5-氟尿嘧啶联合超脉冲二氧化碳激光治疗烧伤增生性瘢痕疗效及影响因素分析。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Yi Jiang, Qiang Dai, Wenjuan Shi, Yong Zhang, Shihuan Xie, Qiliang Xu
{"title":"5-氟尿嘧啶联合超脉冲二氧化碳激光治疗烧伤增生性瘢痕疗效及影响因素分析。","authors":"Yi Jiang, Qiang Dai, Wenjuan Shi, Yong Zhang, Shihuan Xie, Qiliang Xu","doi":"10.1080/15569527.2025.2519029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Laser therapy is widely used in scar repair, and the use of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) as an adjuvant treatment has also attracted attention. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic efficacy of 5-FU combined with ultra-pulsed fractional carbon dioxide laser (UFCL) treatment and UFCL treatment alone for hypertrophic scars after burns, and to analyse influencing factors to provide evidence for clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 150 patients with hypertrophic scars from burns were randomly divided into an observation group (OG) and a control group (CG). Assessments were based on the Vancouver scar scale (VSS), patient scar assessment scale (PSAS), and records of adverse reactions (AR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of burn causes, disease duration, hypertrophic scar formation time, and wound healing time (<i>P</i> > 0.05). After treatment, the OG showed greater improvements in VSS and PSAS scores compared to the CG. In terms of clinical efficacy, 11 cases in the OG achieved complete recovery, and 42 cases showed visible improvement, with a total effective rate of 93.33%, higher than that of the CG. The incidence of AR in the OG (6.67%) was lower as against the CG. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that advanced age, longer disease duration, and higher pre-treatment VSS scores were negatively correlated with treatment effectiveness (<i>P <</i> 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The combination of 5-FU and UFCL treatment is significantly more effective than laser treatment alone. Risk factors affecting clinical efficacy include advanced age, longer disease duration, and higher pre-treatment VSS scores.</p>","PeriodicalId":11023,"journal":{"name":"Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Therapeutic efficacy and influencing factors of 5-fluorouracil combined with ultra-pulsed fractional carbon dioxide laser treatment for hypertrophic scars in burn patients.\",\"authors\":\"Yi Jiang, Qiang Dai, Wenjuan Shi, Yong Zhang, Shihuan Xie, Qiliang Xu\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15569527.2025.2519029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Laser therapy is widely used in scar repair, and the use of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) as an adjuvant treatment has also attracted attention. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic efficacy of 5-FU combined with ultra-pulsed fractional carbon dioxide laser (UFCL) treatment and UFCL treatment alone for hypertrophic scars after burns, and to analyse influencing factors to provide evidence for clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 150 patients with hypertrophic scars from burns were randomly divided into an observation group (OG) and a control group (CG). Assessments were based on the Vancouver scar scale (VSS), patient scar assessment scale (PSAS), and records of adverse reactions (AR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of burn causes, disease duration, hypertrophic scar formation time, and wound healing time (<i>P</i> > 0.05). After treatment, the OG showed greater improvements in VSS and PSAS scores compared to the CG. In terms of clinical efficacy, 11 cases in the OG achieved complete recovery, and 42 cases showed visible improvement, with a total effective rate of 93.33%, higher than that of the CG. The incidence of AR in the OG (6.67%) was lower as against the CG. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that advanced age, longer disease duration, and higher pre-treatment VSS scores were negatively correlated with treatment effectiveness (<i>P <</i> 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The combination of 5-FU and UFCL treatment is significantly more effective than laser treatment alone. Risk factors affecting clinical efficacy include advanced age, longer disease duration, and higher pre-treatment VSS scores.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11023,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15569527.2025.2519029\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15569527.2025.2519029","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:激光治疗在疤痕修复中应用广泛,5-氟尿嘧啶(5-FU)作为辅助治疗也备受关注。本研究旨在比较5-FU联合超脉冲分数二氧化碳激光(UFCL)治疗与单独UFCL治疗烧伤后增生性瘢痕的疗效,并分析影响因素,为临床实践提供依据。方法:150例烧伤增生性瘢痕患者随机分为观察组(OG)和对照组(CG)。评估基于温哥华疤痕量表(VSS)、患者疤痕评估量表(PSAS)和不良反应记录(AR)。结果:两组患者烧伤原因、病程、增生性瘢痕形成时间、创面愈合时间比较,差异均无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。治疗后,与CG相比,OG组在VSS和PSAS评分方面表现出更大的改善。临床疗效方面,OG组11例完全恢复,42例明显好转,总有效率93.33%,高于CG组。OG组的AR发生率(6.67%)低于CG组。多因素回归分析显示,年龄越大、病程越长、治疗前VSS评分越高与治疗效果呈负相关(P < 0.05)。结论:5-FU联合UFCL治疗明显优于单纯激光治疗。影响临床疗效的危险因素包括高龄、病程较长、治疗前VSS评分较高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Therapeutic efficacy and influencing factors of 5-fluorouracil combined with ultra-pulsed fractional carbon dioxide laser treatment for hypertrophic scars in burn patients.

Background: Laser therapy is widely used in scar repair, and the use of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) as an adjuvant treatment has also attracted attention. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic efficacy of 5-FU combined with ultra-pulsed fractional carbon dioxide laser (UFCL) treatment and UFCL treatment alone for hypertrophic scars after burns, and to analyse influencing factors to provide evidence for clinical practice.

Methods: A total of 150 patients with hypertrophic scars from burns were randomly divided into an observation group (OG) and a control group (CG). Assessments were based on the Vancouver scar scale (VSS), patient scar assessment scale (PSAS), and records of adverse reactions (AR).

Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of burn causes, disease duration, hypertrophic scar formation time, and wound healing time (P > 0.05). After treatment, the OG showed greater improvements in VSS and PSAS scores compared to the CG. In terms of clinical efficacy, 11 cases in the OG achieved complete recovery, and 42 cases showed visible improvement, with a total effective rate of 93.33%, higher than that of the CG. The incidence of AR in the OG (6.67%) was lower as against the CG. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that advanced age, longer disease duration, and higher pre-treatment VSS scores were negatively correlated with treatment effectiveness (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: The combination of 5-FU and UFCL treatment is significantly more effective than laser treatment alone. Risk factors affecting clinical efficacy include advanced age, longer disease duration, and higher pre-treatment VSS scores.

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
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
40
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology is an international, peer-reviewed journal that covers all types of harm to cutaneous and ocular systems. Areas of particular interest include pharmaceutical and medical products; consumer, personal care, and household products; and issues in environmental and occupational exposures. In addition to original research papers, reviews and short communications are invited, as well as concise, relevant, and critical reviews of topics of contemporary significance.
×
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