Botulinum toxin type A versus 5-Fluorouracil in treatment of keloid

Effect of Keloid Properties on Treatment Efficacy, a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of keloid treatment in randomized studies is highly variable. However, no systematic review has been performed to evaluate the effect of different keloid properties on treatment efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

To identify clinically relevant keloid properties that may influence treatment efficacy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic database search was conducted. Two reviewers independently selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and performed a methodologic quality assessment using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2.0 tool.

RESULTS

One thousand five hundred twenty studies were screened, and 16 RCTs, involving 1,113 patients, were included. The authors found lower efficacy in older keloids ( n = 3), keloids located on the chest, extremities, pinna, and shoulder ( n = 3), larger keloids ( n = 2), lower baseline Vancouver Scar Scale score ( n = 1), and keloids with history of recurrence ( n = 1). Overall, most studies had a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

Only a minority of studies specifically addressed keloid properties, which makes comparisons between studies challenging. The authors' results suggest that keloid location, duration prior to treatment, size, history of recurrence, and severity are clinically relevant keloid properties that affect treatment efficacy. Further studies are crucial to corroborate the authors' findings, establish a clinically relevant keloid classification, and ultimately develop an evidence-based treatment algorithm that takes these properties into account.

Intralesional 5-Fluorouracil for Keloids: A Systematic Review

Keloids are benign, fibroproliferative dermal tumours, often arising after trauma, that are more common in darker skin types. Numerous therapeutic options have been employed for the treatment of keloids; however, there is no one gold standard approach. Five-fluorouracil, a potent chemotherapeutic agent, has emerged as a promising therapeutic option. Therefore, this systematic review, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, focused on providing a broad overview of the use of 5-fluorouracil for the management of keloids. Forty studies (2325 patients) met inclusion criteria and investigated 5-fluorouracil for keloid management, with 19 studies (1043 patients) including a 5-fluorouracil monotherapy group. Five-fluorouracil monotherapy demonstrated consistent keloid improvement with >254 keloids injected across various anatomical regions. Five-fluorouracil monotherapy was most often compared to intralesional triamcinolone acetonide, utilizing the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale and the Vancouver Scar Scale. The most common keloid parameters assessed were height, size, volume, width, length, induration, pruritus, and erythema. Five-fluorouracil monotherapy exhibited substantial improvements, with weight averages of 73% of patients experiencing >25% improvement and 67% achieving >50% improvement. Relapse rate was 16% at 27 weeks after 5-fluorouracil monotherapy treatment. Limitations included potential selection bias, language restrictions, and heterogenous data analysis among studies. Overall, our findings underscore the potential effectiveness of 5-fluorouracil monotherapy in the management of keloids, with an encouraging safety profile. Larger prospective trials are needed to determine optimal therapy or combination therapy for the management of keloids. This detailed compilation of treatment protocols, outcomes, and relapse rates stand as a valuable resource for further research and clinical applications.

Pharmacotherapy for Keloids and Hypertrophic Scars

Keloids (KD) and hypertrophic scars (HTS), which are quite raised and pigmented and have increased vascularization and cellularity, are formed due to the impaired healing process of cutaneous injuries in some individuals having family history and genetic factors. These scars decrease the quality of life (QOL) of patients greatly, due to the pain, itching, contracture, cosmetic problems, and so on, depending on the location of the scars. Treatment/prevention that will satisfy patients' QOL is still under development. In this article, we review pharmacotherapy for treating KD and HTS, including the prevention of postsurgical recurrence (especially KD). Pharmacotherapy involves monotherapy using a single drug and combination pharmacotherapy using multiple drugs, where drugs are administered orally, topically and/or through intralesional injection. In addition, pharmacotherapy for KD/HTS is sometimes combined with surgical excision and/or with physical therapy such as cryotherapy, laser therapy, radiotherapy including brachytherapy, and silicone gel/sheeting. The results regarding the clinical effectiveness of each mono-pharmacotherapy for KD/HTS are not always consistent but rather scattered among researchers. Multimodal combination pharmacotherapy that targets multiple sites simultaneously is more effective than mono-pharmacotherapy. The literature was searched using PubMed, Google Scholar, and Online search engines.

Comparative Efficacy of Drug Interventions for Keloids: A Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Keloids are common benign skin lesions originating from a disorganized fibroproliferative collagen response; these lesions often lead to both physical and psychological problems. The optimal treatment for keloids is yet to be standardized. Intralesional injection, which is simple and nontraumatic, is one of the most commonly used treatment modalities for these lesions. In this study, we compared 5 different drugs (intralesional injections) for the treatment of keloids in terms of efficacy.

METHODS

We systemically searched relevant studies on PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Randomized clinical trials on the safety and efficacy of triamcinolone acetonide (TAC), 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), botulinum toxin A (BTA), verapamil, and bleomycin were included in this study.

RESULTS

This network meta-analysis included a total of 1114 patients from 20 randomized controlled trials. Botulinum toxin A alone and TAC plus 5-FU exhibited significantly better efficacy than did 5-FU, TAC, and verapamil. No significant difference in efficacy between BTA alone and TAC combined with 5-FU was observed. No significant differences were noted in the adverse event rate between BTA, TAC plus 5-FU, 5-FU, and TAC. Furthermore, we performed surface under the cumulative ranking curve analyses to predict the rank of each intervention (by efficacy and adverse event rate). The predicted ranking by efficacy was as follows: TAC plus 5-FU, BTA, bleomycin, TAC, 5-FU, and verapamil; the predicted ranking by adverse events was as follows: TAC, 5-FU, TAC plus 5-FU, and BTA. Funnel plot analysis revealed no publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Botulinum toxin A and TAC plus 5-FU appear to have outstanding therapeutic efficacy for keloids. The rate of adverse events was similar among BTA, TAC, 5-FU, and TAC plus 5-FU. Nonetheless, additional reviews of rigorous, large-scale randomized controlled trials are warranted for further validation of our findings.

Comparing intralesional triamcinolone and verapamil-triamcinolone injections in keloids: A single-blinded randomised clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

In this clinical trial, we investigated the efficacy of two treatment methods for keloids resulting from surgical incisions: intralesional triamcinolone injections alone versus in combination with verapamil.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients were divided into two groups: one received triamcinolone alone (Group T) and the other received a triamcinolone-verapamil blend (Group VT). Regular treatments were conducted until the keloids were nearly flat or for a maximum of eight sessions.

RESULTS

Both groups showed significant improvements, but Group VT saw quicker resolution of skin redness and needed fewer sessions. Though the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores were generally similar across both groups, Group VT exhibited greater improvements, leading to lower final scores. The VT group also attained normal scar flexibility faster than the T group.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that the combination of verapamil and triamcinolone provides a more effective treatment for keloids, thereby highlighting the potential of verapamil in scar reduction.

Scar Management and Dyschromia: A Summary Report from the 2021 American Burn Association State of the Science Meeting

Burn scars, and in particular, hypertrophic scars, are a challenging yet common outcome for survivors of burn injuries. In 2021, the American Burn Association brought together experts in burn care and research to discuss critical topics related to burns, including burn scars, at its State of the Science conference. Clinicians and researchers with burn scar expertise, as well as burn patients, industry representatives, and other interested stakeholders met to discuss issues related to burn scars and discuss priorities for future burn scar research. The various preventative strategies and treatment modalities currently utilized for burn scars were discussed, including relatively noninvasive therapies such as massage, compression, and silicone sheeting, as well as medical interventions such as corticosteroid injection and laser therapies. A common theme that emerged is that the efficacy of current therapies for specific patient populations is not clear, and further research is needed to improve upon these treatments and develop more effective strategies to suppress scar formation. This will necessitate quantitative analyses of outcomes and would benefit from creation of scar biobanks and shared data resources. In addition, outcomes of importance to patients, such as scar dyschromia, must be given greater attention by clinicians and researchers to improve overall quality of life in burn survivors. Herein we summarize the main topics of discussion from this meeting and offer recommendations for areas where further research and development are needed.

Hypertrophic Scars and Keloids: Advances in Treatment and Review of Established Therapies

Hypertrophic scars and keloids can have significant detrimental effects on patients both psychosocially and functionally. A careful identification of patient risk factors and a comprehensive management plan are necessary to optimize outcomes. Patients with a history of dystrophic scarring should avoid unnecessary procedures and enhance the wound-healing process using various preventive strategies. As there is no single, fully efficacious treatment modality, prevention remains the best approach in reducing aberrant scar formation. When prevention therapies fail, keloids have been shown to be respond to a variety of therapies including topical and injectable corticosteroids, 5-fluorouracil, radiotherapy, lasers, and surgical excision, all with varying efficacies. As such, management should be tailored to the individual patient's risk factors with the use of combination therapies to reduce recurrence rates. Still, keloid and hypertrophic scar therapies are widely diverse with novel treatment modalities providing alternatives for recurring lesions. Laser-assisted drug delivery, skin priming, and novel topical therapies may provide alternative options for the management of hypertrophic scars and keloids.

Comparing the Efficacy of Multiple Drugs Injection for the Treatment of Hypertrophic Scars and Keloid: A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus regarding the choice of injected drugs for pathological scars. Although the clinical efficacy of different drug treatments was shown in many randomized controlled trials, the efficacies of many drugs are inconsistent. Therefore, this study aimed to determine how different effective drugs are for treating pathological scars. It is anticipated that the study findings may serve as guidelines for plastic surgeons.

METHODS

Relevant literature was extracted from the following databases Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, Weipu, and Wanfang until June 2022, such as randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating different injected drugs for the treatment of pathological scars, including BTA, TAC, 5-Fu, VER, and BLE.

RESULTS

This network meta-analysis of 1539 patients from 23 articles revealed that the most effective treatment for a pathological scar was TAC + BTA. The effective rate of TAC + BTA combination therapy was significantly different from that of the BTA, TAC, 5-Fu, VER, and BLM monotherapies. TAC+5-FU was more effective than TAC, 5-FU, VER, or BLM alone, and BTA was more effective than both TAC and 5-Fu. The effectiveness of VER and BLM was the same, but both were better than TAC and 5-Fu. No big differences were found between any of the other local injection therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

According to this network meta-analysis, a combination of keloid and hypertrophic scar injection treatment is recommended, especially BTA+TAC. However, this network meta-analysis has some limitations and must be further verified by larger samples and higher quality RCTs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Botulinum Toxin Type A Injection Improves the Intraperitoneal High Pressure in Rats Treated with Abdominal Wall Plasty

The aim of the study is mainly to study the subject of BoNT-A injection to improve IAH in rats undergoing abdominal angioplasty. The study problem in surgery, especially in ICU, burn, and trauma centers, intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH), and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) are common complications. At present, there are various treatments for IAH. The intramuscular injection of Botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) into the abdominal wall has received a lot of attention. Based on this, this study proposes a method for measuring abdominal pressure, applies BoNT-A to reduce abdominal pressure in the IAH state of abdominal wall angioplasty, and explores a way to increase the compliance of the abdominal wall under the premise of maintaining the sealing of the abdominal cavity, so as to realize the expansion of the abdominal cavity. A method is achieved to reduce intra-abdominal pressure and eliminate or alleviate ACS. The results of the experiment showed that when the rats in the control group were injected with the same amount of normal saline as the rats in the experimental group, the IAP was significantly higher than that in the experimental group (P < 0.05). This shows that BoNT-A increases the compliance of the abdominal wall while maintaining the closure of the abdominal cavity, thereby increasing the volume of the abdominal cavity and alleviating the state of IAH in rats.

Efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin type A for postoperative scar prevention and wound healing improvement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Botulinum toxin type A (BTXA) has shown underlying effects for wound healing improvement. New small clinical trials keep emerging every year and updated evidence-based information is warranted. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BTXA for preventing scarring.

METHODS

Four databases were searched to recruit randomized clinical trials (RCTs) which compared the surgical wounds treated with BTXA vs. those treated with placebo or blank control. The outcomes were primarily quantified by measures including the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scales (SBSES), modified SBSES (mSBSES), and scar width. Patients' satisfaction and adverse events were also reported.

RESULTS

In total, 16 RCTs involving 671 cases (510 patients) were included. The outcome showed significant superiority of BTXA in VSS (mean difference [MD] = -1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -2.00 to -0.65, p = 0.0001), VAS (MD = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.05-1.52, p < 0.00001), SBSES or mSBSES (MD = -0.18, 95% CI: -0.27 to -0.10, p < 0.0001), scar width (MD = -0.18, 95% CI: -0.27 to -0.10, p < 0.0001), and patients' satisfaction (risk ratio [RR] = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.06-1.49, p = 0.01). No significant difference of adverse events incidence was observed (RR = 1.46 95% CI: 0.64-3.33, p = 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

Botulinum toxin type A is effective and safe for postoperative scar prevention and wound healing improvement, especially for facial wounds of Asians. Further studies should manage to standardize the treatment algorithm, while mSBSES is recommended for scar assessment.

Botulinum toxin and platelet rich plasma as innovative therapeutic modalities for keloids

Keloids characterize a definitely challenging type of cutaneous scars for which a diversity of therapeutic modalities has been suggested. The aim of this work was to compare the therapeutic efficacy of intralesional injection of botulinum toxin type-A (BTX-A), platelet rich plasma (PRP), and triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) in keloids. A total of 60 keloids patients were enrolled and divided randomly into three equal groups. Group I treated by intralesional BTX-A injection, group II treated by intralesional PRP injection, and group III treated by intralesional TAC injection. Clinical assessment was done by Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), Verbal Rating Scale (VRS), and dermoscopic examination. Additionally, histopathology and immunohistochemistry of connective tissue growth factor (CTGF) expression were evaluated. The results of this study revealed significant improvement of both VSS and VRS in response to all treatment modalities. There was significant improvement of VSS in BTX-A and PRP groups more than TAC group. However, no significant difference observed between BTX-A and PRP groups. Immunohistochemical examination showed significant decrease of CTGF expression after treatment in BTX-A and PRP groups more than TAC group. In conclusion, both BTX-A and PRP could yield a chance for cosmetically better outcomes in keloids treatment than conventional TAC injection.