SynthesisLasers in medical science2022
A systematic review of randomised controlled trials investigating laser assisted drug delivery for the treatment of keloid and hypertrophic scars.
Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Photobiomodulation therapy for enhanced wound and Scar healing: visual and statistical evaluation.Lasers in medical science · 2025Trial
- Laser-Assisted Drug Delivery for Hypertrophic Scar Treatment: A Scoping Review.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2026Article
- Deciphering the cellular landscape of pathological scars.Burns & trauma · 2026Article
- Hypertrophic Scars and Keloids: Advances in Treatment and Review of Established Therapies.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2023Review
- COLasers in medical science · 2022Article
- Laser-Assisted Drug Delivery: A Systematic Review of Safety and Adverse Events.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Skin scarring: Latest update on objective assessment and optimal management.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
- Principles and clinical applications of transcutaneous laser-assisted drug delivery: A narrative review.Scars, burns & healingReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this article is to study the clinical efficacy and adverse events of laser-assisted drug delivery in the treatment of hypertrophic and keloid scars. We searched the following databases up to 22 October 2020: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Clinical Trials) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and reference lists of articles for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of laser-assisted drug delivery for the treatment of hypertrophic and keloid scars. We also searched online trials registries for ongoing trials and contacted trial authors where appropriate. Our outcomes of interest were objective clinical evaluation of scars, participant satisfaction, and adverse effects of the treatments. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2. Two authors independently abstracted data. We included 10 RCTs involving a total of 329 participants: six trials utilised parallel-arm RCTs whilst four employed split-scar design. Three trials had high risk of bias with the remaining seven rated as having some concerns. The interventions and outcomes were too varied to be combined statistically. High-quality randomised controlled trials assessing laser-assisted delivery for drugs in the context of hypertrophic and/or keloid scarring are needed. Studies with a larger number of participants, with longer follow-up times, and standardised evaluation of outcome and adverse effects are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33763827What 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.