Combination of ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser and platelet-rich plasma treatment to improve hypertrophic scars: a retrospective clinical observational study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Hypertrophic scars are one of the main complications that affect the quality of life of patients after burns. Many methods have been shown to be effective in the treatment of hypertrophic scars, such as ablative fractional CO2 laser (AFCL) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP). However, there are few studies on the effect of the combined application of these measures. The purpose of this study was to explore the therapeutic effect of AFCL combined with PRP on hypertrophic burn scars. Methods A retrospective clinical observation study was conducted on 50 patients with hypertrophic burn scars. The AFCL+PRP group included 31 patients who received AFCL combined with PRP treatment; the AFCL group included 19 patients who received AFCL treatment only. The University of North Carolina 4P Scar Scale (UNC4P) and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores that were collected before each treatment were used as indicators of the effectiveness of the previous treatment. The scores recorded at the second, fourth and seventh months were analysed. Results The demographic data of the 2 groups were not significantly different. Before treatment, there was no difference in the UNC4P and VSS scores between the 2 groups. There was a significant decline in the UNC4P and VSS total scores over 6 months in both groups (p < 0.05) and scores in the 2 groups were comparable after 3 and 6 months (p < 0.05). UNC4P scores in the AFCL+PRP group decreased from a mean of 8.26 to 2.61 (p < 0.05) with a concomitant drop in VSS scores from a mean of 11.74 to 6.06 (p < 0.01). In the AFCL group UNC4P and VSS scores decreased from 7.68 to 4.63 (p < 0.05) and from 10.89 to 8.16 (p < 0.05), respectively. The sub-items of these 2 assessments were analysed and the results suggest that AFCL combined with PRP can comprehensively improve scarring. Conclusions This study shows that PRP is an effective adjunct for AFCL in the treatment of hypertrophic burn scars and that the combination of PRP and AFCL proved to be more useful than AFCL alone. This combination may be a new and effective clinical practice for the treatment of scars. However, larger and higher-level clinical studies are still needed to determine its efficacy and possible mechanisms.
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) | 0,001 | 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 ».