ReviewCureus2025
Hypertrophic and Keloid Scar Management: Advances in Diagnosis, Perioperative Care, and Anesthetic Modulation.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Angiotensin II as a Novel Biomarker in the Assessment and Prediction of Post-burn Hypertrophic Scarring: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Complex soft tissue and facial bone reconstruction after a bear attack in Indonesia: a case report of definitive management following an 8-hour interfacility transfer.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Wound Repair: From Biology to Therapeutic Innovation.Cells · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hypertrophic and keloid scars present significant challenges in surgical recovery and perioperative care, especially in patients undergoing reconstructive procedures or burn treatment. These scars can cause pain, pruritus, and psychosocial distress. There is a higher burden in individuals with skin of color, a term commonly used to describe those with Fitzpatrick skin types IV to VI, due to both increased incidence and limitations of early detection. Traditional treatment approaches often overlook the complex nature of wound healing and the influence of perioperative inflammation and pain control. Recent advances, such as high-frequency ultrasound, shear wave elastography, and artificial intelligence tools, have improved the ability to assess scars objectively and detect changes early. Wearable monitoring systems and personalized therapies are also creating new options to guide treatment. Intraoperative and postoperative strategies, including silicone sheeting and corticosteroid injections, are central to improving outcomes. Anesthesiologists contribute by using regional techniques that reduce inflammation and support recovery. This review explores how surgical, anesthetic, and dermatologic strategies together can improve care and reduce disparities in scar management.
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.