Clinical Observation of Sequential Laser Therapy Combined with Tension Reducer for Postoperative Tension Incision Scar Growth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ting-Yu Wang, Zi-Qing Ye, Weiguo Xie Department of Burns, Tongren Hospital of WuHan University & WuHan Third Hospital, WuHan, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Zi-Qing Ye; Weiguo Xie, Department of Burns, Tongren Hosptial of WuHan Unversity & WuHan Third Hospital, 241 Pengliuyang Road, Wuchang District, WuHan, 430074, People’s Republic of China, Tel +86 13277933698 ; +86 18071085225, Email 71737700@qq.com; wgxie@hotmail.comObjective: To investigate the clinical effectiveness of laser and secure wound-closure system (Tension reducer) in the treatment of postoperative scarring after tension incision.Methods: A retrospectively observational study was conducted. Twenty-six patients who underwent surgical treatment in our department between June 2017 and December 2021 were selected, and those treated with laser and tension reducer were treated as a combined treatment group, and those treated with laser were treated as a conventional treatment group. Fifteen patients in the conventional group were treated with the pulsed dye laser and CO2 fractional laser at 1– 2 month intervals. Eleven people in the combined treatment group were treated with the laser in addition to a tension reducer for 3– 6 months. The scar width, scar thickness, scar hardness, pruritus score, modified Vancouver scar scale and complication rates between the two treatment modalities were compared between the two groups at 6 months postoperatively.Results: The scar thickness, scar hardness and modified Vancouver scar scale of 1.25 (0.14, 1.90) mm, 31.80 (21.00, 37.20) HA, (6.00 ± 2.17) in patients in the combined treatment group were less than those of patients in the conventional treatment group of 5.50 (4.00, 11.50) mm, 42.60 (32.50, 47.00) HA, (8.25± 1.91), (Z=2.883, 2.718, t=2.904, p< 0.05). The scar width and pruritus score in the combined treatment group, were 8.00 (5.00, 18.00) mm and 0 (0, 1) respectively, while the scar score and pruritus score in the conventional treatment group, were 5.50 (4.00, 11.50) mm respectively, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups. The complication rate was 55% in the combined treatment group and no adverse reactions occurred in the control group.Conclusion: Sequential laser combined with tension reducer treatment can effectively inhibit the proliferation of postoperative tension incision scar.Keywords: tension reducer, tension surgical incision, scar, CO2 LASER, pulsed dye laser
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".