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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ai, Jin-Wei, Liu, Jiang-tao, Pei, Sheng-Duo, Liu, Yu, Li, De-Sheng, Lin, Hong-ming, Pei, Bin
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