SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Combined Stromal Vascular Fraction and Fractional CO2 Laser Therapy for Hypertrophic Scar Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of fractional COFrontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- An Overview of the Mechanisms of Fractional COLasers in medical science · 2026Review
- Long-term efficacy and safety of carbon dioxide (COAmerican journal of translational research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHypertrophic scars (HTSs) result from aberrant wound healing processes, leading to raised, thickened tissue with functional discomfort and cosmetic concerns. Current treatments, including corticosteroid injections and laser therapy, have limitations. Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) therapy and CO2 laser treatment offer promising avenues, with SVF therapy showing regenerative potential and CO2 laser therapy promoting precise tissue removal and wound healing. This study aims to investigate the combined application of SVF therapy and CO2 laser treatment for HTS, aiming to enhance treatment efficacy, tissue remodeling, and aesthetic outcomes, ultimately improving patient satisfaction in HTS management.
methodPubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science databases have been searched for relevant studies. The "R" software (version 4.3.1) along with the "tidyverse" and "meta" statistical packages utilized to analyze data related to the efficiency of this combined method. A random-effects model was fitted to the data. For each study, continuous outcomes were pooled by calculating the standardized mean difference, along with their 95% confidence intervals. The assessment of heterogeneity utilized the I
resultsSix articles fulfilled our inclusion criteria and were included in our review. Results from the pooled analysis of Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores across three included studies indicated a significant impact of the SVF+CO2 method on VSS scores post-treatment (SMD=-3.0144; 95% CI:-4.3706 to -1.6583, p<0.0001). However, analysis of transepidermal water loss levels before and after treatment showed no significant difference (SMD=-2.7603; 95% CI: -6.8729 to 1.3522; p=0.1883). Comparatively, in a pooled analysis of two studies, the combined SVF+CO2 method demonstrated superior efficacy in VSS scores compared to other methods (SMD= -1.3573; 95% CI: -2.2475 to -0.4672, p = 0.0028), with moderate heterogeneity across studies (I^2=23.0%, p = 0.2545).
conclusionThe combined application of SVF and CO2 laser treatment shows significant promise in improving hypertrophic scars' appearance and texture. The SVF+CO2 method demonstrates superior efficacy compared to other modalities, suggesting its potential as a valuable therapeutic approach for hypertrophic scar management. 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 the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
39333369What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.