Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

A Comparative Analysis of the Advances in Scar Reduction: Techniques, Technologies, and Efficacy in Plastic Surgery

Meretsky CR., Polychronis A., Schiuma AT.

Systematic Review on Scar, published in Cureus (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Systematic Review
Journal
Cureus (2024)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
39268283
PMCID
PMC11392586
DOI
10.7759/cureus.66806
Citations
4

Abstract (original English)

The study provides a comprehensive analysis of the latest methodologies and treatments aimed at improving scar management. Scar formation results from the replacement of normal skin with fibroblasts, leading to a structured unidirectional collagen bundle, as opposed to the collagen sheet matrix found in healthy skin. This review categorizes scars into hypertrophic scars and keloids, each with distinct pathophysiological characteristics. It highlights the importance of consistent scar assessment using scales such as the Vancouver Scar Scale and the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale, emphasizing the need for standardized evaluation methods. The study systematically reviews various scar management techniques, ranging from traditional surgical methods to innovative treatments. Conventional approaches such as pressure garments and silicone gel sheeting are explored, noting their roles in maintaining hydration and occlusion. The efficacy of intralesional corticosteroid injections and laser therapies is discussed, with particular attention given to their combined use for optimal outcomes. The review also covers advanced techniques such as microneedling, platelet-rich plasma therapy, and stem cell-based treatments, detailing their mechanisms and potential benefits in scar remodelling. Additionally, the study underscores the emerging role of botulinum toxin A in both preventive

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research