The effect of botulinum toxin A injection immediately after operation on frontal traumatic scars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the clinical effect of botulinum toxin type A injection in the prevention and treatment of frontal traumatic scars immediately after operation. Methods From January 2016 to January 2018, among the 152 patients with frontal trauma admitted to the Department of Plastic Surgery, Daping Hospital, Army Military Medical University, patients with wounds almost perpendicular to the Langer line were selected. Immediately after debridement and suture, botulinum toxin type A was injected with a concentration of 2 U botulinum toxin per 0.10 ml of solution, 0.05 to 0.10 ml (1 to 2 U) per 1 cm was injected into the frontal muscle according to frontal muscle strength.With reference to the observer scar assessment scale and Vancouver scar scale, the color, width, texture, thickness, pain, and itching of the postoperative scar of the frontal wound were evaluated at follow-up. Results A total of 44 patients were included, 22 males and 22 females, aged (31.5 ± 8.4) years old, with a wound length of 1-12 cm(average, 3.5 cm) and a Botox injection volume around wounds of 0.10-0.90 ml (2-18 U) . The patients were followed up for 6 to 24 months. One patient had mild to moderate ptosis, which completely disappeared within one month. Within 6 weeks after operation, the scars in 44 patients were pink and hard. 3-6 months later, the scars gradually became soft, narrow and flat with similiar skin color, no pain and itching left in 42 patients. The satisfaction rate was 95.5% (42/44). Two patients were dissatisfied because of scar pigmentation and width. Conclusions Immediate injection of botulinum toxin type A after debridement and suture of the frontal trauma wound can effectively prevent and improve scar appearance with a high rate of satisfaction. Key words: Botulinum toxins, type A; Cicatrix; Suture techniques; Injury, forehead
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".