Cargando…
The effectiveness of pressure therapy (15–25 mmHg) for hypertrophic burn scars: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Although pressure therapy (PT) represents the standard care for prevention and treatment of hypertrophic scar (HS) from burns, its practice is largely based on empirical evidence and its effectiveness remains controversial. To clarify the effect of PT (15–25 mmHg) for HS, we performed the systematic...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5215680/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28054644 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep40185 |
_version_ | 1782491801184108544 |
---|---|
author | Ai, Jin-Wei Liu, Jiang-tao Pei, Sheng-Duo Liu, Yu Li, De-Sheng Lin, Hong-ming Pei, Bin |
author_facet | Ai, Jin-Wei Liu, Jiang-tao Pei, Sheng-Duo Liu, Yu Li, De-Sheng Lin, Hong-ming Pei, Bin |
author_sort | Ai, Jin-Wei |
collection | PubMed |
description | Although pressure therapy (PT) represents the standard care for prevention and treatment of hypertrophic scar (HS) from burns, its practice is largely based on empirical evidence and its effectiveness remains controversial. To clarify the effect of PT (15–25 mmHg) for HS, we performed the systematic review and meta-analysis. Several electronic databases were screened to identify related randomized controlled trials (RCTs). 12 RCTs involving 710 patients with 761 HS resulting from burn injuries were included. Compared with non/low-PT, cases treated with PT (15–25 mmHg) showed significant differences in Vancouver Scar Scale score (MD = −0.58, 95% CI = −0.78–−0.37), thickness (SMD = −0.25, 95% CI = −0.40–−0.11), brightness (MD = 2.00, 95% CI = 0.59–3.42), redness (MD = −0.79, 95% CI = −1.52–−0.07), pigmentation (MD = −0.16, 95% CI = −0.32–−0.00) and hardness (SMD = −0.65, 95% CI = −1.07–−0.23). However, there was no difference in vascularity (MD = 0.03, 95% CI = −0.43–0.48). Our analysis indicated that patients with HS who were managed with PT (15–25 mmHg) showed significant improvements. Due to limitations, more large and well-designed studies are needed to confirm our findings and the side-effects of the PT may also need to be evaluated. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5215680 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-52156802017-01-09 The effectiveness of pressure therapy (15–25 mmHg) for hypertrophic burn scars: A systematic review and meta-analysis Ai, Jin-Wei Liu, Jiang-tao Pei, Sheng-Duo Liu, Yu Li, De-Sheng Lin, Hong-ming Pei, Bin Sci Rep Article Although pressure therapy (PT) represents the standard care for prevention and treatment of hypertrophic scar (HS) from burns, its practice is largely based on empirical evidence and its effectiveness remains controversial. To clarify the effect of PT (15–25 mmHg) for HS, we performed the systematic review and meta-analysis. Several electronic databases were screened to identify related randomized controlled trials (RCTs). 12 RCTs involving 710 patients with 761 HS resulting from burn injuries were included. Compared with non/low-PT, cases treated with PT (15–25 mmHg) showed significant differences in Vancouver Scar Scale score (MD = −0.58, 95% CI = −0.78–−0.37), thickness (SMD = −0.25, 95% CI = −0.40–−0.11), brightness (MD = 2.00, 95% CI = 0.59–3.42), redness (MD = −0.79, 95% CI = −1.52–−0.07), pigmentation (MD = −0.16, 95% CI = −0.32–−0.00) and hardness (SMD = −0.65, 95% CI = −1.07–−0.23). However, there was no difference in vascularity (MD = 0.03, 95% CI = −0.43–0.48). Our analysis indicated that patients with HS who were managed with PT (15–25 mmHg) showed significant improvements. Due to limitations, more large and well-designed studies are needed to confirm our findings and the side-effects of the PT may also need to be evaluated. Nature Publishing Group 2017-01-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5215680/ /pubmed/28054644 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep40185 Text en Copyright © 2017, The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Article Ai, Jin-Wei Liu, Jiang-tao Pei, Sheng-Duo Liu, Yu Li, De-Sheng Lin, Hong-ming Pei, Bin The effectiveness of pressure therapy (15–25 mmHg) for hypertrophic burn scars: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | The effectiveness of pressure therapy (15–25 mmHg) for hypertrophic burn scars: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | The effectiveness of pressure therapy (15–25 mmHg) for hypertrophic burn scars: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | The effectiveness of pressure therapy (15–25 mmHg) for hypertrophic burn scars: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | The effectiveness of pressure therapy (15–25 mmHg) for hypertrophic burn scars: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | The effectiveness of pressure therapy (15–25 mmHg) for hypertrophic burn scars: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | effectiveness of pressure therapy (15–25 mmhg) for hypertrophic burn scars: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5215680/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28054644 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep40185 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aijinwei theeffectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT liujiangtao theeffectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT peishengduo theeffectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT liuyu theeffectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT lidesheng theeffectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT linhongming theeffectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT peibin theeffectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT aijinwei effectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT liujiangtao effectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT peishengduo effectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT liuyu effectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT lidesheng effectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT linhongming effectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT peibin effectivenessofpressuretherapy1525mmhgforhypertrophicburnscarsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |