ArticleArchives of plastic surgery2026
Comprehensive Update on Keloid Management.
Article in Archives of plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Keloids remain one of the most challenging conditions in cutaneous wound healing, marked by complex pathophysiology and notoriously high recurrence rates. Although a universally accepted standard of care is still lacking, recent advances have significantly improved our understanding and management of this fibrotic disorder. Emerging evidence highlights genetic predisposition, prolonged inflammatory response, and aberrant fibroblast activity as key contributors to keloid formation. Current therapeutic approaches focus on multimodal strategies, including intralesional corticosteroids, cryotherapy, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy. Intralesional triamcinolone remains a first-line treatment, while chemotherapy agents like 5-fluorouracil and vincristine have shown promising efficacy in refractory cases. Surgical excision, often combined with adjuvant therapies such as radiation, is considered for large or recurrent lesions. Given the high recurrence rate, patient-centered, evidence-based treatment algorithms are essential. Stratifying keloids into categories enables tailored interventions. Both established and emerging treatments are now evolving toward more personalized and less invasive approaches to improve outcomes and patient satisfaction. Multimodal, individualized treatment approaches-guided by lesion morphology, anatomical location, treatment history, and patient factors-are essential for optimizing outcomes. Emerging therapies are expanding the therapeutic arsenal, offering additional strategies for resistant or recurrent cases. Moreover, the integration of molecular and genetic insights is paving the way for the development of targeted therapies, which may ultimately transform keloid treatment into a more precise and effective discipline. Future studies should focus on large-scale trials to establish standardized, data-driven treatment guidelines for keloids.
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.