Efficacy of Intralesional Injection of Botulinum Toxin in Treatment of Keloids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Keloid is generally accepted to be the result of prolonged and aberrant wound healing. Botulinum toxin injections are considered an efficient therapy for keloids. The current study evaluated the efficacy and safety of intralesional injection of botulinum toxin in treatment of keloids.
 Methods: This prospective interventional study was carried out on 20 patients presented with keloids. Patients were treated by intradermal injection at the periphery of lesions by botulinum toxin as 100 IU diluted by 2 ml normal saline (5 IU/ cm3). Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) and Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) were used for the assessment of the therapeutic efficacy.
 Results: There was a statistically significant improvement in all VSS and VRS parameters. Vast majority, 18 (90%) patients, were satisfied and 2 (10%) patient was not satisfied. There was non-significant correlation between the age of patients, duration of keloid nor size of keloid in relation to degree of improvement of VSS after treatment. There was positive significant correlation between VSS before treatment and degree of improvement of VSS after treatment.
 Conclusions: Intralesional injection of botulinum toxin was effective and safe therapeutic techniques in inhibiting keloids regarding the statistically significant improvement on comparing between before treatment and after the end of follow up period.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".