Efficacy and safety of triamcinolone acetonide alone and in combination with 5‐fluorouracil for treating hypertrophic scars and keloids: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Issue 3 (18th July 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ren, YiMing; Zhou, XianHu; Wei, ZhiJian; Lin, Wei; Fan, BaoYou; Feng, ShiQing
• Is Part Of: International wound journal. Volume 14:Issue 3(2017)
• Page Start: 480
• Page End: 487
• Publication Date: 2016-07-18
• Subjects: 5‐Fluorouracil -- Hypertrophic scars -- Keloids -- Meta‐analysis -- Triamcinolone acetonide; Wounds and injuries -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Wounds and injuries -- Periodicals; Wound healing -- Periodicals; 617.1005
• DOI: 10.1111/iwj.12629
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1742-4801

Abstract

Abstract: Pathological scars, such as keloids and hypertrophic scars, readily cause physical and psychological problems. Combination 5‐fluorouracil (5‐FU) with triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) is presumed to enhance the treatment of pathological scars, although supportive evidence is lacking. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of TAC alone and in combination with 5‐FU for the treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids. Five databases (PubMed, Medline, Cochrane databases, Embase and CNKI) were searched with the limitations of human subjects and English‐language text. Mean differences (MDs), odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The control group received intralesional TAC alone, and the experimental group received TAC combined with 5‐FU injection. A pooled analysis of the effectiveness based on patient self‐assessment after treatment showed that the experimental group achieved better results than the control group (OR = 2·92, 95% CI = 1·63–5·22, P = 0·0003). Similarly, a pooled analysis of the effectiveness based on observer assessment following treatment produced the same conclusion (OR = 4·03, 95% CI = 1·40–11·61, P = 0·010). A meta‐analysis of scar height after treatment showed that the experimental group performed better than the control group (MD = −0·14, 95% CI = −0·23–0·05, P = 0·002). The erythema score of the experimental group after treatment was superior (MD = −0·20, 95% CI = −0·34–0·06, P = 0·004). The heterogeneity test showed no heterogeneity among the studies ( P > 0·1, I 2 = 0%). TAC combined with 5‐FU is more suitable for the treatment and prevention of hypertrophic scars and keloids, with greater improvement in scar height and patient satisfaction as well as fewer side effects.