Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31452957›Full record

ReviewScars, burns & healing

Keloid research: current status and future directions.

Chia-Hsuan Tsai, Rei Ogawa

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Scars, burns & healing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed
12.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

66 citing papers in PubMed, 106 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Reviewing the efficacy, safety and aesthetic outcome of barbed suture use in neck dissection.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. LangerinClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Chia-Hsuan TsaiDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung & Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2786-1703
Rei OgawaDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3658-555X
Chang Gung University · TWNippon Medical School · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionKeloids and hypertrophic scars are fibroproliferative disorders of the skin that result from abnormal healing of injured or irritated skin. Multiple studies suggest that genetic, systemic and local factors may contribute to the development and/or growth of keloids and hypertrophic scars. A key local factor may be mechanical stimuli. Here, we provide an up-to-date review of the studies on the roles that genetic variation, epigenetic modifications and mechanotransduction play in keloidogenesis.

methodsAn English literature review was performed by searching the PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases with the following keywords: genome-wide association study; epigenetics; non-coding RNA; microRNA; long non-coding RNA (lncRNA); DNA methylation; mechanobiology; and keloid. The searches targeted the time period between the date of database inception and July 2018.

resultsGenetic studies identified several single-nucleotide polymorphisms and gene linkages that may contribute to keloid pathogenesis. Epigenetic modifications caused by non-coding RNAs (e.g. microRNAs and lncRNAs) and DNA methylation may also play important roles by inducing the persistent activation of keloidal fibroblasts. Mechanical forces and the ensuing cellular mechanotransduction may also influence the degree of scar formation, scar contracture and the formation/progression of keloids and hypertrophic scars.

conclusionsRecent research indicates that the formation/growth of keloids and hypertrophic scars associate clearly with genetic, epigenetic, systemic and local risk factors, particularly skin tension around scars. Further research into scar-related genetics, epigenetics and mechanobiology may reveal molecular, cellular or tissue-level targets that could lead to the development of more effective prophylactic and therapeutic strategies for wounds/scars in the future.

Indexed as

DNA methylationepigeneticsgeneticsKeloidlong non-coding RNAmechanobiologymicroRNAnon-coding RNA

Identifiers

PMID31452957
PMCPMC6700880
OpenAlexW2969513073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.