Efficacy of 2 Representative Topical Agents to Prevent Keloid Recurrence After Surgical Excision

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.

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.

Vacuum and Electromagnetic Fields Treatment to Regenerate a Diffuse Mature Facial Scar Caused by Sulfuric Acid Assault

Acid attacks are on the rise, and they cause extensive and deep burns, especially on the face. The treatments used to improve the aesthetic, functional and social impact of non-acid scars do not always prove useful for acid scars. This article reports the case of a woman with an extended, mature, acid facial scar, caused by sulfuric acid assault, treated with a recent new procedure that combines the application of vacuum and electromagnetic fields. Before and after the treatment, the aesthetic appearance, and motor function of the face and neck were evaluated, as well as the level of hydration, the amount of sebum, the elasticity, and the pH of the skin. The improvements highlighted after the treatment of the aesthetic and functional characteristics of the face and neck, and of the physical parameters of the skin seemed to indicate that this particular treatment induces tissue regeneration, even in the nerve component. However, it is evident that the rehabilitation pathways of facial wounds and scars must be personalized, and must include continuous psychological support for the patient.

Management of keloid scars: noninvasive and invasive treatments

Scars vary from mature linear scars to abnormal excessive scars such as hypertrophic scars and keloid scars. Keloid scars are fibro-proliferative disease entities that reflect an abnormal process of wound healing. They can cause pain, itching, stiffness, and psychological distress, all of which can affect quality of life. Various treatment options have been advocated as ways to prevent and treat keloid scars. These include noninvasive treatments such as use of silicone gel sheeting and compression therapy, and invasive treatments such as intralesional corticosteroid injections, surgery, and radiotherapy. Novel treatments include chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and anti-inflammatory therapies. Unfortunately, keloids continue to pose a significant challenge due to the lack of efficacious treatments. Therefore, clinicians should be familiar with various therapeutic options and apply the most suitable treatment plan for patients. In this review, we introduce the current therapeutic options for the management of keloid scars.

circNRIP1 facilitates keloid progression via FXR1‑mediated upregulation of miR‑503‑3p and miR‑503‑5p

Circular nuclear receptor interacting protein 1 (circNRIP1) is implicated in tumor initiation and progression; however, the underlying mechanism of keloid progression is unclear. To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first to characterize the contribution of circNRIP1 to keloid progression and evaluate the potential underlying molecular mechanisms using keloid-derived fibroblasts. The expression profile of circNRIP1 was confirmed in keloid tissue. The contribution of circNRIP1 to keloid progression was investigated via loss-of-function assays. Furthermore, the molecular mechanism by which circNRIP1 contributes to pre-microRNA (miR)-503 maturation through blocking Fbxo4-mediated Fragile-X mental retardation 1 (FXR1) ubiquitination was verified. Finally, the biological functions of FXR1, miR-503-3p, and miR-503-5p in keloid-derived fibroblast proliferation, apoptosis and extracellular matrix accumulation were confirmed. circNRIP1 was highly expressed in keloid tissue and keloid-derived fibroblasts. Functional analysis showed that circNRIP1 knockdown successfully blocked the proliferation and expression of extracellular matrix-associated proteins while increasing the rate of apoptosis in keloid-derived fibroblasts. Mechanistically, circNRIP1 maintained FXR1 stability by impeding Fbxo4-mediated FXR1 ubiquitination and degradation. Additionally, FXR1 increased the abundance of miR-503-3p and miR-503-5p by contributing to pre-miR-503 maturation. Knockdown of FXR1, miR-503-3p and miR-503-5p also inhibited proliferation and extracellular matrix accumulation in keloid-derived fibroblasts and increased levels of cell apoptosis. Collectively, the present study confirmed that circNRIP1 contributed to pre-miR-503 maturation via blocking Fbxo4-mediated FXR1 ubiquitination and degradation, which facilitates keloid progression. These results indicate that circNRIP1 has potential as a novel therapeutic target for the control and/or treatment of keloids.

Keloid Scars: An Updated Review of Combination Therapies

Keloid scars are a common yet poorly understood complication of wound healing that can cause a diminished quality of life. Currently, there is little agreement amongst the medical community regarding the best treatment modality for keloids. For this reason, we have created an updated review of the most successful combination therapies for keloid scars and compared their efficacy based on rates of recurrence following treatment. Additionally, these combination therapies have been compared with intralesional triamcinolone acetonide corticosteroid (TAC), which is considered the mainstay monotherapy for keloids. All combination therapies included in our review were shown to produce superior outcomes than TAC monotherapy. We have also found that certain combination therapies are known to produce superior results when used in specific anatomic locations. Intralesional TAC plus intralesional cryotherapy appeared to have the most promising results for non-auricular keloids, and the authors suggest considering this as a first-line treatment. Additionally, the use of surgical excision plus compression therapy achieved superior results for auricular keloids and should be considered first-line for keloids in these locations.

Long-term outcomes and recurrence-free interval after the treatment of keloids with a standardized protocol

BACKGROUND

Recurrence rates of keloids have generally been reported at one time point. However, the longer the duration after treatment, the greater the likelihood that such lesions will recur. In this study, we analysed the time to recurrence during long-term follow-up.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed recurrence-free interval in 52 patients with keloid (age 8-79 years) who had been treated between June 2006 and January 2011 using a standardised protocol developed by our group.

RESULTS

Mean duration of follow-up was 37.5 (range, 7-120) months in patients with keloid. Kaplan-Meier survival curves revealed a statistically significant difference in recurrence-free interval between ear keloids and keloids excluding ear keloids. Recurrence rate for keloids was high in the first 2 years after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Kaplan-Meier analysis was useful for understanding the tendency of recurrence of keloids after treatment using a standardised protocol.

Keloids: a review of therapeutic management

Keloid scar formation arises from a disorganized fibroproliferative collagen response that extends beyond the original wound margins because of excessive production of extracellular matrix (ECM). Despite treatment options for keloid scars including medical and surgical therapies, such as intralesional steroid injection and surgical excision, the recurrence rate remains high. Herein we consolidate recently published narrative reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses to provide an overview of updated treatment recommendations for keloidal scar formation. PubMed search engine was used to access the MEDLINE database to investigate updates regarding keloid incidence and treatment. More than 100 articles were reviewed. Keloid management remains a multimodal approach. There continues to be no gold standard of treatment that provides a consistently low recurrence rate; however, the increasing number of available treatments and synergistic combinations of these treatments (i.e., laser-based devices in combination with intralesional steroids, or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in combination with steroid therapy) is showing favorable results. Future studies could target the efficacy of novel treatment modalities (i.e., autologous fat grafting or stem cell-based therapies) for keloid management. This review article provides updated treatment guidelines for keloids and discusses insight into management to assist patient-focused, evidence-based clinical decision making.

Keloids: Current and emerging therapies

Keloids are pathological scars that grow over time and extend beyond the initial site of injury after impaired wound healing. These scars frequently recur and rarely regress. They are aesthetically disfiguring, can cause pain, itching, discomfort as well as psychological stress, often affecting quality of life. Many treatment modalities, including surgical and non-surgical, have been explored and have been reported to be beneficial; however, none have been absolutely satisfactory or optimal for the treatment of all keloid subtypes to date. This poses a major challenge to clinicians. Often, a combinational therapeutic approach appears to offer the best results with higher patient satisfaction compared to monotherapy. The aetiopathogenesis of keloids is not fully elucidated; however, with recent advances in molecular biology and genetics, insight is being gained on the complex process of scar formation and hence new therapeutic and management options for keloids. In this paper, we explore the literature and summarise the general concepts surrounding keloid development and review both current (corticosteroids, surgical excision, silicone-based products, pressure therapy, radiotherapy, cryotherapy, laser therapy, imiquimod and 5-fluorouracil) and emerging (stem cell therapy, mitomycin C, verapamil, interferons, bleomycin, botulinum toxin type A and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors) treatments. Increased knowledge and understanding in this area may potentially lead to the discovery and development of novel therapeutic options that are more efficacious for all keloid types.

LAY SUMMARY

Keloids are problematic scars that are difficult to treat and manage. The aetiopathogenesis of keloids is not clear; however, recent advances in molecular biology and genetics are beginning to shed light on the underlying mechanisms implicated in keloid scar formation which will hopefully lead to the development of treatment options for all keloid types. This review summarises current and emerging therapies.

Imiquimod to prevent keloid recurrence postexcision: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Imiquimod 5% cream, an immune response modifier capable of inducing IFN-α, TNF-α, and interleukins 1, 6, and 8. It was approved for use in the management of genital and perianal warts and soon embraced as a method to diminish the recurrence of keloids postexcision. A previous meta-analysis included four studies. This meta-analysis is part of a larger systematic review project on the effect of moisturizers on scars. It was conducted following an a priori protocol and the guidance of the Joanna Briggs Institute. Databases searched included PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science. After screening and critical appraisal, subgroup meta-analysis on excision method and location of the keloid was conducted using the Miller approach for proportional meta-analysis and a random effects model. Seven studies, including 77 participants and 82 keloids were included. Meta-analysis revealed a recurrence rate of 39% (95% CI = 8.474.4%; I² = 87.5%) following application of Imiquimod postexcision. The use of primary excision or tangential excision did not alter the outcome. For analysis based on the location of the keloid scar, earlobe keloids had a recurrence rate of 5.4% (95% CI = 0-21.7%; I² = 52.9%). For keloids excised from other areas (predominantly on the trunk) recurrence rate was higher, at 76.8% (95% CI = 36.1-100%). For keloids, Imiquimod application postexcision results in highly variable recurrence rates. There is very low certainty in the effect of Imiquimod and it therefore is not recommended as a treatment option.

Managing keloid scars: From radiation therapy to actual and potential drug deliveries

The aetiology of keloids is becoming clearer, but many questions remain, including about the most optimal treatment. Current therapies include surgical excision, radiotherapy, and various pharmaceutical drugs. However, none of these drugs are keloid-specific. Moreover, all current interventions are associated with high recurrence rates. Here, we review the pharmaceutical interventions that are currently available. All are based on the fact that keloids are an expanding solid mass with intense chronic inflammation at its advancing edges. Consequently, current pharmaceuticals aim to reduce the mass and/or symptoms of keloids, similar to surgery and radiotherapy. They include chemotherapies, immunotherapies, volume-reducing therapies, and anti-inflammatory therapies. We also describe new advances in keloid pharmaceuticals. They include drugs that were designed to treat systemic diseases such as hypertension or breast cancer but were found to also treat keloids. Furthermore, recent progress in genetic, epigenetic, and stem cell therapies suggests that they could become useful in the keloid field. This review of pharmaceutical advances will hopefully promote additional research and the development of effective and specific pharmaceuticals for keloids.