提早解决烧伤肥厚性疤痕症状:激光疤痕修复最早可在受伤后 3-6 个月开始。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY
Victoria Slavinsky, Jasmine H. Wong, Bonnie C. Carney, Davon T. Lee, Rebekah Allely, Jeffrey W. Shupp, Shawn Tejiram, Taryn E. Travis
{"title":"提早解决烧伤肥厚性疤痕症状:激光疤痕修复最早可在受伤后 3-6 个月开始。","authors":"Victoria Slavinsky,&nbsp;Jasmine H. Wong,&nbsp;Bonnie C. Carney,&nbsp;Davon T. Lee,&nbsp;Rebekah Allely,&nbsp;Jeffrey W. Shupp,&nbsp;Shawn Tejiram,&nbsp;Taryn E. Travis","doi":"10.1002/lsm.23822","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Fractional ablative CO<sub>2</sub> laser (FLSR) is used to treat hypertrophic scars (HTSs) resulting from burn injuries, which are characterized by factors, such as erythema, contracture, thickness, and symptoms of pain and itch. Traditionally, waiting a year after injury for scar maturation before starting laser treatment has been recommended; however, the potential benefits of earlier intervention have gained popularity. Still, the optimal timing for beginning laser intervention in patients with HTSs remains uncertain. This study aims to evaluate the ideal timing for the initiation of FLSR for HTSs using several qualitative and quantitative assessment measures. It was hypothesized that early intervention would lead to similar improvement trends as later intervention, however, would be more ideal due to the shortened time without symptom relief for patients.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients who received three or more laser treatment sessions and completed both pre- and posttreatment evaluations were included in this analysis (<i>n</i> = 69). FLSR treatment was administered at 4–8-week intervals. Patients starting treatment before 6 months after injury were classified as the early-stage intervention group and those beginning treatment at 6–12 months after injury were classified as the late-stage intervention group. Demographic data, including the age of patients at the time of first treatment, age of scars at the time of first treatment, biological sex, ethnicity, Fitzpatrick skin type, and use of laser-assisted drug delivery, were collected by retrospective chart review. Patients were evaluated on six subjective scales and objectively for scar stiffness with durometry. For all scales, higher scores indicate worse scars. A two-way ANOVA, Student's <i>t</i>-test, and Mann–Whitney <i>U</i>-test were used to compare scores from the pre- to posttreatment evaluations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>There were no significant differences between the groups for any of the demographic or scar-specific variables; thus, differences in outcome can be attributed to the timing of intervention. Both groups demonstrated an improvement in scars with treatment over time (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). Both early- and middle-stage initiation showed scar symptom improvement in five out of six scales. In the late-stage intervention, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale-Patient average score did not show improvement. In the early-stage intervention, the Vancouver Scar Scale total did not show improvement. Quantitative evaluation of scar stiffness by durometry did not show symptom improvement in either group. The Scar Comparison Scale demonstrated the greatest improvement across groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Laser treatment led to scar improvement in at least one scale at each stage of initiation. Both intervention timelines resulted in equivalent outcomes, and early intervention should be considered when initiating FLSR treatment in burn scars to alleviate symptoms earlier.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":17961,"journal":{"name":"Lasers in Surgery and Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lsm.23822","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Addressing Burn Hypertrophic Scar Symptoms Earlier: Laser Scar Revision May Begin as Early as 3–6 Months After Injury\",\"authors\":\"Victoria Slavinsky,&nbsp;Jasmine H. Wong,&nbsp;Bonnie C. Carney,&nbsp;Davon T. Lee,&nbsp;Rebekah Allely,&nbsp;Jeffrey W. Shupp,&nbsp;Shawn Tejiram,&nbsp;Taryn E. Travis\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/lsm.23822\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>Fractional ablative CO<sub>2</sub> laser (FLSR) is used to treat hypertrophic scars (HTSs) resulting from burn injuries, which are characterized by factors, such as erythema, contracture, thickness, and symptoms of pain and itch. Traditionally, waiting a year after injury for scar maturation before starting laser treatment has been recommended; however, the potential benefits of earlier intervention have gained popularity. Still, the optimal timing for beginning laser intervention in patients with HTSs remains uncertain. This study aims to evaluate the ideal timing for the initiation of FLSR for HTSs using several qualitative and quantitative assessment measures. It was hypothesized that early intervention would lead to similar improvement trends as later intervention, however, would be more ideal due to the shortened time without symptom relief for patients.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Patients who received three or more laser treatment sessions and completed both pre- and posttreatment evaluations were included in this analysis (<i>n</i> = 69). FLSR treatment was administered at 4–8-week intervals. Patients starting treatment before 6 months after injury were classified as the early-stage intervention group and those beginning treatment at 6–12 months after injury were classified as the late-stage intervention group. Demographic data, including the age of patients at the time of first treatment, age of scars at the time of first treatment, biological sex, ethnicity, Fitzpatrick skin type, and use of laser-assisted drug delivery, were collected by retrospective chart review. Patients were evaluated on six subjective scales and objectively for scar stiffness with durometry. For all scales, higher scores indicate worse scars. A two-way ANOVA, Student's <i>t</i>-test, and Mann–Whitney <i>U</i>-test were used to compare scores from the pre- to posttreatment evaluations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>There were no significant differences between the groups for any of the demographic or scar-specific variables; thus, differences in outcome can be attributed to the timing of intervention. Both groups demonstrated an improvement in scars with treatment over time (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). Both early- and middle-stage initiation showed scar symptom improvement in five out of six scales. In the late-stage intervention, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale-Patient average score did not show improvement. In the early-stage intervention, the Vancouver Scar Scale total did not show improvement. Quantitative evaluation of scar stiffness by durometry did not show symptom improvement in either group. The Scar Comparison Scale demonstrated the greatest improvement across groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Laser treatment led to scar improvement in at least one scale at each stage of initiation. Both intervention timelines resulted in equivalent outcomes, and early intervention should be considered when initiating FLSR treatment in burn scars to alleviate symptoms earlier.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17961,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lasers in Surgery and Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lsm.23822\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lasers in Surgery and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lsm.23822\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lasers in Surgery and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lsm.23822","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:点阵烧蚀二氧化碳激光(FLSR)用于治疗烧伤导致的增生性疤痕(HTSs),这些疤痕的特征包括红斑、挛缩、厚度以及疼痛和瘙痒症状。传统上,建议在受伤一年后待疤痕成熟后再开始激光治疗;然而,提早干预的潜在益处已广为流行。不过,HTS 患者开始激光治疗的最佳时机仍不确定。本研究旨在通过几种定性和定量评估方法,评估开始对 HTSs 进行 FLSR 治疗的理想时机。假设早期干预会导致与晚期干预相似的改善趋势,但由于患者症状未缓解的时间缩短,因此早期干预更为理想:方法:接受过三次或三次以上激光治疗并完成治疗前和治疗后评估的患者被纳入本次分析(n = 69)。FLSR治疗间隔为4-8周。伤后 6 个月前开始治疗的患者被列为早期干预组,伤后 6-12 个月开始治疗的患者被列为晚期干预组。通过回顾性病历审查收集了患者的人口统计学数据,包括首次治疗时的年龄、首次治疗时的疤痕年龄、生理性别、种族、菲茨帕特里克皮肤类型以及激光辅助给药的使用情况。对患者进行了六项主观评分,并使用硬度计对疤痕硬度进行了客观评估。在所有量表中,疤痕越深表示疤痕越严重。采用双向方差分析、学生 t 检验和 Mann-Whitney U 检验来比较治疗前和治疗后的评估得分:结果:两组在人口统计学或疤痕特定变量方面均无明显差异;因此,结果差异可归因于干预时机。随着治疗时间的推移,两组患者的疤痕都有所改善(p 结论:激光治疗可改善部分患者的疤痕:激光治疗在开始的每个阶段都能使疤痕在至少一个尺度上得到改善。两组干预时间的结果相当,在对烧伤疤痕进行 FLSR 治疗时,应考虑早期干预,以尽早缓解症状。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Addressing Burn Hypertrophic Scar Symptoms Earlier: Laser Scar Revision May Begin as Early as 3–6 Months After Injury

Addressing Burn Hypertrophic Scar Symptoms Earlier: Laser Scar Revision May Begin as Early as 3–6 Months After Injury

Objectives

Fractional ablative CO2 laser (FLSR) is used to treat hypertrophic scars (HTSs) resulting from burn injuries, which are characterized by factors, such as erythema, contracture, thickness, and symptoms of pain and itch. Traditionally, waiting a year after injury for scar maturation before starting laser treatment has been recommended; however, the potential benefits of earlier intervention have gained popularity. Still, the optimal timing for beginning laser intervention in patients with HTSs remains uncertain. This study aims to evaluate the ideal timing for the initiation of FLSR for HTSs using several qualitative and quantitative assessment measures. It was hypothesized that early intervention would lead to similar improvement trends as later intervention, however, would be more ideal due to the shortened time without symptom relief for patients.

Methods

Patients who received three or more laser treatment sessions and completed both pre- and posttreatment evaluations were included in this analysis (n = 69). FLSR treatment was administered at 4–8-week intervals. Patients starting treatment before 6 months after injury were classified as the early-stage intervention group and those beginning treatment at 6–12 months after injury were classified as the late-stage intervention group. Demographic data, including the age of patients at the time of first treatment, age of scars at the time of first treatment, biological sex, ethnicity, Fitzpatrick skin type, and use of laser-assisted drug delivery, were collected by retrospective chart review. Patients were evaluated on six subjective scales and objectively for scar stiffness with durometry. For all scales, higher scores indicate worse scars. A two-way ANOVA, Student's t-test, and Mann–Whitney U-test were used to compare scores from the pre- to posttreatment evaluations.

Results

There were no significant differences between the groups for any of the demographic or scar-specific variables; thus, differences in outcome can be attributed to the timing of intervention. Both groups demonstrated an improvement in scars with treatment over time (p < 0.05). Both early- and middle-stage initiation showed scar symptom improvement in five out of six scales. In the late-stage intervention, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale-Patient average score did not show improvement. In the early-stage intervention, the Vancouver Scar Scale total did not show improvement. Quantitative evaluation of scar stiffness by durometry did not show symptom improvement in either group. The Scar Comparison Scale demonstrated the greatest improvement across groups.

Conclusion

Laser treatment led to scar improvement in at least one scale at each stage of initiation. Both intervention timelines resulted in equivalent outcomes, and early intervention should be considered when initiating FLSR treatment in burn scars to alleviate symptoms earlier.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
119
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Lasers in Surgery and Medicine publishes the highest quality research and clinical manuscripts in areas relating to the use of lasers in medicine and biology. The journal publishes basic and clinical studies on the therapeutic and diagnostic use of lasers in all the surgical and medical specialties. Contributions regarding clinical trials, new therapeutic techniques or instrumentation, laser biophysics and bioengineering, photobiology and photochemistry, outcomes research, cost-effectiveness, and other aspects of biomedicine are welcome. Using a process of rigorous yet rapid review of submitted manuscripts, findings of high scientific and medical interest are published with a minimum delay.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信