SVF
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic Review

A systematic review of therapeutic procedures for the treatment of morphea and systemic sclerosis.

Jafarzadeh A., Leisi A., Goodarzi A.

Systematic Review with a reported sample of 732 on Systemic / IV, published in Lasers Med Sci (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

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
Lasers Med Sci (2026)
Country
England
Reported sample size
732
PMID
41718824
DOI
10.1007/s10103-026-04799-3

Abstract (original English)

Considering the challenges involved in managing morphea and systemic sclerosis—especially the risks of disease reactivation and inflammation following treatment—and the limited evidence on the effectiveness and safety of treatment methods like energy-based devices and intralesional injections, it is essential to conduct a systematic review to compile and critically evaluate the available data comprehensively. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of energy-based devices and intralesional injections in managing morphea and systemic sclerosis, to provide critical evidence that informs clinical decision-making and ultimately enhances patients’ quality of life. This study was conducted as a systematic review following established guidelines and checklists for such reviews. The PRISMA flow diagram was employed to illustrate the identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion of studies. Comprehensive searches were performed from different scientific databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase, to identify all relevant studies evaluating the effectiveness and safety of energy-based devices and intralesional injections in treating morphea and systemic sclerosis. We managed the retrieved records using EndNote reference management software. After a thorough screening process, we extracted relevant data based on predefined study variables and

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
HumansScleroderma, LocalizedScleroderma, SystemicInjections, IntralesionalLow-Level Light TherapyFemale
Systemic / IV
View on PubMedDOI

Related research