ArticleTranslational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer2026
Effectiveness of different non-surgical scar reduction methods in post-operative scars: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Effective scar management is crucial in improving cosmetic outcomes, restoring physiological function, and supporting psychological well-being in surgical patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness of post-operative scar reduction techniques in optimising wound healing and minimising scar formation. Methods: PubMed (Medline), National University of Singapore (NUS) Library, ResearchGate and Springerlink were searched by two independent researchers up to 30th October 2024. Eligible studies compared Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) scores across different studies and their respective scar reduction techniques on post-operative patients. English-language human studies on post-surgical management with scar-related outcomes were included while non-English, non-human, non-surgical, duplicate studies and scars covering burns were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool. A quantitative synthesis of the results was performed using available outcome data and effect sizes were plotted using forest plots. Results: A total of 20 studies (1995-2024) including 1,089 post-surgical patients were appraised. Each scar reduction technique was found to have produced significant improvements in different aspects of scar reduction. Fractional CO2 laser produced stable and significant improvements in pliability and texture. Meanwhile, botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) showed moderate-to-strong efficacy, particularly in high-tension areas like the face and chest. Silicone gel demonstrated improvement in pigmentation and pliability in hypertrophic scars, and pulsed dye laser (PDL) was known to significantly reduce scar height and vascularity. Conclusions: This demonstrates that all four non-invasive interventions-silicone gel, PDL, fractional CO2 laser, and BTX-A-are associated with measurable improvements in scar reduction and appearance. Early intervention and employing a multimodal approach may result in an overall enhanced outcome across multiple dimensions of scar reduction.
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.