Efficacy of Punch Excision Combined With Superficial X‐Ray for the Treatment of Keloids: A Single‐Center Retrospective Study

Pressure-garment therapy for preventing hypertrophic scarring a er burn injury (Protocol)

Objective: To explore the clinical effects of pulsed dye laser (PDL) dynamically combined with triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) in the treatment of keloids. Methods: A retrospectively observational study was conducted. From April 2015 to October 2020, 34 keloid patients (46 keloids) who met the inclusion criteria were admitted to Huaihe Hospital of Henan University. The patients were divided into TAC group and dynamic treatment group according to their treatment methods. There were 18 patients (26 keloids) in TAC group, including 8 males and 10 females, aged (30±12) years, who were treated with TAC injection alone. There were 16 patients (20 keloids) in dynamic treatment group, including 6 males and 10 females, aged (26±11) years, who were treated with TAC injection, PDL, or PDL combined with TAC injection according to the Vancouver scar scale (VSS) score before each treatment. Before the first treatment (hereinafter referred to as before treatment) and 12 months after the first treatment (hereinafter referred to as after treatment), the keloids were assessed by VSS, patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS), and the effect of keloids on the quality of life of patients was evaluated with dermatology life quality index (DLQI) scale. Twelve months after treatment, the curative effect of keloid was evaluated according to the VSS score and the effective rate was calculated. The first effective time and the cumulative times of TAC injection at the first effective time, the number of follow-up and the occurrence of adverse reactions of keloids within 12 months after treatment were recorded, and the incidence of adverse reactions was calculated. Data were statistically analyzed with paired sample t test, independent sample t test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Mann-Whitney U test, chi-square test, and Fisher's exact probability test. Results: The total VSS scores of patients' keloids in TAC group and dynamic treatment group 12 months after treatment were significantly lower than those before treatment (with t values of 7.53 and 8.09, respectively, P<0.01), and the total scores of pigmentation and vascularity in VSS and POSAS, the total POSAS score, and the DLQI scale score were significantly lower than those before treatment (with Z values of -3.71, -4.04, -4.21, -4.11, -3.76, -3.73, -3.92, and -3.93, respectively, P<0.01). The total scores of pigmentation and vascularity in VSS and POSAS of patients' keloids in dynamic treatment group 12 months after treatment were significantly lower than those in TAC group (with Z values of -2.03 and -2.12, respectively, P<0.05). Twelve months after treatment, the effective rate of patients' keloids in dynamic treatment group was significantly higher than that in TAC group (χ2=3.88, P<0.05). The first effective time of patients' keloids in dynamic treatment group was 5.5 (2.0, 6.0) months, which was significantly shorter than 6.0 (2.3, 10.3) months in TAC group (χ2=4.02, P<0.05). The cumulative times of TAC injection at the first effective time of patients' keloids in dynamic treatment group was 3.2±1.7, which was significantly less than 4.2±1.8 in TAC group (t=2.09, P<0.05). The number of follow-up of patients' keloids within 12 months after treatment in dynamic treatment group was significantly more than that in TAC group (t=-2.94, P<0.01), and the total incidence of adverse reactions was lower than that in TAC group but without statistically significant difference (P>0.05). Conclusions: Compared with TAC injection alone, PDL dynamically combined with TAC in the treatment of keloid can shorten the effective time, reduce the number of TAC injection, and improve the patient's compliance and clinical efficacy.

Controversy exists about whether cutting diathermy for skin incisions leads to a cosmetically inferior scar. Cosmetic outcomes were compared between skin incisions created with cutting diathermy versus scalpel. Wound infection rates and postoperative incisional pain were also compared. This was a randomized double-blind trial comparing cutting diathermy and scalpel in patients undergoing bowel resection. Scar cosmesis was assessed at 6 months after surgery by a plastic surgeon and a research associate using the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) and the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). Patients also used POSAS to self-evaluate their scars. Wound infections within 30 days were recorded, and incision pain scores were measured on the first 5 days after operation. A total of 66 patients were randomized to cutting diathermy (31) or scalpel (35). At 6 months, there was no significant difference between the diathermy and scalpel groups in mean(s.d.) VSS scores (4·9(2·6) versus 5·0(1·9); P = 0·837), mean POSAS total scores (19·2(8·0) versus 20·0(7·4); P = 0·684) or subjective POSAS total scores (20·2(12·1) versus 21·3(10·4); P = 0·725). Neither were there significant differences in wound infection rates between the groups (5 of 30 versus 5 of 32; P = 1·000). Pain scores on day 1 after operation were significantly lower in the diathermy group (mean 1·68 versus 3·13; P = 0·018), but were not significantly different on days 2-5. Cutting diathermy is a cosmetically acceptable technique for abdominal skin incisions. There is no increased risk of wound infection, and diathermy may convey benefit in terms of early postoperative wound pain. NCT01496404 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Background: The keloid treatment is still a thorny and complicated clinical problem, especially in multiple keloids induced by wound, severe burn, ethnic background or cultural behaviors, or unexplained skin healing. Mainstream treatments have limited efficacy in treating multiple keloids. As no oral treatment with painlessness and convenience is available, oral treatment strategies should be formulated. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and therapeutic mechanism of oral tofacitinib in keloid patients. Methods: We recruited the 7 patients with keloid scars and prescribed 5 mg of tofacitinib twice a day orally with a maximum follow-up of 12 weeks. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), the Vancouver scar scale (VSS), ANTERA 3D camera, and the DUB Skin Scanner 75 were used to assess the characteristics of the lesion. Immunohistochemistry was performed to evaluate collagen synthesis, proliferation, and relative molecular pathways. Moreover, the effects of tofacitinib were assessed on keloid fibroblast in vitro. Results: After 12 weeks of oral tofacitinib, significant improvement in POSAS, VSS, and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) scores was observed (p < 0.05). The volume, lesion height, and dermis thickness of the keloid decreased (p < 0.05). Moreover, significant decreases in the expression of collagen I, Ki67, p-STAT 3, and p-SMAD2 were observed after 12 weeks of administration. In vitro experiments suggested that tofacitinib treatment inhibits fibroblast proliferation and collagen I synthesis via suppression of STAT3 and SMAD2 pathway. Conclusion: Tofacitinib, a new candidate oral drug for keloid, could reduce keloid lesion volume by inhibiting collagen synthesis and inhibiting fibroblast proliferation, and alleviate itch and pain to obtain a better life quality.

This study aimed to explore the clinical effects of pulsed dye laser (PDL) dynamically combined with triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) in the treatment of post-operative keloids recurrence. This study retrospectively analysed the clinical data of 29 keloid patients (with 39 keloids) from April 2014 to February 2020. The patients were divided into TAC group (14 patients with 19 keloids) and dynamic treatment group (15 patients with 20 keloids) according to the post-operative treatment that they received. The keloids were assessed by Vancouver scar scale (VSS), patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) and the effect of keloids on the quality of life of patients was evaluated with dermatology life quality index (DLQI) scale before the surgical treatment, at any time of relapse, and 24 months after the surgical treatment. The recurrence-free interval, relative cure time, and the cumulative times of TAC injection when the relative cure could be assessed as achieved, and the incidence of adverse reactions were calculated. Patients experiencing a recurrence within 2 years after surgery included 19 keloids (25.33%) that developed a recurrent event within 6 months, 34 keloids (45.33%) that within 12 months, and 39 keloids (52.00%) that within 24 months after surgery. Anterior chest keloid had the highest recurrence rate and ear keloid had the lowest recurrence rate. The total pigmentation and vascularity (VSS and POSAS) scores of patients' keloids in TAC group and dynamic treatment group 24 months after treatment were significantly lower than those before treatment and at relapse (P < 0.05), the total VSS and POSAS scores were significantly lower at 24 months than before treatment and at relapse (P < 0.05), and the DLQI scale score was significantly lower at 24 months than before treatment (P < 0.05). The VSS and POSAS scores of patients' keloids at 24 months after treatment were significantly lower in the dynamic treatment group than in the TAC group. The relative cure time of patients' keloids in the dynamic treatment group was 6.47 ± 2.72 months, which was significantly shorter than 8.65 ± 3.67 months in the TAC group (P < 0.05). The cumulative number of TAC injections that were given to achieve a relative cure of patients' keloids in dynamic treatment group was 3.60 ± 1.76, which was significantly less than 5.24 ± 2.25 in TAC group. The total incidence of adverse reactions was lower in the dynamic group than in TAC group, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (P > 0.05). Compared with TAC injection alone, PDL dynamically combined with TAC in the treatment of keloid with post-operative recurrence can shorten the relative cure time, reduce the number of TAC injections and improve the clinical efficacy.

Objective: To explore clinical application effects of skin distractor on the treatment of scars and to observe effects of skin distractor with different pull speeds on different parts scars of human body. Methods: One hundred and four patients with scars, conforming to the study criteria, were hospitalized in our unit from January 2014 to June 2015. Patients were divided into 2 mm/d group and 4 mm/d group according to the random number table, with 52 patients in each group. After admission, skin distractors were pasted on scars in face and neck, trunk, and extremities of patients in 2 groups, with inner edges of pasteboards close to outside edges of longer sides of scars. Skin distractors in 2 mm/d group and 4 mm/d group were pulled to scars axis direction as speeds of 2 mm/d and 4 mm/d, respectively. Pull time equals values of pull speeds divided by width of scars. Scars were resected after finishing pulling. Immediately after scars resection, skin distractors were pasted again with inner edges of pasteboards close to outside edges of longer sides of incision and removed when stitches were taken out. Scars of patients were scored by Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) was used to record scores of patient scar assessment scale (PSAS), observer scar assessment scale (OSAS) and overall scores of patients and observers of scars of patients before and one year after scars resection. Data were processed with χ(2) test, independent samples t test, paired samples t test, independent samples non-parametric rank-sum test and paired samples non-parametric rank-sum test. Results: (1) Scores of all scars of patients in 2 groups before scars resection were close (with t values from -1.384 to 0.622, P values above 0.05), obviously higher than those of one year post scars resection (with t values from 11.085 to 24.835, P values below 0.01). Scores of scars in face and neck, trunk and extremities in 2 groups before scars resection were close (with Z values from -1.651 to -0.035, t values from -1.549 to 0.219, P values above 0.05), significantly higher than those of one year post scar resection (with Z values from -2.992 to -2.555, t values from 8.739 to 19.076, P values below 0.01). (2) Scores of all scars of patients in 2 mm/d group of one year post scars resection were lower than those in 4 mm/d group (with t values from -2.583 to -2.018, P values below 0.05). PSAS scores of scars in face and neck and trunk in 2 mm/d group of one year post scars resection were lower than those in 4 mm/d group (with Z values respectively -2.385 and -2.198, P values below 0.05), other scores of scars in face and neck and trunk of patients in 2 groups of one year post scars resection were close (with Z values from -1.841 to -0.363, P values above 0.05). VSS scores, PSAS scores, OSAS scores, patients' overall scores, and observers' overall scores in 2 mm/d groups were (4.6±0.8), (28±4), (28±4), (4.7±0.7), (4.8±1.4) points, respectively, lower than those in 4 mm/d group[(5.2±0.8), (32±4), (31±6), (5.5±1.2), (5.5±1.0) points, respectively, with t values from -3.712 to -2.105, P<0.05 or P<0.01]. Conclusions: Skin distractor has better effects on the treatment of scars, and treatment effects of skin distractor in extremities pulled by 2 mm/d are better than those pulled by 4 mm/d.

Background:The earlobe and helix are common sites for keloids following ear piercing. First-line therapy involves intra-keloidal excision followed by triamcinolone acetonide (TA) injection. Yet, the optimal timing for TA injection after keloid excision remains debated. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes between immediate and delayed TA injection after auricular keloid excision.Methods:This was a prospective, controlled trial with patients randomized into immediate or delayed groups. The Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) were used to evaluate scar quality. The number of recurrent keloid cases was recorded, defined as a VSS height of 3, POSAS thickness greater than 5, or an increase in VSS height or POSAS thickness after keloid excision. Overall complications were recorded. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results:The immediate group contained 18 patients, and the delayed group had 16 patients. The mean age of patients was 25.52 years, and the mean maximum keloid diameter was 14.49 mm (7–32.5 mm). The immediate group reported a statistically significant lower recurrence rate than did the delayed group at 5 months (P = 0.042). No significant differences were noted between VSS and POSAS scores at 3 months, and no complications were recorded during the study.Conclusions:Immediate TA injection is an acceptable option for auricular keloid treatment. Here, it was associated with a lower recurrence rate than with delayed injection and resulted in no complications. The immediate and delayed groups had similar outcomes for VSS and POSAS.

Direct comparison of reproducibility and reliability in quantitative assessments of burn scar properties

Thyroid surgery is a common procedure for managing benign and malignant conditions. While the primary focus is on treating the underlying pathology, visible neck scars can significantly impact patients' self-esteem and quality of life (QoL). A comprehensive assessment of scar cosmesis alongside functional outcomes is essential. Despite the availability of tools such as the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), studies combining subjective and objective scar assessments with thyroid-specific and general QoL measures remain limited. This retrospective study evaluated scar cosmesis and QoL in 100 thyroidectomy patients treated between January 2021 and December 2023. Subjective satisfaction was measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and objective assessments were performed using VSS and POSAS. QoL was assessed using validated instruments, ThyPRO and SF-36, to capture thyroid-specific and general QoL domains. Statistical analyses included t-tests, Pearson correlation, and multivariate regression. The mean VAS score was 7.8, with 85% of patients reporting satisfaction with their scars. Objective evaluations yielded mean VSS and POSAS scores of 5.2 and 6.8, respectively. Younger patients (VAS = 8.2 for ≤ 50years) and females (VAS = 8.0) reported higher satisfaction with scar outcomes. QoL improved significantly, with physical functioning increasing from 65.3 to 76.8 (p < 0.01) and emotional well-being from 61.2 to 70.1 (p < 0.05). Significant correlations were observed between scar cosmesis scores and QoL domains, such as physical functioning (r = 0.42). Sensory changes, including numbness around the scar area, were reported in 12% of patients. Integrating subjective and objective measures, including ThyPRO and SF-36, provides a complete evaluation of scar cosmesis and QoL outcomes after thyroidectomy. Key predictors of higher satisfaction included younger age, female gender, and superior scar quality. These findings highlight the importance of addressing both aesthetic and functional outcomes in thyroid surgery to enhance patient satisfaction and QoL. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12070-025-05368-w.

Keloid and hypertrophic scars are fibroproliferative disorders resulting from abnormal wound healing in genetically susceptible individuals. Current therapies are often ineffective. Kynurenine shows promise as a topical treatment for keloids and hypertrophic scars. In this study, healthy adult male and female subjects seeking treatment for mature keloid scars were enrolled. Subjects were randomized in double-blind fashion to receive kynurenic acid 0.5% (FS2) cream (Group 1), an active onion extract comparator treatment (Group 2), or the inactive vehicle (Group 3). Each treatment was applied twice-daily. Qualitative assessments were made using the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), as well as the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scales (POSAS). Among subjects in Group 1, there was a substantial decrease in mean PGSS scores after 30 days of treatment that continued to trend downward, becoming significant versus Group 2 at days 90 and 180 (P&lt;0.05) and versus Group 3 at day 180 (P&lt;0.01). Based on mean VSS scores, subjects in Group 1 achieved beneficial effects that became significant versus Group 2 at day 90 (P&lt;0.01), day 120 (P&lt;0.05), and day 180 (P&lt;0.001) and versus Group 3 at day 180 (P&lt;0.05). There were no significant improvements in Groups 2 or 3. There were no adverse events or local skin reactions. The twice-daily application of FS2 Cream represents a potentially new and effective treatment for mature keloid scars. J Drugs Dermatol. 2021;20(9):964-968. doi:10.36849/JDD.6197.

To compare the reliability of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) with the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) in evaluating thyroidectomy scars. At 6 months after the operation, 112 patients who underwent thyroid surgery via collar neck incision were evaluated by two blinded plastic surgeons and two senior residents using the VSS and the observer component of the POSAS. In addition, the observer-reported VAS score and patient-reported Likert score were evaluated. Internal consistency, interobserver reliability, and correlations between the patient- and observer-reported outcomes were examined. The observer component of POSAS scores demonstrated higher internal consistency and interobserver reliability than the VSS. However, the correlations between the observer-reported VAS score and the patient-reported Likert score (0.450) and between the total sum of patient and observer component scores (0.551) were low to moderate. The POSAS is more consistent over repeated measurements; accordingly, it may be considered a more objective and reliable scar assessment tool than the VSS. However, a clinician's perspective may not exactly match the patient's perception of the same scar.

BackgroundSince the management of keloid and hypertrophic scars still remains a difficult clinical problem, there is need for adequate, effective therapy. In this study, we explored for the first time the efficacy and the potential synergetic effect of combined triamcinolone and verapamil for the treatment of hypertrophic and keloid scars. The objective was to assess the efficacy of combined intralesional triamcinolone and verapamil therapy for hypertrophic and keloid scars.MethodsFifty-eight patients with hypertrophic scars (n = 31) and keloid scars (n = 27) were included. A specific injection therapy scheme was applied. Five follow-up moments were chosen, with a maximum follow-up of nearly 2 years. The effects of combination therapy on scar pliability, thickness, relief, vascularization, surface area, pain, and pruritus were examined by means of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS).ResultsOur results reveal a fast and abiding improvement of both keloid and hypertrophic scars after treatment with the combination therapy. All POSAS components showed a reduction in scar score, while scar relief, pain, itchiness, and surface area improved significantly (P < 0.05) in keloids. Significant improvement in hypertrophic scars was found in scar pigmentation, vascularization, pliability, thickness, pain, and surface area. Overall POSAS scores revealed statistically significant decreases between baseline and 3–4 months, 4–6 months, and >12 months after start of therapy in both keloids and hypertrophic scars.ConclusionsThis study reveals that combined therapy of triamcinolone and verapamil results in overall significant scar improvement with a long-term stable result.Level of evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Analysis of scars in various conditions is essential, but no consensus had been reached on the scar assessment scale to select for a given condition. We reviewed papers to determine the scar assessment scale selected depending on the scar condition and treatment method. We searched PubMed for articles published since 2000 with the contents of the scar evaluation using a scar assessment scale with a Journal Citation Report impact factor >0.5. Among them, 96 articles that conducted a scar evaluation using a scar assessment scale were reviewed and analyzed. The scar assessment scales were identified and organized by various criteria. Among the types of scar assessment scales, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) was found to be the most frequently used scale. As for the assessment of newly developed operative scars, the POSAS was most used. Meanwhile, for categories depending on the treatment methods for preexisting scars, the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) was used in 6 studies following a laser treatment, the POSAS was used in 7 studies following surgical treatment, and the POSAS was used in 7 studies following a conservative treatment. Within the 12 categories of scar status, the VSS showed the highest frequency in 6 categories and the POSAS showed the highest frequency in the other 6 categories. According to our reviews, the POSAS and VSS are the most frequently used scar assessment scales. In the future, an optimal, universal scar scoring system is needed in order to better evaluate and treat pathologic scarring.

Evaluating scars is fundamental to analyse the outcome of treatments that include surgical intervention. Scales facilitate this type of assessment, but most of these measuring instruments are in different languages. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is one of the most robust instruments available in the literature for the evaluation of scars, although there is no validated version in Brazilian Portuguese. The aims of this study were to culturally translate and validate POSAS for the Portuguese language of Brazil and to test its reproducibility, face validity, content, and construct. Following the methodology proposed by Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz, MB, Spine 2000, 25, 3186, the questionnaire was translated and adapted to the Brazilian culture. The reproducibility, face, content, and construct validity were then analysed. In all, the scale was applied to 35 patients with postoperative scars (patient version) and 35 hand surgery specialists (version for the observer). The internal consistency was tested by Cronbach's alpha, and construct validation was performed by correlating the translated instrument with the Brazilian Portuguese translation of the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). The cultural adaptation of POSAS Escola Paulista de Medicina/Universidade Federal de São Paulo (EPM/UNIFESP) was confirmed. Both subscales showed strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.77-0.93), demonstrating reliability. The reproducibility was excellent, and the adapted scale demonstrated significant intra- and inter-observer reproducibility (r > 0.9) (P < 0.05). The validity of the construct was significant and showed good sensitivity between POSAS EMP/UNIFESP and the VSS. This study confirmed that POSAS EPM/UNIFESP can be used to evaluate patients with surgical scars in the Brazilian population. It has proven to be useful for clinical and research purposes, lending itself to capturing medical opinions and those of the patients themselves.

Hypertrophic scar (HTS) remains a comorbidity of burn injury, often requiring split-thickness skin grafting (STSG) and resulting in symptomatic HTS at grafted sites and STSG donor sites (DS). Literature supports the use of ablative fractional CO2 laser (FLSR) to treat HTS, however many trials lack control sites and tissue-level examinations. Given the widespread adoption of FLSR for HTS, delegation of non-treated scar sites for the sake of randomized controlled trials (RCT) is troubling for many clinicians. We trialed using STSG DS scars for randomization rather than withholding FLSR from HTS at grafted sites. Patients (n = 20) were treated for DS scar with FLSR. DS scars were randomized and treated with either 6 FLSR treatments, follow-ups, and standard of care (SOC) or SOC only. Prior to treatment, DS skin and normal skin (NS) were evaluated for trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL), melanin index (MI), elasticity, and erythema. Serial biopsies were analyzed for epidermal thickness, rete ridge ratio (RRR), and papillary dermal cellularity. All sites, including a separate burn scar (BS) site, were evaluated using the patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) -observer (-O), -patient (-P), Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), and an institutional Scar Comparison Scale (SCS). Prior to treatment, the DS control (DS C), DS treated (DS T), and BS sites were hyperpigmented compared to normal skin. BS was less elastic than all other sites and had increased TEWL compared to normal skin. DS skin had increased cellularity, decreased rete ridge ratios, and increased epidermal thickness compared to NS. Clinician observers and patients perceived the BS site as more severe versus DS skin through the POSAS-O, POSAS-P, and VSS. Over time, DS C and DS T sites were not different in TEWL, elasticity, erythema, MI, cellularity, RRR, epidermal thickness, POSAS-O scores, POSAS-P scores, VSS scores, or SCS scores. Over time, burn scar did not change in TEWL, elasticity, erythema, MI, POSAS-O scores, POSAS-P scores, and VSS scores. Decreased SCS scores within the DS C, DS T, and BS sites indicated patient-perceived improvement in all scars throughout the study time course. NS and DS skin possess inherent physiological differences, though not to the degree of burn scars vs. NS. FLSR may not alter the rate of maturation and remodeling of DS skin compared to current SOC. While improvement in scar assessment was observed in laser-treated BS HTS, no specific control for these sites was analyzed. Due to differences in the pathophysiology of HTS formation at grafted and donor sites, the STSG DS may not be an adequate substitute for BS HTS when designing RCTs to evaluate the effect of FLSR. Prior studies evaluating the use of FLSR in burn-related HTS consist of low-powered clinical trials or case studies without control sites or tissue-level examinations, prompting the design of an RCT in DS scars. However, this scar type may not be suitable for this study design. Future work should extend to extra-cellular matrix morphology and transcriptomics of donor site and burn scar healing to better understand the effects of laser treatment.