No abstract

Keloids are pathological scars presenting as nodular lesions that extend beyond the area of injury. They do not spontaneously regress, often continuing to grow over time. The abnormal wound-healing process underlying keloid formation results from the lack of control mechanisms self-regulating cell proliferation and tissue repair. Keloids may lead to cosmetic disfigurement and functional impairment and affect the quality of life. Although several treatments were reported in the literature, no universally effective therapy was found to date. The most common approach is intralesional corticosteroid injection alone or in combination with other treatment modalities. Triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) is the most commonly used intralesional corticosteroid. The aim of this article was to review the use of TAC, alone or in combination, in the treatment of keloid scars. The response to corticosteroid injection alone is variable with 50–100% regression and a recurrence rate of 33% and 50% after 1 and 5 years, respectively. Compared to verapamil, TAC showed a faster and more effective response even though with a higher complication rate. TAC combined with verapamil was proved to be effective with statistically significant overall improvements of scars over time and long-term stable results. TAC and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) intralesional injections were found to achieve comparable outcomes when administered alone, although 5-FU was more frequently associated with side effects. Conversely, the combination of 5-FU and TAC was more effective and showed fewer undesirable effects compared to TAC or 5-FU alone. Several kinds of laser treatments were reported to address keloids; however, laser therapy alone was burdened with a high recurrence rate. Better results were described by combining CO2, pulsed-dye or Nd: YAG lasers with TAC intralesional injections. Further options such as needle-less intraepidermal drug delivery are being explored, but more studies are needed to establish safety, feasibility and effectiveness of this approach.

No abstract

Objective: To determine differences in infection rates among uncomplicated, repaired wounds managed with: topical bacitracin zinc (BAC); neomycin sulfate, bacitracin zinc, and polymyxin B sulfate combination (NEO); silver sulfadiazine (SIL); and petrolatum (PTR). Methods:This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebocontrolled study conducted at a military community hospital with an emergency medicine residency program. Patients were enrolled if they: presented to the E D within 12 hours of injury and did not have puncture wounds, allergies to the agents used, or a history of immunocompromise; were not receiving antibiotics, chemotherapy, or steroids at the time of presentation; had not taken antibiotics within the preceding seven days; did not have an underlying fracture; and were not pregnant as determined by history. Local anesthetics without epinephrine and high-pressure irrigation with normal saline were used for all the patients. Wound scrubbing, debridement, and polyglactin subcutaneous (SQ) suture placement were carried out when necessary. Interrupted simple sutures using a monofilament, nonabsorbable material were used for skin closure. Numbered, randomized vials were given to all patients, with standardized instructions to inspect, clean, and redress their wounds three times a day. The wounds were evaluated for clinical infection at the time of follow-up.Results: Among the groups, there was no difference in patient ages; gender; wound location, type, length, or depth; time elapsed from injury to ED treatment; number of wounds scrubbed or necessitating debridement; number of SQ and cutaneous sutures used; and rate of compliance with returning the used vial of dispensed topical agent. The wound infection rates for the treatment groups were: BAC, six of 109 (5.5%); NEO, five of 110 (4.5%); SIL, 12 of 99 (12.1%); and PTR, 19 of 108 (17.6%) (p = 0.0034). Conclusion:The use of topical antibiotics resulted in significantly lower infection rates than did the use of a petrolatum control. BAC and NEO had the lowest wound infection rates.

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 the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .