Search

Background: Autologous fat transfer (AFT) has been proposed as a possible treatment for scar tissue and its associated symptoms. Its effectiveness's evidence is yet unidentified though. The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the currently available evidence on the efficacy and safety of autologous fat transfer in treating post-burn and post-traumatic scars using a validated scar measurement tool. Methods: This study performed a systematic literature review in November 2023 using the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), PUBMED, and Google Scholar. The following key terms were included: (Fat grafting OR Autologous fat transfer) AND (body scars OR body burns OR body wounds) AND (Efficacy OR Safety OR satisfaction). We evaluated articles according to predefined quality criteria. The following data were included during the extraction period: patient demographics, indications for AFT, the number of AFT sessions, follow-up periods, and changes in the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) scores, which contain both the patient and observer components. Results: This study included 1326 patients and 23 published articles. A total of 14 prospective studies, 7 retrospective studies, and 2 Randomized clinical trials studies were evaluated. These 23 articles came from diverse global locations; the earliest was published in 1992, and the most recently published in 2022. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrated significant enhancements in scar characteristics from both patient and observer perspectives. Overall, AFT holds promise as a valuable treatment option for scar-related conditions as it enhances scar quality ,contributing to improved patient outcomes and satisfaction. Level of Evidence III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is no ideal suture material or ideal sewing technique. The type of suture material affects the quality of the scars. Patient and surgeon satisfaction with the quality and comfort of the scar is one of the main goals of modern surgery. Aims: This study aims to compare the quality of scars and patient satisfaction after using two different types of sutures. Methods: This research was conducted as a prospective study that included 64 patients whose surgical wounds were closed with intradermal suture using different suturing materials according to which the patients were divided into two groups: absorbable — Monocryle (32) and non-absorbable — DemeLENE suture (32). POSAS scale and an ultrasound machine were used to assess the scars. The doctor and the patient evaluated seven parameters on two occasions, after 2 and 6 weeks after the surgery. Results: The statistically significant advantage was found after 2 weeks in scars sewn with non-resorptive suture in terms of elasticity, doctor's general impression, pain, itching, color, stiffness, thickness, irregularity, and patient's general impression. After 6 weeks, statistically significantly better results were shown on scars sewn with non-resorptive thread for the parameters doctor's general impression, itching, irregularity, and patient's general impression. Conclusions: Non-resorptive sutures show statistically significantly better results, especially after 2 weeks from the patient's point of view so we consider them more comfortable and convenient to use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Wound healing and scar quality after trauma are subject to impairment through excessive wound healing, chronic wound or even surgical site infections. Optimizing the process of scar formation and skin healing is crucial in virtually all fields of medicine. In this regard, we tested the possible usage and advantages of titanium coated suture material. Methods We performed a prospective observational cohort study including 30 patients who underwent soft tissue reconstruction. One half of the donor flap site was sutured with titanium coated suture material, while the other half was closed with non-coated sutures. Scar quality of the donor flap site was assessed by photographs and POSAS scores on days 2–5, 14, 42, 72 and 180 postoperatively. Results No difference between the titanium coated sutures and non-coated sutures was seen in the POSAS assessment, neither for the patient scale at 14, 42, 72 and 180 days, nor for the observer scale on the same dates. Comorbidities like diabetes, chronic renal failure and smoking as well as the BMI of each patient affected the wound healing process to an equal degree on both sides of the suture. Conclusions No difference between the titanium coated and non-titanium-coated suture material was seen in the POSAS assessment in regard to scar quality and wound healing. The titanium-coated suture material can be considered to be equally as effective and safe in all qualities as the non-titanium-coated suture material, even in patients with comorbidities. Clinical trial register This study is registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) under the registration number DRKS00021767. ( https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00021767 )

Abstract: Objective: The normal process of skin tissue repair following injury invariably results in visual scarring. It is known that topical treatment with hydrophobic cosmetics rich in silicone and mineral oil content can improve the appearance of scars and striae. Given lifestyle preferences of many cosmetic consumers towards so‐called natural treatments, the objective of this controlled randomized study was to investigate the efficacy of a plant body oil rich in oleic and linoleic acids (Bio Skin Oil®) for improving the appearance of scars and striae. Methods: A panel of 80 volunteers with non‐hypertrophic scars (40) or stretch marks (40) not older than 3 years applied a cosmetic face and body oil for 8 weeks. Compared to an untreated scar/stretch mark region, a blinded investigator as well as volunteer assessments with given observed parameters demonstrated the efficacy of the oil under test. Results: On the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the mean score was reduced on the product‐treated area by approximately 5% (P = 0.006). The untreated area remained unchanged. Observed effects by volunteers were more pronounced – Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS) giving a reduction of approximately 20% on the treated area, and on the control untreated area a reduction of approximately 6%. The overall product effect of 14% was shown to be clearly significant (P = 0.001). All statements relating to product traits achieved higher frequencies of agreements than of non‐agreements and were therefore assessed positively by the volunteers. Highest frequencies of agreements occurred in statements that the test product provides a long‐lasting, soft and supple skin feeling (93%); caring effect (87%); and quick absorbance (84%). Agreement was also found for statements that the product improves the skin appearance (61%) and that scars/striae appear less pronounced (51%). Only 17% of volunteers felt the oil had no benefit to the appearance of their scars/striae. Conclusions: The oil blend under test is effective in improving the appearance of non‐keloid scars and striae. Further work is required to understand the mechanisms of how plant oil fatty acids ameliorate scar and striae appearance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]