A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INTRALESIONAL TRIAMCINOLONE ACETONIDE ALONE VERSUS COMBINATION OF 5-FLUOROURACIL AND TRIAMCINOLONE ACETONIDE IN THE TREATMENT OF KELOID
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Keloids are benign proliferative condition of dermal broblast. Intralesional corticosteroid improves keloid but associated with signicant adverse effects like dyspigmentation, tissue atrophy and telengectasia and contraindicated in certain conditions like hypertension and diabetes. 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU), a pyrimidine analogue with an inhibitory effect on TGF-β induced broblast proliferation is useful in treatment of keloids but is associated with ulceration and pain. A low dose of Triamcinolone if added to 5-FU injection overcomes these issues. Approach: This study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital. Sixty patients; thirty in each group were included. In group A, once weekly intralesional Triamcinolone and in group B, intralesional injection of Triamcinolone mixed with 5-Flurouracil in 1: 9 dilution were injected for 8 sessions. Parameters of Vancouver scale were noted at the baseline and at the end of treatment. Results: Out of 60 patients enrolled in this study. The combination group was better in improving height (62.11% vs 78%), pliability (44.14% vs 8.81%), and vascularity (55.78% vs 61.30%) and results were statistically signicant (P valve <0.05) however it was not better in improving pigmentation (43.47% vs 20%) and volume (69.79% vs 80.76%) (P valve > 0.05). Pain and pruritus improved completely (100%) in both the groups at the end of the treatment. Excellent improvement in patient and observer assessment score was seen in 96.67% vs 3.33% in combination group and TAC group respectively. The difference was statistically signicant (P valve<0.05). Combination was better irrespective of age of the patient, duration, site, and origin of keloid. All patients treated with 5 FU develop ulceration and pain. Conclusion: Both the therapies are effective but combination is superior to TAC alone. We advocate that 5-FU should be used alone, addition of TCA does not have any added advantage in therapeutic outcome rather it increases the cost of treatment.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".