| Literature DB >> 23856363 |
Tae Hwan Park1,2, Ji Hae Park1, Choong Hyun Chang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Keloids are often resistant to treatment and have high recurrence rates. To the best of the authors' knowledge, however, there have been very few case reports related to foot keloids. The purpose of this retrospective case-series was to summarize the baseline characteristics of a cohort of patients, introduce our treatment regimen for the successful treatment of foot keloids.Entities:
Keywords: Foot; Keloid; Recurrence; Steroid
Year: 2013 PMID: 23856363 PMCID: PMC3717136 DOI: 10.1186/1757-1146-6-26
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Foot Ankle Res ISSN: 1757-1146 Impact factor: 2.303
Figure 1Central sparing in a foot keloid.
Figure 2Typical ulceration in a foot keloid.
Figure 3Preoperative appearance of a patient.
Figure 4Approximation of the harvested full thickness skin to the defect area using silk 2-0 sutures.
Figure 5Postoperative 2 months.
Figure 6Postoperative 12 months.
Baseline patient characteristics
| Age, years | 18.00 (7 - 43) |
| Total size, cm2 | 50.00 (18 - 150) |
| Gender: | |
| Female, n (%) | 75 (94.9%) |
| Male, n (%) | 4 (5.1%) |
| Previous treatment history: | |
| No, n (%) | 29 (36.7%) |
| Yes, n (%) | 50 (63.3%) |
| Surgical excision, n (%) | 4 (5.1%) |
| Steroid injection, n (%) | 33 (41.8%) |
| Laser therapy, n (%) | 2 (2.5%) |
| Combination treatments, n (%) | 11 (13.9%) |
| Etiology: | |
| ORIF d/t fracture, n (%) | 54 (68.4%) |
| 1’ closure d/t laceration, n (%) | 11 (13.9%) |
| 2’ healing following burn, n (%) | 10 (1.1%) |
| Others, n (%) | 4 (5.1%) |
| Recurrence | |
| No, n (%) | 62 (78.5%) |
| Yes, n (%) | 17 (21.5%) |
Values are median(ranges) for continuous variables and number (percentages) for categorical variables.
Results of patient scar assessment scale
| Total score | 16.82 | 4.34 | 14.09 | 3.94 | 13.25 | 3.89 | 12.61 | 3.89 |
| Pain | 2.30 | 1.05 | 2.15 | 0.88 | 2.11 | 0.85 | 2.10 | 0.83 |
| Itchiness | 4.09 | 1.08 | 3.37 | 1.04 | 3.05 | 0.97 | 2.92 | 0.98 |
| Color | 3.78 | 1.53 | 2.86 | 1.29 | 2.66 | 1.23 | 2.51 | 1.18 |
| Stiffness | 3.29 | 1.08 | 2.72 | 0.88 | 2.63 | 0.87 | 2.52 | 0.88 |
| Thickness | 3.41 | 1.04 | 3.00 | 1.01 | 2.78 | 1.01 | 2.56 | 0.98 |
| Irregularity | 3.91 | 1.06 | 3.32 | 1.05 | 3.27 | 1.03 | 3.18 | 0.99 |
Figure 7A representative shape of the defect following complete excision that could not be closed primarily.
Figure 8Improved “patient scar assessment scale” by lapse of time.
Figure 9Improved “itchiness” by lapse of time.