Prevention of hypertrophic scars and keloids by the prophylactic use of topical silicone gel sheets following a surgical procedure in an office setting. The use of silicone occlusive sheeting (Sil-K) and silicone occlusive gel (Epiderm) in the prevention of hypertrophic scar formation. Cica-Care gel sheeting in the management of hypertrophic scarring. A controlled clinical trial of topical silicone gel sheeting in the treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids. A prospective randomized clinical trial to investigate the effect of silicone gel sheeting (Cica-Care) on post-traumatic hypertrophic scar among the Chinese population. Vitamin E added silicone gel sheets for treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids. Silicone versus nonsilicone gel dressings: a controlled trial. Hypertrophic sternal scars: silicone gel sheet versus Kenalog injection treatment. Topical silicone gel for the prevention and treatment of hypertrophic scar. Topical silicone gel: a new treatment for hypertrophic scars. Effectiveness of silicone sheets in the prevention of hypertrophic breast scars. Prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled study to assess the efficacy of the 585-nm flashlamp-pumped pulsed-dye laser and silicone gel sheeting in hypertrophic scar treatment. Evaluation of a self-adherent soft silicone dressing for the treatment of hypertrophic postoperative scars. Effect of the 585 nm flashlamp-pumped pulsed dye laser for the treatment of keloids.
Topical silicone gel sheeting has been used for more than 20 years to help reduce the size of hypertrophic scars and keloids. Its clinical efficacy and safety is well established.
                To determine whether topical silicone gel sheeting can be used to prevent hypertrophic scars and keloids from forming following dermatologic skin surgery.
                Patients undergoing skin surgery were stratified into two groups: those with no history of abnormal scarring (low-risk group) and those with a history of abnormal scarring (high-risk group). Following the procedure, patients within each group were randomized to receive either routine postoperative care or topical silicone gel sheeting (48 hours after surgery). Patients were followed for 6 months.
                In the low-risk group, there were no statistical differences between individuals using routine postoperative care or using topical silicone gel sheets. In the high-risk group, there was a statistical difference (39% versus 71%) between patients who did not develop abnormal scars and used topical silicone gel sheeting and patients who developed abnormal scars after routine postoperative treatment. Those individuals having a scar revision procedure also showed a statistical difference if topical silicone gel sheeting was used following surgery.
                Topical silicone gel sheeting, with a 20-year history of satisfaction in dermatology, now appears to be useful in the prevention of hypertrophic scars and keloids in patients undergoing scar revision. The development of hypertrophic scars and keloids is an unsolved problem in the process of wound healing. For this reason, a successful treatment to prevent excessive scar formation still has not been found. Over the last decade, however, a promising new treatment has been introduced. Silicone materials have proved to reduce the amount of scar tissue and are believed even to prevent hypertrophic scar and keloid formation. In this study, the prophylactic effect of a silicone occlusive sheeting (Sil-K, Degania, Israel) and a silicone occlusive gel (Epiderm, Inamed B.V., The Netherlands) was investigated in a bilateral breast-reduction scar model in which the nontreated scars were supported by nonocclusive Micropore (3M, The Netherlands). The inframammary scars of 129 female patients with a mean age of 31 years ( 14 to 69 years) were studied up to 1 year after the operation. The width and height were measured, and B-scan ultrasound, laser-Doppler flowmetry, and color measurements were used as objective indicators to distinguish between normal and exuberant scars. Three months following the operation, 64.3 percent of the patients developed a hypertrophic scar, which was reduced to 56.6 percent after 6 months and down to 35.3 percent after 1 year. No keloids were seen. Patients with an easily tanning skin, nonsmokers, and patients with an allergy showed more hypertrophic scar formation. Neither Sil-K, used in 68 patients, nor Epiderm, used in 61 patients, could prevent the formation of hypertrophic scars. If both groups were taken together, the scars treated with silicone materials even developed significantly more hypertrophy compared with the Micropore-applicated scars. A prospective, controlled clinical trial was undertaken to assess the efficacy and safety of two types of silicone gel, Silastic Gel Sheeting (SGS) and Cica-Care (CC), in the management of hypertrophic scars. Forty-two patients were randomly assigned to SGS and CC groups and their hypertrophic scars were divided into treated and control areas. Extensometric measurements were made at monthly intervals for 6 months and significant improvement of the treated areas relative to the control areas was observed. The two gels were not significantly different in efficacy or safety, but CC, being more adhesive and more comfortable than SGS, has advantages in ease of use and patient acceptability. nan This study aimed to determine the efficacy of silicone gel (Cica-Care) on severe post-traumatic hypertophic scars among the Chinese population.
                A randomized clinical trial (RCT) was conducted on 45 Chinese patients with post-traumatic hypertrophic scars. Twenty-two subjects were placed in the experimental group with silicone gel sheeting (SGS) applied 24h per day for 6 months while all subjects were taught to massage the scar daily for 15 min serving as the control intervention. Scar assessments were conducted regularly to measure the changes in thickness, pigmentation, vascularity, pliability, itchiness and pain.
                Two-way repeated ANOVA showed a significant difference between MT group and SGS group on scar thickness. The post hoc comparison analysis showed that the difference was significant at the post-2-month (p=0.008) and post-6-month (p<0.001) intervention. The SGS group also showed changes in pigmentation which resembled normal skin but no statistical significance was found. Pain, itchiness and pliability were also improved after intervention.
                This study indicated that silicone gel sheeting (Cica-Care) was effective to reduce thickness, pain, itchiness and pliability of the severe hypertrophic scar among the Chinese population. The moisturization effect of the tough and hard scar might contribute to the reduction of the skin thickness after 6 month's intervention. Trauma of various origins can induce a connective tissue disorder that leads to keloids. This condition has yet not been clearly distinguished from scars and hypertrophic scars. Only electronmicroscopic and biochemical data can help to do this. Among some more or less therapeutic approaches, the use of silicon (polydimethylsiloxane) plates, wrapped on the keloid surface, has been reported effective by some authors. These authors also demonstrated that it is not the mechanical pressure that is the mechanism of action, but a direct action on fibroblasts and a hyperhydration of subcutaneous tissue. The authors of this study conceived that the silicon plate may be able to improve the transdermal penetration of a compound such as vitamin E. This vitamin is capable of preserving some important morphologic and functional features of biological membranes by means of its phytilside chain of the molecule acting as a stabilizer of lysosomal membranes.
                Eighty patients of both sexes, aged between 18 and 63 years, who had hypertrophic scars and keloids, were admitted to the trial. The patients were randomized to two groups in a simple-blinded study. Group A: Forty patients whose scars have been covered with silicon plates with added vitamin E. Group B: Forty patients treated with simple silicone gel sheets. No pressure bandages were used, only tape fixing the sheet for 10 hours overnight. The trial lasted for 2 months. The results were recorded at 4 and 8 weeks, evaluating the improvement according to a Scott-Husskinson scale. For objective assessment photos were taken. The results were analyzed by the chi-square test.
                At the end of the first month, group A had improved by more than 50% in 85% of cases, whereas the improvement in group B was 55% (P < 0.01). At the end of the second month, 95% of patients in group A had improved by 50%, whereas 75% had improved by 50% in group B (P < 0.05).
                Vitamin E added to the silicon plate scored better than the simple silicon plate at the end of both periods. We have reported the successful combined action of vitamin E and silicone gel sheets in scar treatment, especially in the short-term prophylaxis of hypertrophic scars or keloids. Silicone gel dressings decrease scar volume and soften hypertrophic tissue, allowing it to be more easily controlled by other methods. Although silicone does not appear to be an essential component of the treatment, nonsilicone dressings have been reported to cause no change in physical parameters during a 2-month treatment period.
                To compare silicone and nonsilicone gel dressings in the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars, including a control group, and to evaluate the effectiveness of these treatments using two new assessment techniques.
                Patients were randomly chosen to receive silicone or nonsilicone gel dressings in a 4.5-month controlled prospective study. Scar size, induration, and symptoms were evaluated before and after the treatment. Scar color was visually measured using a color palette catalog, and a new device was developed to measure intracicatricial pressure.
                All of the measured parameters were significantly reduced in both silicone- and nonsilicone-treated groups, as compared to the control, with no significant differences between them.
                Silicone and nonsilicone gel dressings are equally effective in the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars. A prospective, randomized trial was designed to compare the standard Kenalog injection of established hypertrophic sternal scars with topical silicone gel sheets (Spenco). Fourteen poststernotomy cardiac patients with symptomatic scars were randomized to treatment in one-half of the scar with Kenalog injection. Simultaneously, the other half of the scar received the silicone gel sheet. The standard Kenalog injection used was 40 mg/ml x 1 cc, mixed with 1 cc of 1% Xylocaine with epinephrine. The gel sheets were worn continuously for 12 hours for 12 weeks. Pretreatment and posttreatment photographs were compared for color and appearance by blindfolded observers. Scar measurements (length, width, and height) were taken weekly in each area, and the patients were asked to rank their symptoms within each half as worse, the same, or better. The primary outcome of patient preference was analyzed sequentially, and the recruitment was terminated after 11 patients had completed the study, 10 of whom favored the silicone gel treatment (p < 0.05). Three patients remained in the treatment phase at the time of termination and completed the study subsequently. For the total sample of 14 subjects, 11 preferred the silicone gel, 1 expressed no preference, and 2 preferred the injection. The average time to improvement was 3.9 +/- 0.62 days (gel) versus 6.8 +/- 1.86 days (Kenalog). This study demonstrates that silicone gel sheets provide earlier symptomatic relief and a more aesthetic scar and are the preferred treatment of patients with symptomatic hypertrophic sternal scars. We studied the effects of a silicone gel bandage that was worn for at least 12 hours daily on the resolution of hypertrophic burn scar. In a second cohort, the prevention of hypertrophic scar formation in fresh surgical incisions by this bandage was also evaluated. In 19 patients with hypertrophic burn scars, elasticity of the scars was quantitated serially with the use of an elastometer. An adjacent or mirror-image hypertrophic burn scar served as a control. Scar elasticity was increased after both 1 and 2 months compared with that in controls. There was corresponding improvement clinically that persisted for at least 6 months. In the other cohort, scar volume changes in 21 surgical incisions were measured before and after 1 and 2 months. Gel-treated incisions gained less volume than control incisions after both intervals. Clinical assessment corroborated this quantitative demonstration of a decrement in scar volume. We concluded that topical silicone gel is efficacious, both in the prevention and in the treatment of hypertrophic scar. A prospective, controlled clinical trial was designed to assess the efficacy of a new treatment of hypertrophic scars. Silicone gel sheeting was applied to 14 hypertrophic scars in 10 adults for 8 weeks. The treated scars and untreated, mirror-image or adjacent control scars were photographed, biopsy specimens were taken, and they were measured elastometrically before and after treatment. Photography and elastometry were repeated 4 weeks after treatment was discontinued. All the scars that had been treated for at least 12 hours a day were improved clinically after 4 weeks. There was further clinical improvement during the second 4 weeks of treatment. Elastometrically, the treated scars were improved significantly at 4, 8, and 12 weeks, compared with both their own treatment value and the control scars (p less than 0.05). Control scars were unchanged elastometrically. Clinical improvement persisted for at least 4 weeks after treatment was discontinued. The silicone gel sheeting was well tolerated, except for occasional transient rashes or superficial maceration--both of which resolved promptly when treatment was withdrawn. There was no histologic evidence of inflammation or foreign body reaction suggesting that silicone had entered the treated tissues. We conclude that this simple method of treating hypertrophic scar is efficacious, even in relatively chronic cases. The mechanism of action of silicone gel, which is apparently not related to compression, remains to be determined. A clinical study was designed in which 20 women who were to undergo bilateral McKissock reduction mammaplasties were requested to use a precut silicone elastomer sheet over the scars of one breast, starting at the time of suture removal. The patients were instructed to use the silicone sheet for 12 hours each day for 2 months. Evaluation of the scars at 2 months revealed that 60% of the nontreated scars were hypertrophic and only 25% of the treated scars were hypertrophic. The difference was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). The use of the sheets was discontinued after 2 months and the beneficial effect remained at the 6-month evaluation. To determine the efficacy of the 585-nm flashlamp-pumped pulsed-dye laser and silicone gel sheeting in the treatment of hypertrophic scars in lighter- and darker-skinned patients.
                Prospective, single-blind, randomized, internally controlled, comparison investigation.
                Large academic dermatology department.
                Twenty patients with hypertrophic scars (19 completed the laser treatments and 18 completed the silicone gel sheeting treatments).
                Clinical measurements included hypertrophic scar blood flow, elasticity, and volume. Patients' subjective complaints of pruritus, pain, and burning were also monitored. Histological assessment of fibrosis, number of telangiectasias, and number of mast cells was performed. Statistically significant improvements in clinical measurements and patients' subjective complaints determined treatment success.
                Mean scar duration was 32 months (range, 4 months to 20 years). There was an overall reduction in blood flow, volume, and pruritus over time (P = .001, .02, and .005, respectively). However, no differences were detected among treatment and control groups. There was no reduction in pain or burning (0-40 weeks), elasticity (8-40 weeks), or fibrosis (0-40 weeks, n = 5 biopsies) in the treated or control sections of the scars. Unlike in a previous study, the number of mast cells in the scars was similar to the number of mast cells in healthy skin.
                Clinical results demonstrate that the improvements in scar sections treated with silicone gel sheeting and pulsed-dye laser were no different than in control sections. The primary objective was to compare the efficacy of a self-adherent soft silicone dressing (Mepiform) with 'left-alone' management of hypertrophic scars using theVancouver Scar Scale. Secondary objectives were to follow photographs of the scars, patients' opinions of the scars, and doctors' and patients' assessments of the overall dressing performance, safety and tolerance.
                An exploratory open randomised controlled clinical investigation was undertaken on 11 female patients aged 21-43 years with postoperative scars (nine following breast surgery, two following lower abdominal-glutealplasty). Treatment was initiated between two weeks and two months (mean 4.7 weeks) after surgery. Ten patients completed the 12-month investigation; one patient in the treatment group discontinued for personal reasons.
                All parameters in the Vancouver Scar Scale improved in both groups, although patients treated with the soft silicone dressing showed greater and more rapid improvements compared with the non-treated patients, while their assessments of the condition of the scar were more favourable. Medical staff rated the overall dressing performance as 'very good' or'good'. One adverse event was reported--local skin irritation at the site of the scar.
                The results suggest that patients treated with the soft silicone dressing experienced greater and more rapid improvements compared with non-treated patients. These results concur with those of previous studies. The fact that Mepiform is self-adhesive and causes limited damage to the stratum corneum on removal gives it an added value compared with non-adhesive silicone gel dressings. Due to its potential effects on skin microcirculation and collagen metabolism, the 585 nm flashlamp-pumped pulsed dye laser has been proposed for treating abnormal scars. Indeed, one of the main problems with keloidal scars is their disfiguring erythematous color.
                To assess the efficacy of the 585 nm pulsed dye laser on the appearance of keloids.
                Eleven patients with skin phototypes II-IV and keloids were treated with the 585 nm pulsed dye laser. After one to three treatment sessions, clinical assessments of the scars were performed in combination with remittance spectroscopy measurements of the redness and melanin pigmentation. A group of nine keloids covered by silicone gel sheeting served as controls. Data were compared statistically.
                During laser treatments, a discrete decrease in redness of the scars was clinically reported. However, this improvement was not confirmed by the objective spectrophotometric data. No side effects, especially hyperpigmentation, were disclosed. The keloids redness was not improved in the control group.
                The 585 nm pulsed dye laser yields only minimal effects, if any, on the erythema of keloids. Similarly silicone gel sheeting does not modify the keloids redness.
Trials evaluating silicon gel sheeting as a treatment for hypertrophic and keloid scarring are of poor quality and highly susceptible to bias. There is weak evidence of a benefit of silicon gel sheeting as a prevention for abnormal scarring in high risk individuals but the poor quality of research means a great deal of uncertainty prevails.