scar assessments using VSS, Skinfibrometer, Skinglossmeter, and Mexameter were performed in both scars and contralateral normal skin at each treatment session. Correlations between the measurements by these tools and VSS parameters were examined.
RESULTS: We found statistically significant differences between scar and contralateral normal skin using Skinfibrometer, Skinglossmeter, and Mexameter. A strong correlation was found between the VSS pliability scores and the stiffness of skin of Skinfibrometer (r = 0.628, P < 0.001). VSS vascularity scores showed weak correlation with erythema index of Mexameter (r = 0.372, P < 0.001). However, no correlation appeared to exist between any parameters of VSS and Skinglossmeter and between VSS pigmentation scores and the melanin index of Mexameter.
CONCLUSION: In our study, Skinfibrometer can be an objective noninvasive evaluation tool for pliability of the scar.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to validate the correlation between objective measurements with SkinFibrometer® , SkinGlossMeter® , and Mexameter® and subjective assessment with Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) of keloid and hypertrophic scar.
METHODS: A total of 25 patients with keloids and hypertrophic scars were enrolled in this study. Patients were treated with intralesional triamcinolone acetonide at 2-6 week intervals. Scar assessments using VSS, Skinfibrometer, Skinglossmeter, and Mexameter were performed in both scars and contralateral normal skin at each treatment session. Correlations between the measurements by these tools and VSS parameters were examined.
RESULTS: We found statistically significant differences between scar and contralateral normal skin using Skinfibrometer, Skinglossmeter, and Mexameter. A strong correlation was found between the VSS pliability scores and the stiffness of skin of Skinfibrometer (r = 0.628, P < 0.001). VSS vascularity scores showed weak correlation with erythema index of Mexameter (r = 0.372, P < 0.001). However, no correlation appeared to exist between any parameters of VSS and Skinglossmeter and between VSS pigmentation scores and the melanin index of Mexameter.
CONCLUSION: In our study, Skinfibrometer can be an objective noninvasive evaluation tool for pliability of the scar.