SynthesisJournal of cosmetic dermatology2026
Efficacy and Safety of Cryotherapy Combined With Intralesional Steroid for Keloid and Hypertrophic Scar: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveIntralesional steroid injection is the first-line therapy for scars. Emerging evidence indicates that combining intralesional steroid injection with cryotherapy yields promising therapeutic outcomes for scar management. However, a consensus on the efficacy and safety of this combined regimen has not yet been reached. Consequently, the present meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of this combination compared with control groups.
methodsA full-scale literature retrieval was performed across a range of databases to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective non-randomized studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of cryotherapy plus intralesional steroid injection against control treatments for keloids or hypertrophic scars. Key outcome data, including the mean percentage change in scar improvement, the excellent clinical response rate (defined as ≥ 75% reduction in scar volume), and the incidence of adverse events, were extracted. Meta-analyses were performed using a fixed- or random-effects model based on the heterogeneity assessment results.
resultsThirteen studies involving 1012 cases were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results exhibited that cryotherapy combined with intralesional steroid injection yielded a significantly higher efficacy rate than various control interventions (including intralesional steroid monotherapy, cryotherapy alone, bleomycin/verapamil treatment, laser plus steroid, and surgical excision plus radiotherapy) (risk ratio [RR] = 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03-1.36; p = 0.01). However, no statistically significant differences were detected between the experimental and control groups in either the mean percentage change in scar improvement (standard mean difference (SMD) = 0.14, 95% CI: -0.39 to 0.68; p = 0.60) or the overall incidence of adverse events (RR = 1.35, 95% CI: 0.99-1.83; p = 0.06).
conclusionsCryotherapy combined with intralesional steroid injection is a viable alternative to other first-line treatments for keloids and hypertrophic scars. Clinical recommendations should be made cautiously based on specific patient and scar conditions. Further well-designed, large-scale RCTs are required to validate the long-term efficacy and safety of this combined regimen.
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.