TY - JOUR
T1 - Effectiveness of Botulinum Toxin Type A Injection on Scars
T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
AU - Li, Man Yun
AU - Chiu, Wen Kuan
AU - Wang, Hsian Jenn
AU - Chen, I. Fan
AU - Chen, Jin Hua
AU - Chang, Ta Pang
AU - Ko, Yu
AU - Chen, Chiehfeng
N1 - Funding Information:
This article was edited by Wallace Academic Editing and supported by Taipei Medical University (107TMU-WFH-07).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/12/1
Y1 - 2022/12/1
N2 - Background: Scars can cause pain, long-term physical dysfunction, and psychological harm. Botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) is one treatment choice for scars, but further evidence is needed to confirm its efficacy. Methods: This systematic review included randomized controlled trials that investigated the effectiveness of BoNT-A on scars. The mean and standard deviation for the Vancouver Scar Scale, Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale, visual analog scale for appearance evaluation, visual analog scale for scar pain evaluation, and scar width were extracted for subgroup analysis. Results: Twenty-one randomized controlled trials were included. The BoNT-A group had a lower Vancouver Scar Scale score than the saline group (standardized mean difference, -0.73; 95 percent CI, -1.12 to -0.35; p = 0.0002) but a higher score than the steroid group (standardized mean difference, 0.85; 95 percent CI, 0.27 to 1.43; p = 0.004). The BoNT-A group exhibited a higher Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale grade than the saline group (standardized mean difference, 1.42; 95 percent CI, 0.83 to 2.00; p < 0.00001). The visual analog scale for appearance evaluation revealed higher scores in the BoNT-A group than in the saline group (standardized mean difference, 1.14; 95 percent CI, 0.69 to 1.60; p < 0.00001). As for pain evaluation, the BoNT-A group had a lower visual analog scale score than the steroid group (standardized mean difference, -2.57; 95 percent CI, -4.40 to -0.74; p = 0.006). Furthermore, scar width was significantly shorter in the BoNT-A group than in the control group (standardized mean difference, -1.11; 95 percent CI, -1.38 to -0.83; p < 0.00001). Conclusions: BoNT-A is more effective in treating scars than saline, although steroids may exhibit higher potency. Therefore, it can be considered an alternative in patients not amenable to steroid treatment. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.
AB - Background: Scars can cause pain, long-term physical dysfunction, and psychological harm. Botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) is one treatment choice for scars, but further evidence is needed to confirm its efficacy. Methods: This systematic review included randomized controlled trials that investigated the effectiveness of BoNT-A on scars. The mean and standard deviation for the Vancouver Scar Scale, Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale, visual analog scale for appearance evaluation, visual analog scale for scar pain evaluation, and scar width were extracted for subgroup analysis. Results: Twenty-one randomized controlled trials were included. The BoNT-A group had a lower Vancouver Scar Scale score than the saline group (standardized mean difference, -0.73; 95 percent CI, -1.12 to -0.35; p = 0.0002) but a higher score than the steroid group (standardized mean difference, 0.85; 95 percent CI, 0.27 to 1.43; p = 0.004). The BoNT-A group exhibited a higher Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale grade than the saline group (standardized mean difference, 1.42; 95 percent CI, 0.83 to 2.00; p < 0.00001). The visual analog scale for appearance evaluation revealed higher scores in the BoNT-A group than in the saline group (standardized mean difference, 1.14; 95 percent CI, 0.69 to 1.60; p < 0.00001). As for pain evaluation, the BoNT-A group had a lower visual analog scale score than the steroid group (standardized mean difference, -2.57; 95 percent CI, -4.40 to -0.74; p = 0.006). Furthermore, scar width was significantly shorter in the BoNT-A group than in the control group (standardized mean difference, -1.11; 95 percent CI, -1.38 to -0.83; p < 0.00001). Conclusions: BoNT-A is more effective in treating scars than saline, although steroids may exhibit higher potency. Therefore, it can be considered an alternative in patients not amenable to steroid treatment. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85143088407&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85143088407&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000009742
DO - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000009742
M3 - Review article
C2 - 36112846
AN - SCOPUS:85143088407
SN - 0032-1052
VL - 150
SP - 1249E-1258E
JO - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
JF - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
IS - 6
ER -
