Trial reportClinical drug investigation2017
A Randomized, Single-Blind Trial of Clobetasol Propionate 0.05% Cream Under Silicone Dressing Occlusion Versus Intra-Lesional Triamcinolone for Treatment of Keloid.
Trial report in Clinical drug investigation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Therapeutic methods and effect on keloid and hypertrophic scars: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Treatment of traumatic hypertrophic scars and keloids: a systematic review of randomized control trials.Archives of dermatological research · 2023Pooled it
- Keloid treatments: an evidence-based systematic review of recent advances.Systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Reply to Comment on "Comparative Evaluation of Single and Combination Pharmacologic and Device-Based Anti-scar Therapies in a Murine Linear Wound Model".Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- How to approach the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap revision for optimal aesthetics.Gland surgery · 2026Review
- Advancements in Acne Scar Treatment: Exploring Novel Therapies.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Review
- Scoping review for pain mitigation during intralesional injections of corticosteroid for hypertrophic scar and keloid treatment.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Article
- Needle-free electronically controlled jet injection with corticosteroids in recalcitrant keloid scars: a retrospective study and patient survey.Lasers in medical science · 2023Article
- Intralesional Corticosteroid Administration in the Treatment of Keloids: A Scoping Review on Injection Methods.Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Skin scarring: Latest update on objective assessment and optimal management.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveKeloid is conventionally treated with intra-lesional (IL) triamcinolone, which is highly operator dependent and has its own adverse effects. Topical steroid and silicone dressings are a patient friendly and non-invasive treatment alternative. We therefore sought to determine the efficacy and safety of topical clobetasol propionate (Dermovate
methodsThis was a prospective, randomised, observer-blinded study. Two keloids on the same site were randomly assigned to receive either daily topical clobetasol propionate 0.05% cream under occlusion with silicone dressing (Scar 1) or monthly IL triamcinolone injection (Scar 2). Efficacy was assessed using patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) at 4-weekly intervals up to 12 weeks. Dimension of keloid and adverse effects were also assessed.
resultsA total of 34 scars from 17 patients completed the study. There was significant improvement of POSAS at 12 weeks compared to baseline within each treatment group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in POSAS at 12 weeks between the two treatments. Keloid dimensions showed a similar trend of improvement by week 12 with either treatment (p = 0.002 in Scar 1, p = 0.005 for Scar 2). However, there was no significant difference between the treatment. In the IL triamcinolone group, all patients reported pain and 70.6% observed necrotic skin reaction. There was a significantly higher rate of adverse effects such as erythema (41.2 vs. 17.6%), hypopigmentation (35.3 vs. 23.5%), telangiectasia (41.2 vs. 17.6%) and skin atrophy (23.5 vs. 5.9%) documented in the IL triamcinolone group when compared to clobetasol propionate 0.05% cream under occlusion with silicone dressing.
conclusionClobetasol propionate 0.05% cream under occlusion with silicone dressing is equally effective and has fewer adverse effects compared to IL triamcinolone. Hence, it may be used as an alternative treatment for keloid particularly in patients with low pain threshold, needle phobia and those who prefers home-based treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.