Evaluation of the effect of fractional <scp>CO</scp>2 laser on histopathological picture and <scp>TGF</scp>‐<i>β</i>1 expression in hypertrophic scar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hypertrophic scar is a form of abnormal wound healing process in which tissue repair regulating mechanism is disrupted. Transforming growth factor β1 has a particular importance in the fibrotic scarring response. Treatment of hypertrophic scar included many chemical, physical, and surgical options. Fractional CO2 laser devices have gained acceptance as a way for managing hypertrophic scar. Aims of this study are: (a) to determine the clinical and histopathological effects of fractional CO2 laser on hypertrophic scar, (b) to evaluate the expression pattern of transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1) as an important fibrogenic factor before and 6 months after fractional CO2 laser treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients of hypertrophic scar were selected, each patient was treated by four sessions with 1 month apart with fractional CO2 laser. Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) was used to assess the patients before and after laser treatment. Skin biopsy was taken from eight cases before and 3 months after four fractional CO2 laser sessions and four normal skin control biopsies. All were assessed by hematoxylin-eosin (H&E), Masson's trichrome, Van Gieson and immunohistochemical (IHC) staining with TGF-β1. The epidermal thickness was assessed before and after treatment by image analyzing system software. RESULTS: There was statistically significant difference in VSS before and after fractional CO2 laser (P > 0.001). The epidermal thickness showed significant increase after laser treatment (P > 0.001), and there was also thinning in stratum corneum and replacement of the irregular collagen bands with organized new collagen fibrils as demonstrated by H&E and the other special stains. The study also showed significant decrease in TGF-β1 expression after laser therapy (P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Fractional CO2 laser could be considered as a good way for hypertrophic scar management. It normalizes dermal collagen as imaged by histopathological picture and the change in TGF-β1 expression.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".