An inexpensive self fabricated pressure clip for the ear lobe

Efficacy and Safety of Excision Combination Therapies for Earlobe Keloids: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Different combinations of excision and adjuvant therapies have been applied to improve outcomes for earlobe keloids, though evidence in this field is still lacking.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to systematically investigate efficacy and safety of these treatments.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to find all relevant studies. Meta-analysis of recurrence rates (RRs) and adverse event rates with 95% confidence intervals, and individual participants data (IPD) were calculated for each intervention when possible. Otherwise, narrative syntheses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 85 articles, covering 23 treatments for earlobe keloids, were included, indicating a preference for multiple combination therapy. The estimated RRs for 6 interventions (i.e., excision monotherapy, combinations of excision with imiquimod, pressure therapy, radiotherapy, steroids, and steroids with pressure therapy) appeared to be comparable. Electron radiotherapy was found to have potential advantages over X-ray treatment, contributing to the observed heterogeneity. Further meta-analysis using IPD revealed that both combination therapies of excision plus steroid therapy (p=0.003) and excision plus radiotherapy (p=0.003) yielded better recurrence-free survival compared to excision alone. The median recurrence-free interval for combination therapy was 10 months. Adverse event rates were similar among different intervention groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that combining excision with radiotherapy or perioperative steroid therapy has the potential to improve prognosis of earlobe keloids without increasing the risk of adverse events. Overall evaluation of patients' conditions and further studies with sufficient follow-up are warranted for clinical practice.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

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 .

Screw-loaded compression device for auricular keloid

Pressure therapy is widely used in the management of keloid mass and for preventing postexcision recurrence of earlobe keloid. Although various types of compression devices are available, the pressure applied by these devices is uncontrolled and associated with the risk of pressure necrosis. This article presents a novel design for a compression device with threaded connectors to control the amount and direction of the pressure applied on the keloid mass.

Simple device to determine the pressure applied by pressure clips for the treatment of earlobe keloids

BACKGROUND

Keloids of the ear are common problems. Various treatment modalities are available for the treatment of ear keloids. Surgical excision with intralesional steroid injection along with compression therapy has the least recurrence rate. Various types of devices are available for pressure therapy. Pressure applied by these devices is uncontrolled and is associated with the risk of pressure necrosis. We describe here a simple and easy to use device to measure pressure applied by these clips for better outcome.

OBJECTIVES

To devise a simple method to measure the pressure applied by various pressure clips used in ear keloid pressure therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

By using a force sensitive resistor (FSR), the pressure applied gets converted into voltage using electrical wires, resistors, capacitors, converter, amplifier, diode, nine-volt (9V) cadmium battery and the voltage is measured using a multimeter. The measured voltage is then converted into pressure using pressure voltage graph that depicts the actual pressure applied by the pressure clip.

RESULTS

The pressure applied by different clips was variable. The spring clips were adjustable by slight variation in the design whereas the pressure applied by binder clips and magnet discs was not adjustable.

CONCLUSION

The uncontrolled/suboptimal pressure applied by certain pressure clips can be monitored to provide optimal pressure therapy in ear keloid for better outcome.

Hypertrophic scars and keloids--a review of their pathophysiology, risk factors, and therapeutic management

BACKGROUND

Hypertrophic scars and keloids result from an abnormal fibrous wound healing process in which tissue repair and regeneration-regulating mechanism control is lost. These abnormal fibrous growths present a major therapeutic dilemma and challenge to the plastic surgeon because they are disfiguring and frequently recur.

OBJECTIVE

To provide updated clinical and experimental information on hypertrophic scars and keloids so that physicians can better understand and properly treat such lesions.

METHODS

A Medline literature search was performed for relevant publications and for diverse strategies for management of hypertrophic scars and keloids.

CONCLUSION

The growing understanding of the molecular processes of normal and abnormal wound healing is promising for discovery of novel approaches for the management of hypertrophic scars and keloids. Although optimal treatment of these lesions remains undefined, successful healing can be achieved only with combined multidisciplinary therapeutic regimens.

Management of external ear keloids using form-pressure therapy

Keloids are a frequent finding after physical trauma. Keloids of the pinna (helix and antihelix) as a complication of ear-piercing are the most difficult cases. Clinicians have tended to avoid the surgical approach, preferring local conservative treatment with corticosteroids or other treatments. We report use of intrakeloid resection and a form-pressure device to treat pinna keloids and avoid recurrence. The purpose is to maintain the form of the folds of the pinna. The recommendation for this therapy is to maintain the pressure at 24-30 mmHg, and the duration of the form-pressure therapy in our patients was about 25 weeks.

Levels of evidence for the treatment of keloid disease

INTRODUCTION

Keloid disease presents a significant burden for patients and a significant therapeutic challenge for clinicians. Multiple treatments have been proposed, but with the increasing drive towards effective use of resources, therapeutic options need to be evaluated in terms of the levels of evidence supporting their use.

AIM

To retrieve and review the primary clinical studies evaluating keloid disease therapy over the last 25 years and assign levels of evidence for the treatment modalities evaluated.

METHOD

A Medline search was conducted to identify all primary clinical studies evaluating the treatment of keloid disease, published in English since 1980 (excluding single case reports). Studies were assigned a level of evidence (LOE-1, highest quality to LOE-5, lowest) adapted from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine.

RESULTS

13 (12%) of 112 studies retrieved were assigned LOE-2, 99 (88%) assigned LOE-4. There were no LOE-1 studies. Ten of the LOE-2 studies evaluated silicone-based therapy or laser therapy. Most studies evaluating steroids, cryosurgery, laser therapy and post-surgical adjuvant therapy provide level 4 evidence.

CONCLUSION

High quality research in evaluating keloid therapy is lacking. There is a definite need for well designed and properly reported randomised controlled trials, to provide clinicians with a sound body of evidence on which to inform decision making.

Keloid Pathogenesis and Treatment

BACKGROUND

Keloid management can be difficult and frustrating, and the mechanisms underlying keloid formation are only partially understood.

METHODS

Using original and current literature in this field, this comprehensive review presents the major concepts of keloid pathogenesis and the treatment options stemming from them.

RESULTS

Mechanisms for keloid formation include alterations in growth factors, collagen turnover, tension alignment, and genetic and immunologic contributions. Treatment strategies for keloids include established (e.g., surgery, steroid, radiation) and experimental (e.g., interferon, 5-fluorouracil, retinoid) regimens.

CONCLUSION

The scientific basis and empiric evidence supporting the use of various agents is presented. Combination therapy, using surgical excision followed by intradermal steroid or other adjuvant therapy, currently appears to be the most efficacious and safe current regimen for keloid management.

International clinical recommendations on scar management

Many techniques for management of hypertrophic scars and keloids have been proven through extensive use, but few have been supported by prospective studies with adequate control groups. Several new therapies showed good results in small-scale trials, but these have not been repeated in larger trials with long-term follow-up. This article reports a qualitative overview of the available clinical literature by an international panel of experts using standard methods of appraisal. The article provides evidence-based recommendations on prevention and treatment of abnormal scarring and, where studies are insufficient, consensus on best practice. The recommendations focus on the management of hypertrophic scars and keloids, and are internationally applicable in a range of clinical situations. These recommendations support a move to a more evidence-based approach in scar management. This approach highlights a primary role for silicone gel sheeting and intralesional corticosteroids in the management of a wide variety of abnormal scars. The authors concluded that these are the only treatments for which sufficient evidence exists to make evidence-based recommendations. A number of other therapies that are in common use have achieved acceptance by the authors as standard practice. However, it is highly desirable that many standard practices and new emerging therapies undergo large-scale studies with long-term follow-up before being recommended conclusively as alternative therapies for scar management.

Ear-lobe keloids: treatment by a protocol of surgical excision and immediate postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy

There is no universally agreed policy for treating keloid scars of the ear lobe following piercing. We treated 35 patients (34 women) for high-risk ear-lobe keloids; the average age was 24 years (range: 16-44 years). All had failed to respond to prior treatment with massage and silicone, and corticosteroid injection. The keloids were excised extralesionally and the defects were closed with interrupted prolene sutures. The operative scar was covered with topical 2% lignocaine-0.25% chlorhexidine sterile lubricant gel under a transparent adhesive dressing. Adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy of 10 Gy, applied as 100 kV photons (4 mm high-voltage therapy (HVT) Al), was given within 24 h of surgery. All keloid scars were controlled at 4 weeks' follow-up. At 1 year, three out of 34 cases followed up had relapsed (probability of control: 91.2%). At 5 years, a further four out of the remaining 31 patients had relapsed (cumulative probability of control at 5 years: 79.4%). There were no cases of serious toxicity.