ArticleInternational ophthalmology2025
Evaluation of periocular scars after blepharoplasty and external dacryocystorhinostomy according to Manchester and modified Vancouver scar score.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the scars of two groups of patients who underwent different periorbital surgical procedures, blepharoplasty and external dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR), using established scar scales. We aimed to compare the cosmetic outcomes of incisions parallel and perpendicular to the skin lines and to evaluate the relationship between patient satisfaction, skin aging, skin phototypes, and scar scores.
methodsThis cross-sectional study included 55 patients who underwent upper eyelid blepharoplasty and 50 patients who underwent external DCR. Patients' postoperative scars were assessed between 12 and 36 months after surgery using the fitzpatrick skin type scoring (Type I white skin-Type VI dark brown/black skin), Modified Fitzpatrick Wrinkle Scale (MFWS) (Class 0 no wrinkle-Class 3 deep wrinkle), modified vancouver scar scale (MVSS) (pigmentation, vascularity, pliability, height) and the Manchester Scar Scale (MSS) (visual analog scale, color, matte/glossy, contour, distortion, texture) by an ophthalmologist and a dermatologist. The assessment was blinded. Finally, all participants answered a patient satisfaction scale consisting of three questions [(1) Can you see the wound (2) Is the scar important to you? (3) Would you undergo the same operation again regarding the scar?].
resultsBoth MSS and MVSS scores were higher in the blepharoplasty group than in the external DCR group (p = 0.041, p = 0.029). As patient dissatisfaction increased, a significant increase in both MSS and MVSS scoreswas observed (p = 0.001, r = 0.308; p = 0.025, r = 0.219).
conclusionAccording to the patient satisfaction scale, blepharoplasty and external DCR were not significantly different, but external DCR resulted in less scarring than blepharoplasty according to MSS and MVSS (performed by a dermatologist and an ophthalmologist). We found that the scar score was influenced by the amount of wrinkles, but not by age or skin color. To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare both the MSS and MVSS scar scores with patient satisfaction after periocular surgery. Finally, both the MSS and MVSS scar scores provide an objective and useful method of assessing postoperative scarring and can therefore help surgical teams optimize their procedure and achieve a better outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40355707What 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.