Safety and Efficacy Evaluation of Pulsed Dye Laser Treatment, CO<sub>2</sub> Ablative Fractional Resurfacing, and Combined Treatment for Surgical Scar Clearance.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Surgical scars are an unwanted sequela following surgical procedures. Several different treatment modalities and approaches are currently being employed to improve the cosmesis of surgical scars with each having varying degrees of success. The objective of this study was to assess the ef cacy and safety pulsed dye laser treatment, CO2 ablative fractional resurfacing, and a combined treatment with these two modalities for the cosmetic improvement of surgical scarring that occurred following the surgical removal of skin cancer from different anatomic areas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients with surgical scarring most frequently on the face following recent surgical excision of skin cancer with Mohs surgery were included in this multicenter, prospective clinical study. Patients were randomized into 4 treatment arms, namely, pulsed dye laser alone, CO2 laser alone, a combined treatment with these two modalities, and CO2 ablative fractional resurfacing on the same day of surgery to half of the scar, followed by a combined treatment with the two modalities to that half of the scar. Patients in each study arm received a total of 3-4 treatments, while those patients in Arm 4 underwent an additional treatment with CO2 laser immediately after surgery. Patients were followed up at 1 and 3 months after the final treatment session. RESULTS: No adverse events were seen. Significant improvements in the appearance of scars were achieved in all study arms, as as- sessed by the Vancouver Scar Scale and Global Evaluation Response scales, with the best clinical outcomes seen in those scars that underwent a combination treatment. All patients reported very high satisfaction from treatment. CONCLUSION: Both pulsed dye laser treatment and CO2 ablative fractional resurfacing, when used as a monotherapy, are safe and effective in the treatment and improvement of recent surgical scarring. When both of these modalities are used in combination, however, they appear to potentially have a synergistic effect and an accelerated outcome on the cosmesis of recent surgical scars. <em>J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(11):1315-1319.</em>.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».