RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Keloids are benign proliferative scars that form as a result of dysregulated growth and collagen deposition in response to cutaneous injury. Laser therapies have emerged as promising options for the treatment of keloids, with performance varying by laser type and lesion characteristics. PURPOSE: To assess the combined continuous wave and repetitive fractionated CO2 laser treatment of keloids. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of 22 cases of keloid scars treated with combined CO2 laser modes. A single session of continuous wave followed by five sessions of fractional delivery. Efficacy was assessed using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and the Vancouver Scar Scale. The Numeric Rating Scale was used to assess patient satisfaction and pain. RESULTS: Most patients were female (77.3%) with skin type IV (72.7%), age was 24.3 ± 9.3 years, most keloids were located on the earlobe (56.5%) or arm or hand (17.4%), size ranged from 5 to 10 cm, and time since injury ranged from 3 months to 35 years. No serious adverse events were reported. At 6 months, significant improvements from baseline occurred in all characteristics, scar color (4.8 ± 2.8 to 1.9 ± 1.1), rigidity (5.0 ± 2.8 vs. 5.4 ± 2.8), thickness (5.4 ± 2.8 vs. 2.0 ± 1.1), and irregularity (5.9 ± 2.4 vs. 1.9 ± 0.9). The Vancouver scores followed a similar trend. Patient-rated overall improvement from 37 ± 17.6 at baseline to 16.1 ± 8.5 at 6 months, and improvement in associated pain and pruritus. CONCLUSION: Combination of two ablative laser delivery modes within a single laser platform provided for effective and safe keloid management and left patients highly satisfied.
Assuntos
Cicatriz Hipertrófica , Queloide , Lasers de Gás , Humanos , Feminino , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem , Adulto , Masculino , Queloide/radioterapia , Queloide/cirurgia , Queloide/etiologia , Dióxido de Carbono , Resultado do Tratamento , Estudos Retrospectivos , Dor/etiologia , Lasers de Gás/efeitos adversos , Cicatriz Hipertrófica/etiologiaRESUMO
Keloidal or nodular scleroderma (NS) is a variant of localized scleroderma (LS) frequently seen in patients with limited or diffuse systemic sclerosis (SSc). It presents as raised, firm plaques or nodules with extensive dermal fibrosis and hyalinized collagen bundles. We present a patient with SSc who presented with this rare entity.
Assuntos
Queloide , Esclerodermia Localizada , Escleroderma Sistêmico , Humanos , Esclerodermia Localizada/diagnóstico , Escleroderma Sistêmico/complicações , Escleroderma Sistêmico/diagnóstico , Queloide/etiologia , Queloide/patologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Hypertrophic and keloid scars are common skin conditions resulting from abnormal wound healing. They can cause itching, pain and have a negative physical and psychological impact on patients' lives. Different approaches are used aiming to improve these scars, including intralesional corticosteroids, surgery and more recently, laser therapy. Since laser therapy is expensive and may have adverse effects, it is critical to evaluate the potential benefits and harms of this therapy for treating hypertrophic and keloid scars. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of laser therapy for treating hypertrophic and keloid scars. SEARCH METHODS: In March 2021 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL EBSCO Plus and LILACS. To identify additional studies, we also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology reports. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication, or study setting. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for treating hypertrophic or keloid scars (or both), comparing laser therapy with placebo, no intervention or another intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted the data, assessed the risk of bias of included studies and carried out GRADE assessments to assess the certainty of evidence. A third review author arbitrated if there were disagreements. MAIN RESULTS: We included 15 RCTs, involving 604 participants (children and adults) with study sample sizes ranging from 10 to 120 participants (mean 40.27). Where studies randomised different parts of the same scar, each scar segment was the unit of analysis (906 scar segments). The length of participant follow-up varied from 12 weeks to 12 months. All included trials had a high risk of bias for at least one domain: all studies were deemed at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding of participants and personnel. The variability of intervention types, controls, follow-up periods and limitations with report data meant we pooled data for one comparison (and only two outcomes within this). Several review secondary outcomes - cosmesis, tolerance, preference for different modes of treatment, adherence, and change in quality of life - were not reported in any of the included studies. Laser versus no treatment: We found low-certainty evidence suggesting there may be more hypertrophic and keloid scar improvement (that is scars are less severe) in 585-nm pulsed-dye laser (PDL) -treated scars compared with no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.96; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11 to 3.45; two studies, 60 scar segments). It is unclear whether non-ablative fractional laser (NAFL) impacts on hypertrophic scar severity when compared with no treatment (very low-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether fractional carbon dioxide (CO2) laser impacts on hypertrophic and keloid scar severity compared with no treatment (very low-certainty evidence). Eight studies reported treatment-related adverse effects but did not provide enough data for further analyses. Laser versus other treatments: We are uncertain whether treatment with 585-nm PDL impacts on hypertrophic and keloid scar severity compared with intralesional corticosteroid triamcinolone acetonide (TAC), intralesional Fluorouracil (5-FU) or combined use of TAC plus 5-FU (very low-certainty evidence). It is also uncertain whether erbium laser impacts on hypertrophic scar severity when compared with TAC (very low-certainty evidence). Other comparisons included 585-nm PDL versus silicone gel sheeting, fractional CO2 laser versus TAC and fractional CO2 laser versus verapamil. However, the authors did not report enough data regarding the severity of scars to compare the interventions. As only very low-certainty evidence is available on treatment-related adverse effects, including pain, charring (skin burning so that the surface becomes blackened), telangiectasia (a condition in which tiny blood vessels cause thread-like red lines on the skin), skin atrophy (skin thinning), purpuric discolorations, hypopigmentation (skin colour becomes lighter), and erosion (loss of part of the top layer of skin, leaving a denuded surface) secondary to blistering, we are not able to draw conclusions as to how these treatments compare. Laser plus other treatment versus other treatment: It is unclear whether 585-nm PDL plus TAC plus 5-FU leads to a higher percentage of good to excellent improvement in hypertrophic and keloid scar severity compared with TAC plus 5-FU, as the certainty of evidence has been assessed as very low. Due to very low-certainty evidence, it is also uncertain whether CO2 laser plus TAC impacts on keloid scar severity compared with cryosurgery plus TAC. The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of neodymium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet (Nd:YAG) laser plus intralesional corticosteroid diprospan plus 5-FU on scar severity compared with diprospan plus 5-FU and about the effect of helium-neon (He-Ne) laser plus decamethyltetrasiloxane, polydimethylsiloxane and cyclopentasiloxane cream on scar severity compared with decamethyltetrasiloxane, polydimethylsiloxane and cyclopentasiloxane cream. Only very low-certainty evidence is available on treatment-related adverse effects, including pain, atrophy, erythema, telangiectasia, hypopigmentation, regrowth, hyperpigmentation (skin colour becomes darker), and depigmentation (loss of colour from the skin). Therefore, we are not able to draw conclusions as to how these treatments compare. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the effectiveness of laser therapy for treating hypertrophic and keloid scars. The available information is also insufficient to perform a more accurate analysis on treatment-related adverse effects related to laser therapy. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, conflicting results, study design issues and small sample sizes, further high-quality trials, with validated scales and core outcome sets should be developed. These trials should take into consideration the consumers' opinion and values, the need for long-term follow-up and the necessity of reporting the rate of recurrence of scars to determine whether lasers may achieve superior results when compared with other therapies for treating hypertrophic and keloid scars.
Assuntos
Cicatriz Hipertrófica , Hipopigmentação , Queloide , Terapia a Laser , Telangiectasia , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Alumínio , Atrofia , Dióxido de Carbono , Criança , Cicatriz Hipertrófica/etiologia , Cicatriz Hipertrófica/radioterapia , Dimetilpolisiloxanos , Érbio , Fluoruracila , Hélio , Humanos , Hipertrofia , Hipopigmentação/etiologia , Queloide/etiologia , Queloide/radioterapia , Terapia a Laser/efeitos adversos , Neodímio , Neônio , Dor/etiologia , Géis de Silicone , Telangiectasia/etiologia , Triancinolona Acetonida , Verapamil , Cicatrização , ÍtrioAssuntos
Colágeno Tipo VI/genética , Contratura/genética , Queloide/genética , Distrofias Musculares/congênito , Adolescente , Contratura/complicações , Feminino , Humanos , Queloide/etiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Distrofias Musculares/complicações , Distrofias Musculares/genética , Mutação de Sentido Incorreto , Pele/lesões , Torcicolo/complicações , Torcicolo/congênito , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Keloids and hypertrophic scars are dermal fibro-proliferative disorders unique to humans. Their treatment is a true challenge with multiple options, but not all the time with good results. Unfortunately this problem is not uncommon in patients with history of burn injury. The aim of this article is to evaluate the use of verapamil and pressure garments in patients with hypertrophic or keloid scar caused by burn injury. METHODS: We included patients with a hypertrophic or keloid scar caused by burn injury candidate to treatment with pressure garment. The pathologic scars were evaluated by serial photographic records, Vancouver and Posas scales. The scales of Vancouver and Posas were compared with t Student. RESULTS: We included 13 scars in 11 patients. Four scars were located in the legs, 4 in the arms, 4 in the face-neck and 1 in the abdomen. The dose of verapamil was calculated .03mg per kg. Injections were scheduled every 7 to 10 days until complete 6 sessions. Taking in count Posas scale, patients referred improvement in pigmentation (.01), thickness (.005), pliability (.01) and surface area (.004). In the Vancouver scale the observers mentioned improvement in elevation (.008), pigmentation (.014), vascularity (.022), flexibility (.014) and pruritus (.003). No adverse effects were found in verapamil injection. CONCLUSIONS: Verapamil was useful in conjunction with pressure garment to improve the condition of the keloid and hypertrophic scar caused by burn.
Introducción: la cicatriz queloide y la hipertrófica son desordenes fibro-proliferativos únicos de los humanos, su tratamiento representa un reto en con pocas opciones. El uso de prendas de compresión resulta útil, sin embargo el proceso de maduración no es tan rápido; decidimos usar verapamilo para facilitar este proceso y poder mejorar la calidad de vida de nuestros pacientes. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar el uso del verapamilo y las prendas de compresión en pacientes con cicatrización patológica como consecuencia de quemadura. Métodos: incluimos pacientes con cicatrización patológica, ya sea queloide o hipertrófica, causada por quemadura. La cicatriz fue evaluada con fotografías seriadas, escala de Vancouver y Posas. Los resultados fueron comparados con la prueba de t de Student. Resultados: incluimos 13 cicatrices en 11 pacientes. La localización de las cicatrices fue en: brazos 4, piernas 4, cara y cuello 1, y abdomen 1. La dosis de verapamilo se calculó a .03 mg por kg de peso. Las inyecciones se aplicaron de manera intralesional y se administraron cada 7 a 10 días, hasta completar 6 sesiones. Encontramos mejoría en los siguientes parámetros de la escala de Posas: pigmentación, pliabilidad, endurecimiento y superficie. En la escala de Vancouver: elevación, pigmentación, vascularidad, flexibilidad y prurito. No encontramos efectos adversos con la administración de verapamilo. Conclusiones: el verapamilo fue útil en conjunto con las prendas de compresión para mejorar las condiciones de la cicatriz queloide e hipertrófica causadas por lesiones por quemadura.
Assuntos
Queimaduras/complicações , Bloqueadores dos Canais de Cálcio/uso terapêutico , Cicatriz Hipertrófica/terapia , Bandagens Compressivas , Queloide/terapia , Verapamil/uso terapêutico , Cicatriz Hipertrófica/etiologia , Humanos , Queloide/etiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Abstract Introduction: Keloids and hypertrophic scars are dermal fibro-proliferative disorders unique to humans. Their treatment is a true challenge with multiple options, but not all the time with good results. Unfortunatelythis problem is not uncommon in patients with history of burn injury. Aim: To evaluate use of verapamil andpressure garments in patients with hypertrophic or keloid scar caused by burn injury. methods: We includedpatients with a hypertrophic or keloid scar caused by burn injury that report non-response to treatment withpressure garment. The pathologic scars were evaluated by serial photographic records, Vancouver and Posasscales. The scales of Vancouver and Posas were compared with t Student. Results: We included 13 scars in11 patients. Four scars were located in the legs, 4 in the arms, 4 in the face-neck and 1 in the abdomen. Thedose of verapamil was calculated 0.03 mg per kg. Injections were scheduled every 7 to 10 days until complete 6 sessions. Taking in count Posas scale, patients referred improvement in pigmentation (0.01), thickness(0.005), pliability (0.01), pruritus (0.003) and irregular surface (0.004). In the Vancouver scale the observers mentioned improvement in elevation (0.008), pigmentation (0.014), vascularity (0.022) and flexibility (0.014).No adverse effects were found in verapamil injection. Conclusion: Verapamil was useful in conjunction withpressure garment to improve the condition of the keloid and hypertrophic scar caused by burn.
Resumen Introducción: La cicatriz queloide o la cicatriz hipertrófica son desórdenes fibro-proliferativos únicos de los humanos, cuyo tratamiento representa un reto en donde existen pocas opciones con buenos resultados.Objetivo: Evaluar el uso de verapamilo y las prendas de compresión en pacientes con cicatrización patológicacomo consecuencia de quemadura. material y método: Incluimos pacientes con cicatrización patológica,ya sea queloide o hipertrófica, causada por quemadura que mencionaron no haber tenido beneficio con el usode prendas de compresión. La cicatriz fue evaluada con fotografías seriadas, escala de Vancouver y Posas.Los resultados fueron comparados con la prueba de t de Student. Resultados: Incluimos 13 cicatrices en 11pacientes. La localización de las cicatrices fue en brazos 4, piernas 4, cara y cuello 1, y abdomen 1. La dosisde verapamilo se calculó a 0,03 mg por kg. Las inyecciones se aplicaron intralesionales y se administraroncada 7 a 10 días hasta completar 6 sesiones. Encontramos mejoría en los siguientes parámetros de la escalade Posas: pigmentación (0,01), pliabilidad (0,01), endurecimiento o grosor (0,005), prurito (0,003) e irregular (0,004). En la escala de Vancouver elevación (0,008), pigmentación (0,014), vascularidad (0,022) yflexibilidad (0,014). No encontramos efectos adversos con la administración de verapamilo. Conclusión: Elverapamilo fue útil en conjunto con las prendas de compresión para mejorar las condiciones de la cicatrizqueloide e hipertrófica causadas por lesiones por quemadura.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Lactente , Pré-Escolar , Criança , Adolescente , Verapamil/uso terapêutico , Cicatriz Hipertrófica/terapia , Bandagens Compressivas , Queloide/terapia , Queimaduras/complicações , Estudos Prospectivos , Cicatriz Hipertrófica/etiologia , Queloide/etiologiaRESUMO
The ear is one of the most common sites of keloid formation, usually associated with the wearing of earrings. However, although this is a small perforating lesion that is equal on both sides, keloids are bigger and more prevalent on the posterior surface. In this study, 141 keloids were evaluated, most of which were located on the posterior surface of the earlobe and caused by the piercing of the ear. Most of the earrings and piercing jewellery used had metallic backs. The more frequent occurrence of earlobe keloids on the posterior surface of the ear therefore may be associated with the exacerbation of local neurogenic inflammation caused by the metallic backs.
Assuntos
Otopatias/etiologia , Joias/efeitos adversos , Queloide/etiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Piercing Corporal/efeitos adversos , Criança , Orelha Externa , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Approximately 30% of women who undergo mastectomy without reconstructive treatment due to breast cancer present sequelae. These include paresthesias, keloid healing, hypoesthesia, lymphedema and limitation of the function of the ipsilateral upper extremity. We undertook this study to present the results using collagen-polyvinylpyrrolidone (Clg- Pvp) as treatment for posmastectomy sequelae in women with breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a unicentric, longitudinal and prospective clinical trial between August 1, 2007 and July 31, 2008. Included variables were age, lymphedema, limitation of the function of the ipsilateral upper extremity, collapse of the wound, keloid healing, paresthesias, and appearance of the surgical area. The appearance of the surgical area (aesthetic aspect) was evaluated before and 6 months after treatment was initiated. Clg-Pvp was administered weekly for a 6-month period. RESULTS: Seven women were included with a median age of 49 years (range: 40-72 years). One patient (14.28%) presented lymphedema, two patients (28.57%) presented collapse of the wound, two patients (28.57%) had keloid healing, three patients (42.85%) experienced paresthesias, five patients (71.4%) reported pain, and five patients (71.4%) reported limitation of the function of the ipsilateral upper extremity. At the completion of the treatment, aesthetic improvement was statistically significant (p = 0.0020, Mann-Whitney U test). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and aesthetic results are good after application of Clg-Pvp for treating sequelae in women with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy without reconstructive surgery.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/cirurgia , Cicatriz/prevenção & controle , Colágeno/uso terapêutico , Fármacos Dermatológicos/uso terapêutico , Excisão de Linfonodo/efeitos adversos , Linfedema/prevenção & controle , Mastectomia Radical/efeitos adversos , Parestesia/prevenção & controle , Povidona/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Idoso , Braço , Cicatriz/etiologia , Colágeno/administração & dosagem , Colágeno/farmacologia , Fármacos Dermatológicos/administração & dosagem , Estética , Feminino , Humanos , Injeções Subcutâneas , Queloide/etiologia , Queloide/prevenção & controle , Linfedema/etiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Parestesia/etiologia , Povidona/administração & dosagem , Povidona/farmacologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Amplitude de Movimento Articular , Cicatrização/efeitos dos fármacosRESUMO
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of keloidectomy and strontium 90 brachytherapy in the prevention of keloid recurrence following excision and to identify outcome and the prognostic factors that predict keloid recurrence after irradiation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data of 612 patients with 892 keloids treated between 1992 and 2006 were evaluated retrospectively. Brachytherapy was performed using a Sr-90Y surface applicator. Total dose was 20 Gy in 10 fractions. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 61 months, the overall recurrence-free response rate for all keloids was 87.6%. Multivariate analysis revealed the following prognostic factors for recurrence: keloid size > 5 cm (p < 0.0001), burn scars as the keloid etiology (p < 0.0001), and previous treatment (p < 0.0001). Outcome was not found to be significantly related to the interval between surgery and radiotherapy, sex, or age. Pruritus and skin reddening were the most common symptoms of keloids, but all signs and symptoms abated with time after treatment. Cosmetic results from the keloid treatment were considered good or excellent in 70.6% of the patients. CONCLUSION: Our study findings show that excision plus Sr-90 brachytherapy is effective in the eradication of keloids. Sr-90 radiotherapy (20 Gy in 10 fractions) achieved a similar local control rate, as have higher doses per fraction in other series. It also resulted in a good cosmetic rate and relief of symptoms. Our data further suggest that the initiation of postoperative irradiation within hours of surgical excision is not important to therapeutic outcome.