Altering CO2 Laser Pulse Energy Settings Did Not Influence Differential Gene Transcription in Normal Skin in a Red Duroc Pig Model

OBJECTIVES

Fractional ablative CO2 lasers are used clinically to treat cutaneous burn scars with reported varying degrees of effectiveness. It was hypothesized that different laser pulse energy settings may lead to differential gene transcription in a porcine model.

METHODS

Uninjured skin from red Duroc pigs was treated with a fractional ablative CO2 laser set to 70, 100, or 120 mJ across the abdomen (n = 4 areas per treatment). Punch biopsies of both treated and untreated sites were taken before treatment (baseline), at 30 min, and at each hour for 6 h and stored in All-Protect tissue reagent. The biopsies were then used to isolate RNA, which was subsequently used in qRT-PCR for eight genes associated with wound healing and the extracellular matrix: CCL2, IL6, FGF2, TIMP1, TIMP3, COL1A2, MMP2, and DCN. RPL13a was used as a housekeeping gene to normalize the eight genes of interest. One-way ANOVA tests were used to assess for differences among laser pulse energies and two-way ANOVA tests were used to assess the differences between treated and untreated areas.

RESULTS

While six of the eight genes were upregulated after treatment (p < 0.05), there were no significant differences in gene expression between the different laser pulse energies for any of the eight genes.

CONCLUSION

While laser treatment is correlated with a positive and significant upregulation for six of the eight genes 4 h after intervention, the pulse energy settings of the laser did not lead to a statistically significant difference in gene transcription among the treatment areas. Different laser pulse energies may not be required to induce similar cellular responses in a clinical setting.

Interventions for postburn pruritus

BACKGROUND

Postburn pruritus (itch) is a common and distressing symptom experienced on healing or healed burn or donor site wounds. Topical, systemic, and physical treatments are available to control postburn pruritus; however, it remains unclear how effective these are.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions for treating postburn pruritus in any care setting.

SEARCH METHODS

In September 2022, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid Embase, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and scanned references of relevant publications to identify eligible trials. There were no restrictions with respect to language, publication date, or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled people with postburn pruritus to compare an intervention for postburn pruritus with any other intervention, placebo or sham intervention, or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 RCTs assessing 21 interventions with 1166 randomised participants. These 21 interventions can be grouped into six categories: neuromodulatory agents (such as doxepin, gabapentin, pregabalin, ondansetron), topical therapies (such as CQ-01 hydrogel, silicone gel, enalapril ointment, Provase moisturiser, beeswax and herbal oil cream), physical modalities (such as massage therapy, therapeutic touch, extracorporeal shock wave therapy, enhanced education about silicone gel sheeting), laser scar revision (pulsed dye laser, pulsed high-intensity laser, fractional CO2 laser), electrical stimulation (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation), and other therapies (cetirizine/cimetidine combination, lemon balm tea). Most RCTs were conducted at academic hospitals and were at a high risk of performance, attrition, and detection bias. While 24 out of 25 included studies reported change in burn-related pruritus, secondary outcomes such as cost-effectiveness, pain, patient perception, wound healing, and participant health-related quality of life were not reported or were reported incompletely. Neuromodulatory agents versus antihistamines or placebo There is low-certainty evidence that doxepin cream may reduce burn-related pruritus compared with oral antihistamine (mean difference (MD) -2.60 on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS), 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.79 to -1.42; 2 studies, 49 participants). A change of 2 points represents a minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Due to very low-certainty evidence, it is uncertain whether doxepin cream impacts the incidence of somnolence as an adverse event compared to oral antihistamine (risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.25; 1 study, 24 participants). No data were reported on pain in the included study. There is low-certainty evidence that gabapentin may reduce burn-related pruritus compared with cetirizine (MD -2.40 VAS, 95% CI -4.14 to -0.66; 1 study, 40 participants). A change of 2 points represents a MCID. There is low-certainty evidence that gabapentin reduces the incidence of somnolence compared to cetirizine (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.38; 1 study, 40 participants). No data were reported on pain in the included study. There is low-certainty evidence that pregabalin may result in a reduction in burn-related pruritus intensity compared with cetirizine with pheniramine maleate (MD -0.80 VAS, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.36; 1 study, 40 participants). A change of 2 points represents a MCID. There is low-certainty evidence that pregabalin reduces the incidence of somnolence compared to cetirizine (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.69; 1 study, 40 participants). No data were reported on pain in the included study. There is moderate-certainty evidence that ondansetron probably results in a reduction in burn-related pruritus intensity compared with diphenhydramine (MD -0.76 on a 0 to 10 numeric analogue scale (NAS), 95% CI -1.50 to -0.02; 1 study, 38 participants). A change of 2 points represents a MCID. No data were reported on pain and adverse events in the included study. Topical therapies versus relevant comparators There is moderate-certainty evidence that enalapril ointment probably decreases mean burn-related pruritus compared with placebo control (MD -0.70 on a 0 to 4 scoring table for itching, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.36; 1 study, 60 participants). No data were reported on pain and adverse events in the included study. Physical modalities versus relevant comparators Compared with standard care, there is low-certainty evidence that massage may reduce burn-related pruritus (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.86, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.27; 2 studies, 166 participants) and pain (SMD -1.32, 95% CI -1.66 to -0.98). These SMDs equate to a 4.60-point reduction in pruritus and a 3.74-point reduction in pain on a 10-point VAS. A change of 2 VAS points in itch represents a MCID. No data were reported on adverse events in the included studies. There is low-certainty evidence that extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) may reduce burn-related pruritus compared with sham stimulation (SMD -1.20, 95% CI -1.65 to -0.75; 2 studies, 91 participants). This equates to a 5.93-point reduction in pruritus on a 22-point 12-item Pruritus Severity Scale. There is low-certainty evidence that ESWT may reduce pain compared with sham stimulation (MD 2.96 on a 0 to 25 pressure pain threshold (PPT), 95% CI 1.76 to 4.16; 1 study, 45 participants). No data were reported on adverse events in the included studies. Laser scar revision versus untreated or placebo controls There is moderate-certainty evidence that pulsed high-intensity laser probably results in a reduction in burn-related pruritus intensity compared with placebo laser (MD -0.51 on a 0 to 1 Itch Severity Scale (ISS), 95% CI -0.64 to -0.38; 1 study, 49 participants). There is moderate-certainty evidence that pulsed high-intensity laser probably reduces pain compared with placebo laser (MD -3.23 VAS, 95% CI -5.41 to -1.05; 1 study, 49 participants). No data were reported on adverse events in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate to low-certainty evidence on the effects of 21 interventions. Most studies were small and at a high risk of bias related to blinding and incomplete outcome data. Where there is moderate-certainty evidence, practitioners should consider the applicability of the evidence for their patients.

Ultrasound measurement of traumatic scar and skin thickness: a scoping review of evidence across the translational pipeline of research-to-practice

OBJECTIVES

To identify the ultrasound methods used in the literature to measure traumatic scar thickness, and map gaps in the translation of these methods using evidence across the research-to-practice pipeline.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic database searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature and Web of Science. Grey literature searches were conducted in Google. Searches were conducted from inception (date last searched 27 May 2022).

DATA EXTRACTION

Records using brightness mode (B-mode) ultrasound to measure scar and skin thickness across the research-to-practice pipeline of evidence were included. Data were extracted from included records pertaining to: methods used; reliability and measurement error; clinical, health service, implementation and feasibility outcomes; factors influencing measurement methods; strengths and limitations; and use of measurement guidelines and/or frameworks.

RESULTS

Of the 9309 records identified, 118 were analysed (n=82 articles, n=36 abstracts) encompassing 5213 participants. Reporting of methods used was poor. B-mode, including high-frequency (ie, >20 MHz) ultrasound was the most common type of ultrasound used (n=72 records; 61% of records), and measurement of the combined epidermal and dermal thickness (n=28; 24%) was more commonly measured than the epidermis or dermis alone (n=7, 6%). Reliability of ultrasound measurement was poorly reported (n=14; 12%). The scar characteristics most commonly reported to be measured were epidermal oedema, dermal fibrosis and hair follicle density. Most records analysed (n=115; 97%) pertained to the early stages of the research-to-practice pipeline, as part of research initiatives.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of evaluation of measurement initiatives in routine clinical practice was identified as an evidence gap. Diverse methods used in the literature identified the need for greater standardisation of ultrasound thickness measurements. Findings have been used to develop nine methodological considerations for practitioners to guide methods and reporting.

Carbon dioxide laser treatment of burn-related scarring: Results of the ELIPSE (Early Laser Intervention Promotes Scar Evolution) prospective randomized controlled trial

AIM

To investigate the impact of ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser (AFCO2L) on patient-reported outcomes measures, subjective scar appearance, dermal architecture, and gene transcription in early burn scars.

METHODS

Fifteen adult patients with a burn-related scar were recruited. Inclusion criteria were two non-contiguous scar areas of 1% total body surface area, similar baseline Vancouver scar scale (VSS) score and 3months since the time of injury. All participants acted as their own control. Scars were randomized to treatment or control. Treatment scars received three AFCO2L treatments at 6-week intervals. Outcome measures were recorded at baseline, 3, 6, and 12-months post-treatment. Measures included blinded VSS, Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), Brisbane Burn Scar Impact Profile (BBSIP), blinded scar photo assessment, histological tissue analysis, and RNA sequencing analysis.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found in VSS, scar erythema, or pigmentation. Patient POSAS improved in scar thickness and texture following AFCO2L. All elements of BBSIP improved in control and laser groups. AFCO2L-treated scars were scored better than control scars by blinded raters. RNA sequencing illustrated that AFCO2L induced sustained changes in fibroblast gene expression.

CONCLUSIONS

AFCO2L treated scars had significantly altered scar thickness and texture 6 months post-laser and were rated better than controls on blinded photo analysis after 3 treatments. RNASeq results suggest laser treatment alters the transcriptome of treated fibroblasts for at least 3 months after treatment. Expansion of this research to study in more depth fibroblast changes in response to laser, as well as assessing the impact on daily activity and quality of life, will be beneficial.

Fractional ablative laser therapy for the treatment of severe burn scars: A pilot study of the underlying mechanisms

Ablative fractional resurfacing is clinically an efficient treatment for burn scar management. The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the poorly understood mechanisms underlying ablative fractional CO2 laser (AFL-CO2) therapy in relation to biomarkers S100 and 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 (11β-HSD1). S100 stains for Langerhans cells and neuronal cells, potentially representing the pruritus experienced. 11β-HSD1 catalyses the interconversion of cortisol and cortisone in cells, promoting tissue remodelling. Immunohistochemical analysis of S100 and 11β-HSD1 protein expression in the dermis and epidermis of the skin was performed on normal skin, before and after AFL-CO2 therapy. Data assessing outcome parameters was collected concurrently with the skin biopsies. 13 patients were treated with AFL-CO2 therapy. Langerhans cells decreased by 39% after 2nd treatment. Neuronal cells were overexpressed before treatment in the scar tissue by 91% but levels returned to that resembling normal skin. 11β-HSD1 expression in keratinocytes was significantly higher after laser treatment compared to before in scar tissue (p <0.01). No clear correlation was found in dermal fibroblast numbers throughout the treatment course. Whilst the role of the explored mechanisms and their association with clinical outcomes cannot conclusively be stated, this pilot study demonstrates promising trends that encourages investigation into this relationship.

Laser-assisted drug delivery of synthetic alpha melanocyte stimulating hormone and L-tyrosine leads to increased pigmentation area and expression of melanogenesis genes in a porcine hypertrophic scar model

OBJECTIVES

One symptom of hypertrophic scar (HTS) that can develop after burn injury is dyschromia with hyper- and hypopigmentation. There are limited treatments for these conditions. Previously, we showed there is no expression of alpha melanocyte stimulating hormone (α-MSH) in hypopigmented scars, and if these melanocytes are treated with synthetic α-MSH in vitro, they respond by repigmenting. The current study tested the same hypothesis in the in vivo environment using laser-assisted drug delivery (LADD).

METHODS

HTSs were created in red Duroc pigs. At Day 77 (pre), they were treated with CO₂ fractional ablative laser (FLSR). Synthetic α-MSH was delivered as a topical solution dissolved in  l-tyrosine (n = 6, treated). Control scars received LADD of  l-tyrosine only (n = 2, control). Scars were treated and examined weekly through Week 4. Digital images and punch biopsies of hyper, hypo-, and normally pigmented scar and skin were collected. Digital pictures were analyzed with ImageJ by tracing the area of hyperpigmentation. Epidermal sheets were obtained from punch biopsies through dispase separation and RNA was isolated. qRT-PCR was run for melanogenesis-related genes: tyrosinase (TYR), tyrosinase-related protein-1 (TYRP1), and dopachrome tautomerase (DCT). Two-way ANOVA with multiple comparisons and Dunnett's correction compared the groups.

RESULTS

The areas of hyperpigmentation were variable before treatment. Therefore, data is represented as fold-change where each scar was normalized to its own pre value. Within the LADD of NDP α-MSH + l-tyrosine group, hyperpigmented areas gradually increased each week, reaching 1.3-fold over pre by Week 4. At each timepoint, area of hyperpigmentation was greater in the treated versus the control (1.04 ± 0.05 vs. 0.89 ± 0.08, 1.21 ± 0.07 vs. 0.98 ± 0.24, 1.21 ± 0.08 vs. 1.04 ± 0.11, 1.28 ± 0.11 vs. 0.94 ± 0.25; fold-change from pre-). Within the treatment group, pretreatment, levels of TYR were decreased -17.76 ± 4.52 below the level of normal skin in hypopigmented scars. After 1 treatment, potentially due to laser fractionation, the levels decreased to -43.49 ± 5.52. After 2, 3, and 4 treatments, there was ever increasing levels of TYR to almost the level of normally pigmented skin (-35.74 ± 15.72, -23.25 ± 6.80, -5.52 ± 2.22 [p < 0.01, Week 4]). This pattern was also observed for TYRP1 (pre = -12.94 ± 1.82, Week 1 = -48.85 ± 13.25 [p < 0.01], Weeks 2, 3, and 4 = -34.45 ± 14.64, -28.19 ± 4.98, -6.93 ± 3.05 [p < 0.01, Week 4]) and DCT (pre = -214.95 ± 89.42, Week 1 = -487.93 ± 126.32 [p < 0.05], Weeks 2, 3, and 4 = -219.06 ± 79.33, -72.91 ± 20.45 [p < 0.001], -76.00 ± 24.26 [p < 0.001]). Similar patterns were observed for scars treated with LADD of  l-tyrosine alone without NDP α-MSH. For each gene, in hyperpigmented scar, levels increased at Week 4 of treatment compared to Week 1 (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

A clinically-relevant FLSR treatment method can be combined with topical delivery of synthetic α-MSH and l-tyrosine to increase the area of pigmentation and expression of melanogenesis genes in hypopigmented HTS. LADD of  l-tyrosine alone leads to increased expression of melanogenesis genes. Future studies will aim to optimize drug delivery, timing, and dosing.

Clinical Observation of Microplasma Radiofrequency Technology Combined With Glucocorticoid Injection in the Treatment of Hundreds of Cases of Hypertrophic Scar After Early Deep Burn and Scald

BACKGROUND

To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of microplasma radiofrequency technology combined with glucocorticoid injection in the treatment of hypertrophic scarring after early deep burns and scalding.

METHODS

A total of 150 patients with hypertrophic scars after early deep burns from June 2018 to June 2021 were randomly divided into 3 groups, with 50 cases in each group. The patients were treated with compound betamethasone injection (Group A), microplasma radiofrequency technique (Group B), and compound betamethasone injection combined with microplasma radiofrequency technology (Group C). Each course of treatment included 5 standard treatments, and they were performed 6 weeks apart. Each patient was analyzed using the Vancouver scar scale and visual analogy scale after each treatment. The results were compared over time and across groups using repeated measurement analysis of variance.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients in these 3 groups completed this study. As treatment continued, the Vancouver scar scale value of Group C decreased more rapidly than that of Group A and Group B, and the difference was statistically significant ( P <0.05). In the improvement of scar pain and itching, there was little difference between Group C and Group A ( P >0.05), but both were better than Group B, and the difference was statistically significant ( P <0.05). Regarding the incidence of adverse reactions, there was little difference between Group C and Group B ( P >0.05), but the incidence of adverse reactions was lower than that of Group A, and the difference was statistically significant ( P <0.05).

CONCLUSION

Microplasma radiofrequency combined with glucocorticoid injection in the treatment of hypertrophic scarring after early deep burns is effective, safe, and has a low incidence of adverse reactions, and it merits clinical promotion.

Comparison of stationary and dynamic fractional CO2 laser modalities of large burns treatment: Experimental laboratory model

OBJECTIVES

To experimentally compare two fractional ablative CO₂ laser handpieces intended for the treatment of large area burn scars. Each handpiece coverage rate, depth of penetration and application time were measured and compared in a simulation model of large area burns scars using a dynamic/roller handpiece (small footprint) and a stationary/stamping handpiece (large footprint).

METHODS

A 30 W fractional ablative CO₂ laser was applied using 2 different handpieces and footprints on a A4 size paper stack. The handpieces were a stationary (stamping) handpiece with 7 × 7 (49 pixels/square shape) and dynamic (roller) handpiece with 7 × 1 (7 pixels/single row shape). For both handpieces the laser settings were fixed at "High" power (30 W), providing an energy level of 100 mJ/pixel. Both handpieces were applied perpendicular to the surface, with the process repeated for the dynamic handpiece with an angled operation. The depth of laser penetration was assessed by the number of pages of paper having visible holes and burn area coverage time measured under each handpiece/condition.

RESULTS

The application time was faster and the penetration deeper for the dynamic handpiece compared to the stationary handpiece in both the perpendicular and angled conditions. This study has practical implications for lasers operators to improve time efficacy in large area scars with improved clinical endpoints.

CONCLUSION

The fractional ablative dynamic handpiece demonstrated superior application efficiency compared to the stationary handpiece in the simulated treatment of large surface area burn scars, reducing treatment time with improved depth of penetration.

Analysis of Energy and Density in Treating Hypertrophic Scar After Burn in Children with CO2 Dot Matrix Laser

Objective: To analyze and compare the effect of the combination of energy and density parameters of CO2 dot matrix laser in the hyperplastic stage of pediatric burn. Materials and Methods: A total of 160 pediatric patients with hypertrophic scar after limb burn from 2017 to 2020 were randomly divided into four parameter groups (n = 40). The patients were treated with ablative fraction carbon dioxide laser, once every 10 weeks. During the interval of laser treatment, Compound Heparin Sodium and Allantoin Gel (Contractubex) was applied externally, tid, and elastic cover or elastic bandage is attached to the affected limb. Scoring based on the Vancouver Scar Scale is performed before each laser treatment, The score before the first treatment was the initial score, which was scored by two people separately, and the average score was calculated. Subsequently, the patients were treated four times and scored. The differences between each treatment and the first score of each parameter group were compared. Under the same energy and different treatment density, the scores after each treatment were compared. Under the same density and different energy, the scores after each treatment were compared. The bleeding and pigmentation of each parameter group were compared. Results: The increase of density can show the therapeutic effect earlier than the increase of energy, and 25mj energy and 10% density have better intervention effect. With the course of disease and the progress of treatment, the correlation between intervention effect and parameters tends to weaken. Comparing the number of cases with different scores between each treatment and the first time, the score in the 5% density group was lower than that in the 10% density group, but there was no significant difference between the 25mj and 17.5mj energy levels in the same density group. The intervention effect of the increase of density on scar was better than that of energy, and the increase of energy and density could aggravate the pain. Conclusion: In pediatric burn hypertrophic scars treated by CO2 dot matrix laser in exfoliation mode, the intervention effect of increasing density is better than that of energy. When setting laser treatment parameters, we should give priority to increasing density and adjust energy according to the effect of treatment and the condition of pain, bleeding and color precipitation. In this study, the best combination of parameters is 17.5mj/10%.

Efficacy and safety of a dual-scan protocol for carbon dioxide laser in the treatment of split-thickness skin graft contraction in a red Duroc pig model

BACKGROUND

Fractional CO₂ laser plays an important role in scar management post split-thickness skin graft by loosening the graft contracture and restoring the smoothness of the surface. However, the optimal treatment protocol remains unknown. This study applied a dual-scan protocol to achieve both releasing and ablation of contracted skin graft. We comprehensively describe this treatment method and compare the efficacy and safety between this dual-scan method and the conventional mono-scan mode.

METHODS

A hypercontracted scar model after split-thickness skin grafting in red Duroc pigs was established. All scars meeting the inclusion criteria were randomly divided into four groups: high fluence-low density (HF-LD), low fluence-high density (LF-HD), combined group and control group. The energy per unit area was similar in the HF-LD and LF-HD groups. Two laser interventions were performed at a 6-week interval. The efficacy of the treatment was evaluated by objective measures of scar area, release rate, elasticity, thickness and flatness, while the safety was evaluated based on adverse reactions and melanin index. Collagen structure was observed histologically. The animals were followed up for a maximum of 126 days after modeling.

RESULTS

A total of 28 contracted scars were included, 7 in each group. At 18 weeks postoperatively, the HF-LD and the combined groups showed significantly increased scar release rate (p = 0.000) and elasticity (p = 0.036) and decreased type I/III collagen ratio (p = 0.002) compared with the control and LF-HD groups. In terms of flatness, the combined group was significantly better than the HF-LD group for elevations <1 mm (p = 0.019). No significant skin side effects, pigmentation or scar thickness changes were observed at 18 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual-scan protocol could achieve superficial ablation and deep release of contracted split-thickness skin graft in a single treatment, with similar contraction release and texture improvement compared to a single deep scan. Its main advantage is to restore a smoother scar appearance. Adequate laser penetration was necessary for the release of contracted scars.

A Single Institution Experience with Standardized Objective and Subjective Scar Evaluation While Undergoing Fractional Ablative Carbon Dioxide Laser Treatment

Laser treatment of burn scar has increased in recent years. Standard components of scar evaluation during laser scar revision have yet to be established. Patients who began laser scar revision from January 2018-2020, underwent at least three treatments, and completed evaluations for each treatment were included. Patients underwent fractional ablative carbon dioxide laser scar revision and pre- and post-procedure scar evaluations by a burn rehabilitation therapist, including Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale, Vancouver Scar Scale, our institutional scar comparison scale, durometry, and active range of motion measurements. Twenty-nine patients began laser scar revision and underwent at least three treatments with evaluations before and after each intervention. All patients improved in at least one scar assessment metric after a single laser treatment. After second and third treatments, all patients improved in at least three scar assessment metrics. Range of motion was the most frequently improved. Durometry significantly improved after a third treatment. Patients and observers showed some agreement in their assessment of scar, but observers rated overall scar scores better than patients. Patients acknowledged substantial scar improvement on our institutional scar comparison scale. Burn scar improves with fractional ablative laser therapy in a range of scar ages and skin types, as early as the first session. Improvements continue as additional sessions are performed. This work suggests baseline evaluation components for patients undergoing laser, and a timeline for expected clinical improvements which may inform conversations between patients and providers when considering laser for symptomatic hypertrophic scar.

Contemporary Aspects of Burn Care

The past one hundred years have seen tremendous improvements in burn care, allowing for decreased morbidity and mortality of this pathology. The more prominent advancements occurred in the period spanning 1930-1980; notably burn resuscitation, early tangential excision, and use of topical antibiotic dressings; and are well documented in burn literature. This article explores the advancements of the past 40 years and the areas of burn management that are presently topics of active discussion and research.

Current Approaches Targeting the Wound Healing Phases to Attenuate Fibrosis and Scarring

Cutaneous fibrosis results from suboptimal wound healing following significant tissue injury such as severe burns, trauma, and major surgeries. Pathologic skin fibrosis results in scars that are disfiguring, limit normal movement, and prevent patient recovery and reintegration into society. While various therapeutic strategies have been used to accelerate wound healing and decrease the incidence of scarring, recent studies have targeted the molecular regulators of each phase of wound healing, including the inflammatory, proliferative, and remodeling phases. Here, we reviewed the most recent literature elucidating molecular pathways that can be targeted to reduce fibrosis with a particular focus on post-burn scarring. Current research targeting inflammatory mediators, the epithelial to mesenchymal transition, and regulators of myofibroblast differentiation shows promising results. However, a multimodal approach addressing all three phases of wound healing may provide the best therapeutic outcome.

Laser Treatment of Traumatic Scars and Contractures: 2020 International Consensus Recommendations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There is currently intense multidisciplinary interest and a maturing body of literature regarding laser treatments for traumatic scars, but international treatment guidelines and reimbursement schemes have not yet caught up with current knowledge and practice in many centers. The authors intend to highlight the tremendous potential of laser techniques, offer recommendations for safe and efficacious treatment, and promote wider patient access guided by future high-quality research.

STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS

An international panel of 26 dermatologists and plastic and reconstructive surgeons from 13 different countries and a variety of practice backgrounds was self-assembled to develop updated consensus recommendations for the laser treatment of traumatic scars. A three-step modified Delphi method took place between March 2018 and March 2019 consisting of two rounds of emailed questionnaires and supplementary face-to-face meetings. The panel members approved the final manuscript via email correspondence, and the threshold for consensus was at least 80% concurrence among the panel members.

RESULTS

The manuscript includes extensive detailed discussion regarding a variety of laser platforms commonly used for traumatic scar management such as vascular lasers and ablative and non-ablative fractional lasers, special considerations such as coding and laser treatments in skin of color, and 25 summary consensus recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Lasers are a first-line therapy in the management of traumatic scars and contractures, and patients without access to these treatments may not be receiving the best available care after injury. Updated international treatment guidelines and reimbursement schemes, additional high-quality research, and patient access should reflect this status. Lasers Surg. Med. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.