ArticleSkin health and disease2024
Efficacy and safety of intralesional triamcinolone acetonide alone and its combination with 5- fluorouracil in keloids and hypertrophic scars: Randomized, parallel group, and double blinded trial.
Article in Skin health and disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07660120 (Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Carbon Dioxide Laser-Assisted Triamcinolone Delivery With and Without 5-Fluorouracil for Hypertrophic Burn Scars), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Carbon Dioxide Laser-Assisted Triamcinolone Delivery With and Without 5-Fluorouracil for Hypertrophic Burn Scars: A Triple-Blinded, Randomized Split Scar Clinical Trial
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of fractional COFrontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Ultradeformable Vesicles for Wound Healing: Ethosomes, Transferosomes, and Transethosomes in Topical Drug Delivery.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Clinical and Therapeutic Predictors of Keloid Recurrence: Outcomes in a European Cohort of 206 Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Intralesional triamcinolone versus 5-fluorouracil for keloids and hypertrophic scars: A randomized comparative clinical study.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Comparison of intralesional 5-fluorouracil versus intralesional triamcinolone acetonide for keloid treatment: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled study.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of intralesional triamcinolone acetonide alone and its combination with 5- fluorouracil in keloids and hypertrophic scars: Randomized, parallel group, and double blinded trial.Skin health and disease · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars is challenging. The current first-line treatment is a steroid which has high resistance and recurrence rate along with unacceptable adverse effects. Different studies involving the combination of TAC and 5-FU that have been done so far showed better treatment outcomes in terms of efficacy and safety. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of intralesional triamcinolone acetonide alone and its combination with 5-fluorouracil in patients with keloids and hypertrophic scars at 12 weeks follow-up. Methods: In this randomized parallel group double-blinded clinical trial, we enroled 66 cases of keloids and hypertrophic scars randomly allocated into two treatment groups. Patients received an intralesional injection of triamcinolone acetonide (20 mg/mL) in Group A and an intralesional injection of a combination of triamcinolone acetonide (20 mg/mL) and 5-fluorouracil (25 mg/mL) in Group B for every 2 weeks until 10 weeks and the final evaluation was done at 12 weeks follow-up. Results: There was a reduction in all the parameters at every follow-up visit in both groups. The ≥50% reduction in height, reduction in the VSS and POSAS scores, and good to excellent subjective improvement reported by both the patients and the observer were significantly greater in the combination group compared to TAC alone group. The response rate was faster and complications were lesser in the combination group as compared to TAC alone group. Limitation: Single-centred, no long-term follow-up, and recurrence could not be assessed. Conclusion: TAC alone and its combination with the 5-FU both were effective in keloids and hypertrophic scars. Yet, the TAC and 5-FU combination treatment was more efficacious with a faster response rate and safer than the TAC alone treatment.
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.