Efficacy and safety of intralesional triple combination <i>versus</i> intralesional triamcinolone acetonide for the treatment of keloids: A randomised controlled trial
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Treatment of keloids presents a significant therapeutic challenge due to their tendency to recur and their impact on a patient's quality of life. This randomised controlled trial aimed to compare the effectiveness of intralesional triple combination regimen versus intralesional triamcinolone acetonide monotherapy in treating keloids. Aims To compare the efficacy and safety of intralesional triple combination versus intralesional triamcinolone acetonide monotherapy in treating keloids at any site. Methods This study was conducted in the outpatient department of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprosy in a tertiary care hospital at Puducherry. Seventy two patients aged ≥18 years with a clinical diagnosis of keloids of any duration, involving any site and without any prior treatment were included in the study. Patients were randomised into two groups: Group A received intralesional triple combination (triamcinolone acetonide, 5-fluorouracil and hyaluronidase), while Group B received intralesional triamcinolone acetonide monotherapy. Treatments were administered every three weeks for four sessions or till complete flattening, whichever was earlier. The Vancouver Scar Scale was used for assessment at baseline and every three weeks for four sessions, and monthly for three months post treatment. Results Both groups showed significant improvement in the Vancouver Scar Scale scores at each follow-up compared to baseline. The mean (percentage) improvement in the Vancouver Scar Scale score in Group A was 0.58 ± 0.5 (7.08%) at three weeks, which progressively increased to 4.47 ± 1.29 (54.55%) at the final follow-up. In Group B, the improvement was lesser, with 0.08 ± 0.28 (0.95%) at three weeks, increasing to 3.08 ± 0.81 (36.65%) at the final follow-up. This improvement was significantly more in Group A at all time points compared to Group B (p < 0.05). Post-procedure pain, which lasted for a few hours, was noted in three and two patients in Groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.642). None of the patients had a recurrence of keloids during the study. Limitations Limitations of this study include small sample size, single centre design, short follow-up period, lack of blinding and patient-reported outcome measures, which may impact the generalisability of the findings. Conclusion Intralesional triple combination is more effective than triamcinolone acetonide monotherapy in treating keloids, offering significantly superior improvements in the Vancouver Scar Scale scoring.
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.
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 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 découle