MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388949086 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22818

Treatment of hypertrophic scars with ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser assisted with different topical triamcinolone delivery ways

2023· article· en· W4388949086 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Junyi Zhou, Fen Hao, Ling Huang, Qingqing Fu, Lili Yuan, Gaoxing Luo, Jianglin Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersState Key Laboratory of Trauma, Burns and Combined InjuryNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTriamcinolone acetonideMedicineAblative caseCarbon dioxide laserAdverse effectScarsSurgeryAnesthesiaInternal medicineLaserLaser surgeryRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser has been used with triamcinolone to treat hypertrophic scars, resulting in promising success rates. However, there are different topical triamcinolone delivery methods used in scar treatment. To assess the efficacy among the different triamcinolone delivery methods, this study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser followed by penetration and injection of topical triamcinolone into thicker hypertrophic scars (height score of VSS ≥2). Study design/materials and methods: We performed a retrospective study of 155 thicker hypertrophic scar patients (height score of VSS ≥2), including 88 patients in the triamcinolone external application group and 67 patients in the triamcinolone intralesional injection group. One month after the patients had 3 treatment sessions at 4-week intervals, the scars were assessed by photography, the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), durometry and spectrocolorimetry. Any adverse effects were also evaluated. Results: The VSS scores and the hardness of the scars in both groups improved significantly compared to baseline. Moreover, the patients in the triamcinolone intralesional injection group had higher treatment efficacy (19.77 ± 21.25 %) based on their VSS scores than the patients in the triamcinolone external application group (5.94 ± 24.07 %), especially in the improvement of scar pliability, height and hardness. Meanwhile, in the triamcinolone injection group, more patients had mild and moderate improvement than in the triamcinolone application group. However, there were no differences in the distribution of the adverse effects in either group. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that using the ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser followed by different topical triamcinolone delivery methods is effective and safe for thicker hypertrophic scar improvement. The method of using the ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser assisted with triamcinolone injection had a better therapeutic outcome in thicker hypertrophic scars, as compared with triamcinolone penetration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicDermatologic Treatments and ResearchFrench-language works237,207