A randomized clinical trial to study the effect of silicone gel dressing and pressure therapy on posttraumatic hypertrophic scars.

Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Journal of burn care & research: official publication of the American Burn Association (Impact Factor: 1.54). 03/2010; 31(3):448-57. DOI: 10.1097/BCR.0b013e3181db52a7
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To investigate the effect of pressure therapy (PG), silicone gel sheeting (SGS), and combined therapy on the management of posttraumatic hypertrophic scar (HS) using a randomized controlled clinical trial. A total of 104 subjects with HS mostly resulting from burns and scald injuries (63 men and 41 women; average age: 21.8 +/- 18.7 years) were recruited from Jiangsu People's First Affiliated Hospital in Nanjing, China. The mean scar formation period was 14.9 +/- 30.8 months. All subjects were randomly allocated into four groups, namely the PG, SGS, combined PG and SGS groups, and single-blinded control group for the treatment of 6 months. Standardized scar assessments (pigmentation, vascularity, thickness, pain, and itchiness) were conducted before the intervention, 2, 4, and 6 months of the intervention, and 1 month after completion of the program, respectively, to observe the progress of the treatments. The results showed that the combined therapy seemed to be more effective in improving the thickness of scar after 2 months of intervention (P < .001). After 6 months of intervention, both the combined therapy group and the PG group showed significant improvement in scar thickness. The improvement in scar thickness was most significant in the combined therapy group. SGS was found to be more effective in alleviating the pain and pruritus rather than the scar thickness. This randomized clinical trial has demonstrated the evidence of the effect of combined PG and gel intervention on posttraumatic HS. The PG group showed an improvement in scar thickness too. Further studies are needed to investigate the biomechanical and physiological effect that PG and gel sheeting would exert on the scar tissues.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Quantitative studies of the clinical recovery of burn scars are currently lacking. Previous reports validate the objective, precise, diagnostic capabilities of high-frequency ultrasound to measure thickness, the Cutometer(®) to measure pliability and the Mexameter(®) to measure erythema and pigmentation of scars. Thus, we prospectively quantified clinical characteristics of patient-matched, after burn hypertrophic scar (HSc), donor site scar (D) and normal skin (N) using these instruments. One investigator measured 3 sites (HSc, D, N) in 46 burn survivors at 3, 6, and 12 months after-burn. A mixed model regression analysis, adjusting p-values for multiplicity of testing, was used to compare means among sites and time points. Participants were 41.2±13.5 years old, 87% males, predominantly Caucasian, with an average of 19.5% body surface area burned. HSc thickness decreased significantly between 3 and 6, 6 and 12, and 3 and 12 months (all p<0.0001), but remained thicker than D and N skin (all p<0.0001). Pliability differed significantly between HSc, D and N sites at all time points (all p<0.0001), with HSc and D increasing between 3 and 12 months (p<0.05) but not reaching normal. HSc and D sites were significantly more erythematous than normal skin (p<0.05) at 3 and 6 months but D sites approached normal by 12 months. The only time points at which pigmentation significantly differed were the HSc and D sites at 6 months. Thickness, pliability, erythema and pigmentation of N skin remained similar over the 12 months. We found that post-burn HSc thickness, pliability and erythema differed significantly from D and N skin at 3, 6, and 12 months and does not return to normal by 12 months after-injury; however, significant improvements towards normal can be expected. Donor sites are redder than normal skin at 3 and 6 months but can be expected to return to normal by 12 months. Although the color of HSc and D sites change markedly with time these color changes are primarily due to changes in redness of the site, not melanin in this primarily Caucasian population.
    Burns: journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries 04/2014; · 1.95 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hypertrophic scars (HTS) are a source of morbidity for burn survivors and can present with a range of lifestyle-limiting problems. These include pruritus, pain, burning, stiffness, and contractures. Many solutions have been developed, but few have been studied in the form of a prospective, randomized control trial (RCT). Given the importance these RCTs carry in shaping the treatment of burn patients, we sought to systematically and critically review this portion of the burn literature.
    Annals of plastic surgery. 06/2014; 72 Suppl 2:S198-201.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Scarring and tissue fibrosis represent a significant source of morbidity in the United States. Despite considerable research focused on elucidating the mechanisms underlying cutaneous scar formation, effective clinical therapies are still in the early stages of development. A thorough understanding of the various signaling pathways involved is essential to formulate strategies to combat fibrosis and scarring. While initial efforts focused primarily on the biochemical mechanisms involved in scar formation, more recent research has revealed a central role for mechanical forces in modulating these pathways. Mechanotransduction, which refers to the mechanisms by which mechanical forces are converted to biochemical stimuli, has been closely linked to inflammation and fibrosis and is believed to play a critical role in scarring. This review provides an overview of our current understanding of the mechanisms underlying scar formation, with an emphasis on the relationship between mechanotransduction pathways and their therapeutic implications.
    Journal of biomechanics 03/2014; · 2.66 Impact Factor