SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
Efficacy and safety of fractional CO
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of fractional CO Materials and methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the combination therapy of fractional CO₂ laser and TA injection for HS were identified through systematic searches of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, Sinomed, and VIP databases from inception to December 2024. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool. Meta-analysis was performed with RevMan (version 5.3), while sensitivity analysis and publication bias assessment were conducted using Stata (version 14.0). The quality of evidence for outcomes was evaluated with the Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment. Results: Nineteen studies involving 1,775 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with TA injection alone, the pooled results showed that fractional CO₂ laser combined with TA injection significantly reduced Vancouver Scar Scale scores [MD: -2.52, 95% CI: -3.07 to -1.98, Conclusion: Preliminary evidence suggests that fractional CO₂ laser combined with TA injection is an effective treatment for HS. However, due to methodological limitations in the included studies, large-scale, rigorously designed RCTs are required to validate these findings. Additionally, all 19 RCTs were conducted in China with Chinese participants; therefore, the current evidence is limited to this population and requires validation in other ethnic groups. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025630116, identifier PROSPERO (CRD4202563011).
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.