ReviewJournal of plastic and reconstructive surgery2026
Understanding and Comparing Current Practice for Ear Keloid Scars: A Narrative Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A keloid scar is a benign fibroproliferative disorder that is characterized by excessive tissue growth beyond the original wound. The psychosocial and surgical challenges that arise can present potentially devastating long-term consequences for patients, particularly in demographics with a high incidence of keloid scar formation. Considering the high incidence of keloids with an estimated 11 million cases annually, particularly in those of Asian and African backgrounds, an understanding of their exact pathophysiology remains challenging. Piercing-induced keloids of the ear are a common cause of ear keloids, yet the exact mechanism and optimal treatments are of considerable debate. This narrative review aims to evaluate current treatment modalities for ear keloids, focusing on their association with ear piercings and the implications for management. A systematic review of Medline, Embase, and Mendeley identified 26 studies, covering a range of surgical and non-surgical treatment methods, indicating a considerable recurrence rate, with an average of 20.3%. Surgical excision remained the primary treatment modality, which was often accompanied by adjunctive therapies such as steroid injections and radiotherapy. Fractional carbon dioxide laser therapy may also be a useful treatment modality with fewer potential complication risks. Overall, the findings identified significant variability in treatment protocols and outcomes, underscoring the need for personalized approaches based on keloid characteristics and patient preferences. Ultimately, the review highlights the importance of further research to establish standardized treatment protocols for ear keloid scars and to understand the role of piercing-specific pathophysiology in improving patient outcomes.
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.