Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26044054›Full record

ReviewArchives of dermatological research2015

A comprehensive evidence-based review on the role of topicals and dressings in the management of skin scarring.

G P Sidgwick, D McGeorge, A Bayat

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of dermatological research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 42 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04046783 completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness and Tolerability of an Overnight 4-week Treatment With Patch Containing Onion Extract and Allantoin for Cesarean Section Scars

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of SalernoRan2019 to 2019Enrolled93ConditionsCesarean Section, Dehiscence, Scar Keloid, Wound HealArmspatch
NCT04506255 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Silicone Taping for the Improvement of Abdominal Donor Site Scars Following Autologous Breast Reconstruction; A Randomized, Prospective Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorNova Scotia Health AuthorityRan2020 to 2026Enrolled32ConditionsHypertrophic Scar, ScarArmsSilicone tape
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 130 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Current and Future Developments in Wound Healing.Facial plastic surgery : FPS · 2023
    Article
  13. From In Silico Simulation between TGF-Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. AntibacterialInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

G P SidgwickPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery Research, Institute of Inflammation and Repair, Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences, Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, University of Manchester, 131 Princess Street, Manchester, M1 7DN, UK.
D McGeorge
A Bayat
University of Manchester · GBNuffield Health · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wound healing after dermal injury is an imperfect process, inevitably leading to scar formation as the skin re-establishes its integrity. The resulting scars have different characteristics to normal skin, ranging from fine-line asymptomatic scars to problematic scarring including hypertrophic and keloid scars. Scars appear as a different colour to the surrounding skin and can be flat, stretched, depressed or raised, manifesting a range of symptoms including inflammation, erythema, dryness and pruritus, which can result in significant psychosocial impact on patients and their quality of life. In this paper, a comprehensive literature review coupled with an analysis of levels of evidence (LOE) for each published treatment type was conducted. Topical treatments identified include imiquimod, mitomycin C and plant extracts such as onion extract, green tea, Aloe vera, vitamin E and D, applied to healing wounds, mature scar tissue or fibrotic scars following revision surgery, or in combination with other more established treatments such as steroid injections and silicone. In total, 39 articles were included, involving 1703 patients. There was limited clinical evidence to support their efficacy; the majority of articles (n = 23) were ranked as category 4 LOE, being of limited quality with individual flaws, including low patient numbers, poor randomisation, blinding, and short follow-up periods. As trials were performed in different settings, they were difficult to compare. In conclusion, there is an unmet clinical need for effective solutions to skin scarring, more robust long-term randomised trials and a consensus on a standardised treatment regime to address all aspects of scarring.

Indexed as

Administration, TopicalBandagesAdjuvants, ImmunologicAminoquinolinesCicatrixHumansImiquimodPlant ExtractsSkin DiseasesVitaminsWound HealingAdjuvants, ImmunologicAminoquinolinesImiquimodPlant ExtractsVitamins

Identifiers

PMID26044054
PMCPMC4506744
OpenAlexW567547588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.