首页> 外文期刊>Advances in skin & wound care >The Safety and Efficacy of Intralesional Verapamil Versus Intralesional Triamcinolone Acetonide for Keloids and Hypertrophic Scars: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
【24h】

The Safety and Efficacy of Intralesional Verapamil Versus Intralesional Triamcinolone Acetonide for Keloids and Hypertrophic Scars: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

机译:内腔内维纳米尔对瘢痕疙瘩对瘢痕疙瘩和肥厚瘢痕的安全性和有效性:系统评价和荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Keloids and hypertrophic scars often result after skin trauma. Currently, intralesional triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) is the criterion standard in nonsurgical management of keloids and hypertrophic scars. Intralesional verapamil may be an effective alternative modality, but it has been insufficiently studied. Accordingly, the study authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the efficacy and safety of the two drugs. The study authors systematically searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases for relevant trials published in any language through September 2018. According to the four studies included in this review, TAC improved scar pliability and vascularity more than verapamil after 3 weeks (P .05). The difference in effects on symptoms was not statistically significant (P = .89). For pain and telangiectasia, no statistical difference was observed (P > .05). Verapamil resulted in fewer cases of skin atrophy (P < .05). It appears that TAC is more effective than verapamil for improving scar pliability and vascularity in keloids and hypertrophic scars after 3 weeks of treatment. However, verapamil has fewer adverse drug reactions than TAC, which allows for a longer treatment period and the possibility that it might be effective for patients who cannot receive TAC.
机译:瘢痕疙瘩和肥厚疤痕通常会导致皮肤外伤后。目前,醋酸类内部葡萄糖酮(TAC)是瘢痕疙瘩和肥厚瘢痕的非诊断管理中的标准标准。内部维拉帕米可能是一种有效的替代方式,但它已经研究了不足。因此,该研究作者对随机对照试验进行了系统审查和荟萃分析,以比较两种药物的疗效和安全性。该研究作者系统地搜索了在2018年9月以任何语言发布的相关试验的Medline,Embase,Cochrane图书馆和中国国家知识基础设施数据库。根据本次审查中的四项研究,TAC后,TAC比Verapamil更好地改善了疤痕宽度和血管3周(p .05)。对症状影响的差异在统计学上没有统计学意义(p = .89)。对于疼痛和毛细血管扩展性,没有观察到统计学差异(p> .05)。维拉帕米导致皮肤萎缩案例较少(P <.05)。似乎TAC比维拉帕米更有效,以改善瘢痕疙瘩的瘢痕宽度和血管性,并在3周治疗后的肥厚疤痕。然而,维拉帕米的不良药物反应少于TAC,这允许更长的治疗期,并且可能对无法接受TAC的患者有效的可能性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号