Welcome to PracticeUpdate! We hope you are enjoying access to a selection of our top-read and most recent articles. Please register today for a free account and gain full access to all of our expert-selected content.
Already Have An Account? Log in Now
Outcomes of Combination Shaving and Cryosurgery Treatment in Patients With Keloid Scars
TAKE-HOME MESSAGE
-
Intramarginal excision and contact cryosurgery were used in this single-center cohort study and the treatment outcomes in 27 patients with 35 keloid scars were analyzed. In total, 50% or more reduction in scar volume was seen in 71% of the keloid scars and there was a statistically significant median volume decrease of 81.9% across all scars (P < .001). The patients were followed up for 12 months and a recurrence rate of 20% was noted.
- Based on the results of this study, healthcare providers should consider shaving combined with contact cryosurgery as a treatment option for patients with keloid scars.
abstract
This abstract is available on the publisher's site.
Access this abstract nowThere is currently no consensus regarding the best treatment of keloid scars. Earlier studies report a decreased scar volume and a substantial reduction of recurrence in keloid scars treated by cryosurgery. In this study, our objective was to assess whether intramarginal excision (shaving) of the keloid scar followed by an immediate single session of contact cryosurgery is associated with decreased scar volume.
Additional Info
Disclosure statements are available on the authors' profiles:
Outcomes Associated With Combination Shaving and Cryosurgery Treatment in Patients With Keloid Scars
JAMA Dermatol 2022 Jun 22;[EPub Ahead of Print], M Artz, A Trimaille, A Labouche, N Kerfant, L Misery, W HuFrom MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
This is a small, non-controlled "study" of the combination of two keloid treatment modalities (shave excision and one exposure to cryotherapy), with a >10% lost to follow-up rate, with an endpoint of decreased volume from baseline as "measured by the Vancouver Scar Severity Scale," which does not clearly quantify keloid volume. One of the treatment modalities, surgical shave removal of the keloid, obviously reduces the keloid volume, unless there is a robust recurrence beyond the baseline volume within the admittedly short 1-year follow-up endpoint. Arguably, anything above a post-treatment keloid volume of 0 represents a recurrence. The large number of lost to follow-up keloids should be added to the 20% "recurrence rate" treatment failure. There are data in the literature pointing to the effectiveness and a low recurrence rate following intra-keloid cryotherapy; however, it remains to be determined whether cryotherapy to the base of a shave-removed keloid has any impact on ultimate keloid recurrence.