BACKGROUND: Postoperative scarring is a common cause of patient dissatisfaction. Several strategies have been developed to improve its clinical aspects. OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of the 10,600 nm ablative fractional carbon dioxide (CO2) laser in the treatment of recent surgical scars in the head and neck region. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective, randomized, single-blind intrapatient controlled study was conducted on 9 postoperative scars in the head and neck region. On half of the scar, 3 treatment sessions were performed. Physician/Patient Global Assessment (PhGA/PGA) and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scales (POSAS) were used to evaluate treatment efficacy. Safety was evaluated by registration of pain and adverse events. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were noted in terms of PhGA or POSAS (observer). Patient Global Assessment (p = 0.058) and POSAS (patient) (p = 0.091) showed a trend toward better improvement of the treated half. Itch score (p = 0.046) and global end evaluation (patient) (p = 0.026) demonstrated a statistically significant difference in favor of the treated part. Adverse events were minor, and no long-term side effects were noted. CONCLUSION: The use of CO2 fractional laser is safe and is associated with high patient satisfaction. However, objective measurements could not confirm its efficacy in the treatment of recent surgical scars.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Postoperative scarring is a common cause of patient dissatisfaction. Several strategies have been developed to improve its clinical aspects. OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of the 10,600 nm ablative fractional carbon dioxide (CO2) laser in the treatment of recent surgical scars in the head and neck region. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective, randomized, single-blind intrapatient controlled study was conducted on 9 postoperative scars in the head and neck region. On half of the scar, 3 treatment sessions were performed. Physician/Patient Global Assessment (PhGA/PGA) and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scales (POSAS) were used to evaluate treatment efficacy. Safety was evaluated by registration of pain and adverse events. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were noted in terms of PhGA or POSAS (observer). Patient Global Assessment (p = 0.058) and POSAS (patient) (p = 0.091) showed a trend toward better improvement of the treated half. Itch score (p = 0.046) and global end evaluation (patient) (p = 0.026) demonstrated a statistically significant difference in favor of the treated part. Adverse events were minor, and no long-term side effects were noted. CONCLUSION: The use of CO2 fractional laser is safe and is associated with high patient satisfaction. However, objective measurements could not confirm its efficacy in the treatment of recent surgical scars.