Laser Scar Revision Research Articles

Addressing Burn Hypertrophic Scar Symptoms Earlier: Laser Scar Revision May Begin as Early as 3-6 Months After Injury.

Fractional ablative CO2 laser (FLSR) is used to treat hypertrophic scars (HTSs) resulting from burn injuries,which are characterized by factors, such as erythema, contracture, thickness, and symptoms of pain and itch. Traditionally, waiting a year after injury for scar maturation before starting laser treatment has been recommended;however, the potential benefits of earlier intervention have gained popularity. Still, the optimal timing for beginning laser intervention in patients with HTSs remains uncertain. This study aims to evaluate the ideal timing for the initiation of FLSR for HTSs using several qualitative and quantitative assessment measures. It was hypothesized that early intervention would lead to similar improvement trends as later intervention, however, would be more ideal due to the shortened time without symptom relief for patients. Patients who received three or more laser treatment sessions and completed both pre- and posttreatment evaluations were included in this analysis (n = 69). FLSR treatment was administered at 4-8-week intervals. Patients starting treatment before 6 months after injury were classified as the early-stage intervention group and those beginning treatment at 6-12 months after injury were classified as the late-stage intervention group. Demographic data, including the age of patients at the time of first treatment, age of scars at the time of first treatment, biological sex, ethnicity, Fitzpatrick skin type, and use of laser-assisted drug delivery, were collected by retrospective chart review. Patients were evaluated on six subjective scales and objectively for scar stiffness with durometry. For all scales, higher scores indicate worse scars. A two-way ANOVA, Student's t-test, and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to compare scores from the pre- to posttreatment evaluations. There were no significant differences between the groups for any of the demographic or scar-specific variables; thus, differences in outcome can be attributed to the timing of intervention. Both groups demonstrated an improvement in scars with treatment over time (p < 0.05). Both early- and middle-stage initiation showed scar symptom improvement in five out of six scales. In the late-stage intervention, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale-Patientaverage score did not show improvement. In the early-stage intervention, the Vancouver Scar Scaletotal did not show improvement. Quantitative evaluation of scar stiffness by durometry did not show symptom improvement in either group. The Scar Comparison Scaledemonstrated the greatest improvement across groups. Laser treatment led to scar improvement in at least one scale at each stage of initiation. Both intervention timelines resulted in equivalent outcomes, and early intervention should be considered when initiating FLSR treatment in burn scars to alleviate symptoms earlier.

Navigating Scar Care: An Evaluation of Scar Treatment Patient Education Materials.

While patient education materials (PEMs) across various specialties have been reported as being too difficult to read, the quality and understandability of PEMs related to scar management have not been assessed. In this study, we report the breadth of scar management interventions and readability of online PEMs authored by academic societies and university hospitals. Websites of academic medical societies and university hospitals with scar revision PEMs were assessed for relevance. PEM readability was assessed via Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and Gunning-Fox Index scores. Understandability and actionability were evaluated using the Patient Education Material Assessment Tool (PEMAT). A total of 26 scar revision PEMs met the inclusion criteria. The most commonly mentioned scar management interventions were scar revision surgery (73%) and laser scar revision (70%), with minimal emphasis on noninvasive methods like scar massage or sun protection. Readability analysis yielded a mean Flesch reading level of 8.8. Overall, PEMAT understandability of online scar treatment PEMs was moderate, with a median of 76.0% (IQR 71.5%-80.5%). PEMs from all specialties and institution types were lacking in actionability, with median actionability of 40.8% (IQR 38.1%-60.0%). Online scar revision PEMs included a wide breadth of scar management interventions; however, the least costly interventions, such as sun protection and scar massage, were not commonly included. PEMs for scar management could be improved by simplifying language, including visual aids, and including checklists or specific steps, patients can take to take action on scar management interventions.

Laser Treatment of Hypertrophic Scar in a Porcine Model Induces Change to Epidermal Histoarchitecture That Correlates to Improved Epidermal Barrier Function.

Mechanisms and timing of hypertrophic scar (HTS) improvement with laser therapy are incompletely understood. Epidermal keratinocytes influence HTS through paracrine signaling, yet they are understudied compared to fibroblasts. It was hypothesized that fractional ablative CO2 laser scar revision (FLSR) would change the fibrotic histoarchitecture of the epidermis in HTS. Duroc pigs (n = 4 FLSR and n = 4 controls) were injured and allowed to form HTS. HTS and normal skin (NS) were assessed weekly by noninvasive skin probes measuring trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL) and biopsy collection. There were 4 weekly FLSR treatments. Immediate laser treatment began on day 49 postinjury (just after re-epithelialization), and early treatment began on day 77 postinjury. Punch biopsies from NS and HTS were processed and stained with H&E. Epidermal thickness and rete ridge ratios (RRR) were measured. Gene and protein expression of involucrin (IVL) and filaggrin (FIL) were examined through qRT-PCR and immunofluorescent (IF) staining. After treatment, peeling sheets of stratum corneum were apparent which were not present in the controls. TEWL was increased in HTS vs NS at day 49, indicating decreased barrier function (P = .05). In the immediate group, TEWL was significantly decreased at week 4 (P < .05). The early group was not significantly different from NS at the prelaser timepoint. After four sessions, the epidermal thickness was significantly increased in treated scars in both FLSR groups (immediate: P < .01 and early: P < .001, n = 8 scars). Early intervention significantly increased RRR (P < .05), and immediate treatment trended toward an increase. There was no increase in either epidermal thickness or RRR in the controls. In the immediate intervention group, there was increased IVL gene expression in HTS vs NS that decreased after FLSR. Eight scars had upregulated gene expression of IVL vs NS levels pretreatment (fold change [FC] > 1.5) compared to four scars at week 4. This was confirmed by IF where IVL staining decreased after FLSR. FIL gene expression trended towards a decrease in both interventions after treatment. Changes in epidermal HTS histoarchitecture and expression levels of epidermal differentiation markers were induced by FLSR. The timing of laser intervention contributed to differences in TEWL, epidermal thickness, and RRR. These data shed light on the putative mechanisms of improvement seen after FLSR treatment. Resolution of timing must be further explored to enhance efficacy. An increased understanding of the difference between the natural history of HTS improvement over time and interventional-induced changes will be critical to justifying the continued approved usage of this treatment.

595 Hypochlorous Acid for Skin Preparation in Fractional Ablative CO2 Laser Treatment of Burn Scars

IntroductionWhile complications from fractional ablative CO2 laser treatment for burn hypertrophic scar (HTS) are relatively rare, the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) after laser treatment exists. When infection occurs, it has been linked to further morbidity, such as scar development in previously unaffected skin. Hypochlorous acid is a non-flammable and colorless antiseptic solution that has been used to treat wounds and is believed to be a less cytotoxic alternative to other agents such as betadine and chlorhexidine. This study aims to investigate the use of hypochlorous acid solution as a skin prep for patients undergoing laser scar revision for HTS and determine its efficacy in preventing SSI.MethodsAll patients undergoing fractional ablative CO2 laser revision of HTS at a single center from September 2016 through September 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Data pertaining to patient demographics, skin characteristics, treatment sessions, and post-treatment complications were recorded. All patients underwent topical skin preparation with hypochlorous acid-soaked laparotomy pads for 10 minutes before laser treatment. No perioperative oral or topical antibiotics were given to any included patient. Patients were excluded from analysis if they were not treated with a fractional ablative CO2 laser, were treated for a scar etiology outside of burn injury, or if insufficient follow-up was documented.ResultsA total of 208 patients undergoing a total of 758 laser treatments were identified. Average patient age was 45 years (SD 16), with 112 (53.8%) patients being female and 96 (46.2%) being male. Median number of laser treatments was 3 (IQR: 1-5). Patients from all Fitzpatrick skin types were treated, with the most common type being type 5 (n=54, 26.0%). None (n=0, 0.0%) of the 208 patients experienced a surgical site infection after any of the laser treatments received.ConclusionsHypochlorous acid is a safe and effective skin preparation for patients undergoing laser burn-scar revision to prevent SSI. Moreover it is non-flammable, colorless and does not need to dry prior to procedure.

614 Laser-treatment of Hypertrophic Scar Induces Change to Epidermal Histoarchitecture Correlating to Improved Epidermal Barrier Function

IntroductionMechanisms and timing of hypertrophic scar (HTS) improvement with laser therapy are incompletely understood. Epidermal keratinocytes influence HTS through paracrine signaling, yet they are understudied compared to fibroblasts. It was hypothesized that fractional ablative CO2 laser scar revision (FLSR) would change the fibrotic histoarchitecture of the epidermis in HTS.MethodsDuroc pigs (n=4 FLSR and n=4 controls) were injured and allowed to form HTS. HTS and normal skin (NS) were assessed weekly by non-invasive skin probes measuring trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL) and biopsy collection. There were 4 weekly FLSR treatments. Early laser treatment began on day 49, and late began on day 77. Punch biopsies from NS and HTS were processed and stained with H&E. Image J was used to obtain epidermal thickness and rete ridge ratios (RRR). Gene and protein expression of involucrin (IVL) was examined through qRT-PCR and immunofluorescent (IF) staining.ResultsAfter treatment, peeling sheets of stratum corneum were apparent which were not present in the controls. TEWL was increased in HTS vs. NS at day 49 indicating decreased barrier function (42.2±8.0 vs. 22.0±4.62g/m2h, p=0.05). In the early group, TEWL was significantly decreased at week 4 to 16.4±3.5 g/m2h (p< 0.05). The late group was not significantly altered from NS at the pre-laser timepoint (day 77=12.1±1.99 g/m2h). Hence, there was no decrease in TEWL post-FLSR. After 4 sessions, epidermal thickness was significantly increased in treated scars in both FLSR groups (early:pre=85.6±6.8 vs. week 4=115.2±12.0 µm, p< 0.01) and (late:pre=75.2±6.6 vs. week 4=125.7±12.0 µm p< 0.001, n=8 scars,). There was no increase in controls. Late intervention significantly increased RRR (pre=1.3±0.1 vs. week 4=1.9±0.1, n=8 scars, p< 0.05), and early treatment trended towards increase (pre=1.17±0.05 vs. week 4=1.4 + 0.1). There was no increase in controls. There was increased IVL gene expression in HTS vs. NS that decreased after FLSR. Eight scars had up-regulated gene expression of IVL vs. NS levels pre-treatment (FC >1.5) compared to 4 scars at week 4. This was confirmed by IF where IVL staining decreased at week 4.ConclusionsChanges in epidermal HTS histoarchitecture and expression levels of epidermal differentiation markers were induced by FLSR. The timing of laser intervention contributed to differences in TEWL, epidermal thickness, and RRR.

A Single-Institution Experience With Standardized Objective and Subjective Scar Evaluation While Undergoing Fractional Ablative Carbon Dioxide Laser Treatment.

Laser treatment of burn scar has increased in recent years. Standard components of scar evaluation during laser scar revision have yet to be established. Patients who began laser scar revision from January 2018 to 2020, underwent at least three treatments, and completed evaluations for each treatment were included. Patients underwent fractional ablative carbon dioxide laser scar revision and pre- and postprocedure scar evaluations by a burn rehabilitation therapist, including Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale, Vancouver Scar Scale, our institutional scar comparison scale, durometry, and active range of motion measurements. Twenty-nine patients began laser scar revision and underwent at least three treatments with evaluations before and after each intervention. All patients improved in at least one scar assessment metric after a single laser treatment. After the second and third treatments, all patients improved in at least three scar assessment metrics. Range of motion was the most frequently improved. Durometry significantly improved after the third treatment. Patients and observers showed some agreement in their assessment of scar, but observers rated overall scar scores better than patients. Patients acknowledged substantial scar improvement on our institutional scar comparison scale. Burn scar improves with fractional ablative laser therapy in a range of scar ages and skin types, as early as the first session. Improvements continue as additional sessions are performed. This work suggests baseline evaluation components for patients undergoing laser and a timeline for expected clinical improvements which may inform conversations between patients and providers when considering laser for the symptomatic hypertrophic scar.

112 Improvements in Burn Hypertrophic Scar After Fractional Ablative Laser Scar Revision

Abstract Introduction Fractional ablative laser therapy use is increasing for treating burn hypertrophic scar (HTS). However, standard components of a routine HTS evaluation prior to starting laser scar revision (LSR) and after each intervention have yet to be determined, and metrics for effective treatment have not been established. Methods Patients who entered a LSR program between September 2018 and September 2019, underwent at least two LSR treatments, and completed post-LSR scar evaluations for each of these treatments were included in the studied sample. Patients were treated with a fractional ablative CO2 laser. A single burn rehabilitation therapist conducted all pre- and post-procedure scar evaluations, which included the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), Institutional Scar Comparison Scale (SCS), durometry, and active range of motion (AROM) measurements. Results From 9/2018 to 9/2019, 25 patients began the LSR program and underwent at least two treatments with post-laser scar assessments for each intervention. Patients underwent an average of 3±1 LSR sessions during the time period for a total of 84 sessions amongst the group. Patients averaged 51±14 years old (range 26–80), with all Fitzpatrick skin types represented (mode type 5). Average HTS age was 14±19 months post-injury (range 3–98 months post injury). After one session of LSR, 91% of patients improved in at least one scar assessment metric (average 3±1.4 areas). After two sessions, all patients showed improvement in at least one metric (average 3.6±1.2 areas). One LSR session was associated with a 10.8±31.9% improvement in AROM of a HTS-affected joint, and this increased to 38.1±41.4% after five LSR treatments (p=0.0002). Durometry readings demonstrated decreasing scar hardness compared to adjacent uninjured skin in 90% of patients, and 96% of patients experienced improvements in POSAS, VSS, and SCS scores during a treatment course. Conclusions Improvements in burn HTS can be achieved with fractional ablative laser therapy in a wide range of scar ages and skin types, as early as the first LSR session. These continue to increase as additional sessions are performed. Applicability of Research to Practice This work suggests necessary baseline evaluation components for patients undergoing LSR, as well as a timeline for expected clinical improvements. This data may inform conversations with burn survivors and providers when considering laser therapy for symptomatic HTS.

Laser Revision and Rehabilitation of Mohs Micrographic Surgical Scars

The use of Mohs micrographic surgery has become standard of care to treat a multitude of skin cancers to ensure tissue preservation. However, with any skin surgery, a cutaneous scar is the byproduct, and thus, laser scar revision has become mainstay of treatment. By utilizing varying laser wavelengths, different components that make up a particular scar can be targeted. Lasers are being used to improve scar texture, vascularity, pigmentation, and thickness, and it is important to understand the different uses and applications. Herein, we will review current practices for utilizing lasers or combination treatments to improve post Mohs surgery scars.

A Combination Approach to Surgical Scars.

Scar formation from surgical procedures is an unavoidable risk. Despite measures taken by both the surgeon and patient during the perioperative and postoperative periods to maximize cosmesis, some patients will wish to pursue surgical or laser scar revision. The authors propose a treatment algorithm to assist in approaching surgical scar revision with combination treatments. A PubMed search was performed on various surgical scar revision techniques. The authors augment these findings with their own personal experiences. Reports of surgical excision, intralesional corticosteroid injection, intralesional 5-fluorouracil injection, pulse dye laser treatment, nonablative fractional laser resurfacing, ablative fractional laser resurfacing, and microneedling and fractional needle radiofrequency, used in isolation or combination, were found. The authors also provide clinical photographs documenting improvement in appearance of surgical scars using these treatments. Surgical scars are best treated with a combination approach to address various features of the scar. The authors propose a treatment algorithm with multiple treatment options and how to combine them safely and effectively.

Management of Acne Scarring, Part I

Acne scarring is the result of a deviation in the orderly pattern of healing and can have profound psychosocial implications for patients. While the most effective means of addressing acne scarring is to prevent its formation through good acne control, there are a number of therapeutic interventions that improve the appearance of acne scars. Many of these procedural modalities have flaws and are limited by operator skill and experience. Laser scar revision, on the other hand, is a precise, well tolerated procedure with clinically demonstrable efficacy and minimal adverse effects that may be used alone or in combination with other scar treatments. The last 20 years has seen a dramatic evolution in laser treatment of acne scars, spanning ablative and nonablative technologies, to the current popularity of fractional laser scar revision. Determining which laser system to use depends upon the type and severity of acne scarring, the amount of recovery a patient can tolerate, and the ultimate goals and expectations of each patient. The importance of proper acne scar classification, laser scar revision techniques, and the evidence that addresses each laser system is reviewed in this article.

Resolution of retracted scar after 585-nm pulse dye laser surgery

BACKGROUND: Laser scar revision has been an effective method for improving several aspects of scarring through ablative and non-ablative sources. The 585-nm pulsed dye laser (PDL) is an important non-ablative instrument for reducing scar bulk and symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of a 585-nm PDL for the treatment of a retracted and atrophic facial scar. METHODS: We report the case of a 26-year-old patient who presented with a retracted facial scar following surgical excision of an aggressive benign tumor. Treatment was carried out using the 585-nm PDL. RESULTS: Treatment of the scar using two low-level PDL therapies significantly altered the appearance of the scar and augmentation of the retracted defect was avoided. CONCLUSION: Treatment of this retracted and atrophic facial scar with the 585-nm PDL was very effective and safe.

Scar revision using laser – review of the literature and an appraisal

A variety of scars – erythematous, pigmented, atrophic, and hypertrophic – may occur as a result of trauma, surgery, burns, and skin disease such as acne. Surgery with other adjunctive methods including radiotherapy, intralesional steroid, and pressure therapy have shown variable results. Laser scar revision has been used since the early 1980s. The continuous wave lasers including continuous wave carbon dioxide, argon and the Nd: YAG laser achieve some improvement, but their use is limited by inherent problems of continuous mode lasers. Pulsed lasers have been effective for scar revision probably due to their selective photothermolysis. The pulsed dye laser has been successfully used in erythematous and hypertrophic scars. The pigment-specific lasers have shown a good improvement for pigmented scars. The high-energy pulsed carbon dioxide laser has been used for distensible facial scarring. The erbium: YAG laser may have advantages because of reduced thermal damage to surrounding tissue and low risk of pigmentary change. The selection of appropriate lasers alone or in combination may be of value for scar revision.