Comparative Effectiveness of 5-Fluorouracil Dissolving Microneedle Patch vs. 5-Fluorouracil Intralesional Injection for the Treatment of Keloid Scars: A Randomised, Single-Blinded, Split-Scar Study.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 CELL BIOLOGY
Jeerapond Leelawattanachai, Savita Sittisaksomjai, Wareeporn Disphanurat
{"title":"Comparative Effectiveness of 5-Fluorouracil Dissolving Microneedle Patch vs. 5-Fluorouracil Intralesional Injection for the Treatment of Keloid Scars: A Randomised, Single-Blinded, Split-Scar Study.","authors":"Jeerapond Leelawattanachai, Savita Sittisaksomjai, Wareeporn Disphanurat","doi":"10.1111/wrr.70078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intralesional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) injections are effective for treating keloid scars but are often associated with pain, hyperpigmentation and ulceration, limiting patient compliance. Dissolving microneedle (DMN) patches offer a novel, minimally invasive and potentially painless alternative for drug delivery. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of 5-FU DMN patches with intralesional 5-FU injections for the treatment of keloid scars. A total of 37 patients were enrolled in this randomised, single-blind clinical trial. Each scar was split in half, with one half treated weekly using 5-FU DMN patches for 12 weeks and the other half receiving monthly intralesional 5-FU injections over the same period. Outcomes were assessed using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and scar volume measurements via multispectral imaging at baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 24. Both treatments significantly improved POSAS scores and reduced keloid volume over time. Intralesional injections resulted in a faster response and significantly greater volume reduction at Week 12 (p = 0.008), but by Week 24, no significant difference in efficacy was observed between the two methods. DMN patches were associated with significantly less pain and better patient comfort. These findings support the use of 5-FU DMN patches as a minimally invasive, patient-friendly alternative to injections for the long-term management of keloid scars.</p>","PeriodicalId":23864,"journal":{"name":"Wound Repair and Regeneration","volume":"33 4","pages":"e70078"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wound Repair and Regeneration","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.70078","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CELL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Intralesional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) injections are effective for treating keloid scars but are often associated with pain, hyperpigmentation and ulceration, limiting patient compliance. Dissolving microneedle (DMN) patches offer a novel, minimally invasive and potentially painless alternative for drug delivery. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of 5-FU DMN patches with intralesional 5-FU injections for the treatment of keloid scars. A total of 37 patients were enrolled in this randomised, single-blind clinical trial. Each scar was split in half, with one half treated weekly using 5-FU DMN patches for 12 weeks and the other half receiving monthly intralesional 5-FU injections over the same period. Outcomes were assessed using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and scar volume measurements via multispectral imaging at baseline and Weeks 4, 8, 12 and 24. Both treatments significantly improved POSAS scores and reduced keloid volume over time. Intralesional injections resulted in a faster response and significantly greater volume reduction at Week 12 (p = 0.008), but by Week 24, no significant difference in efficacy was observed between the two methods. DMN patches were associated with significantly less pain and better patient comfort. These findings support the use of 5-FU DMN patches as a minimally invasive, patient-friendly alternative to injections for the long-term management of keloid scars.

5-氟尿嘧啶溶解微针贴片与5-氟尿嘧啶病灶内注射治疗瘢痕疙瘩疤痕的疗效比较:一项随机、单盲、分裂疤痕研究
病灶内5-氟尿嘧啶(5-FU)注射对治疗瘢痕瘤有效,但通常伴有疼痛、色素沉着和溃疡,限制了患者的依从性。溶解微针(DMN)贴片提供了一种新颖的、微创的、潜在的无痛的药物递送替代方案。本研究旨在比较5-FU DMN贴片与5-FU局部注射治疗瘢痕疙瘩的疗效和安全性。共有37名患者参加了这项随机、单盲临床试验。每个疤痕被分成两半,其中一半每周使用5-FU DMN贴片治疗12周,另一半在同一时期每月接受5-FU局部注射。在基线和第4、8、12和24周时,使用患者和观察者疤痕评估量表(POSAS)以及通过多光谱成像测量疤痕体积来评估结果。随着时间的推移,两种治疗方法都显著提高了POSAS评分,减少了瘢痕疙瘩的体积。在第12周,病灶内注射的疗效更快,体积缩小明显更大(p = 0.008),但到第24周,两种方法的疗效无显著差异。DMN贴片与疼痛明显减轻和患者舒适度提高相关。这些发现支持使用5-FU DMN贴片作为一种微创的、对患者友好的替代注射来长期治疗瘢痕疙瘩疤痕。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Wound Repair and Regeneration
Wound Repair and Regeneration 医学-皮肤病学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.40%
发文量
71
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Wound Repair and Regeneration provides extensive international coverage of cellular and molecular biology, connective tissue, and biological mediator studies in the field of tissue repair and regeneration and serves a diverse audience of surgeons, plastic surgeons, dermatologists, biochemists, cell biologists, and others. Wound Repair and Regeneration is the official journal of The Wound Healing Society, The European Tissue Repair Society, The Japanese Society for Wound Healing, and The Australian Wound Management Association.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信