Scars: A Review of Emerging and Currently Available Therapies
Abstract
BACKGROUND: With the investigation and potential introduction of several novel scar-reducing therapies to the market within the next several years, it is germane to review both the pathophysiology of scarring and the safety and efficacy of currently available and emerging therapeutic agents. METHODS: An extensive review of the English-language literature was conducted using the MEDLINE database. RESULTS: A comprehensive review of the pathophysiology of scarring and scar management, including both emerging and currently available therapies, was completed. Current clinical studies are limited by small sample sizes, lack of well-designed controls, and lack of standardized scar outcome measurement parameters. CONCLUSIONS: A prominent challenge in the study of scar management is the paucity of well-designed, large, randomized, controlled studies examining existing scar-reducing techniques. The greatest improvement in scar-reducing protocols likely entails a polytherapeutic strategy for management. Further investigation into the role of inflammation in scarring is paramount to the development of improved scar-reducing agents. There is a need for large controlled trials using a polytherapeutic strategy that combines existing and novel agents to provide a standardized evidence-based evaluation of efficacy.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Multiple treatment regimens for hypertrophic scars and keloids are practiced, but none are optimal and effective, and molecular-targeted therapeutics remain elusive.
“Although multiple treatment regimens are practiced, including silicone gel sheeting, pressure therapy, corticosteroids, cryotherapy, 5-fluorouracil, laser therapy, and radiation, none of these are optimal and effective, and therapeutics based on molecular targets remain elusive (2).”
From Wound repair and regeneration: Mechanisms, signaling, and translation (2014) · cites this paper as [2]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 109 · Cited by 126
- Authors
- Reish, R. G., & Eriksson, E.
- Affiliations
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- ORCID
- Eriksson, Elof
- Venue
- Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
- Published
- 2008-10
- Volume
- 122
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1068-1078
- ISSN
- 0032-1052 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2054674187
- Cited by
- 126
- References
- 109
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 1.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatologic Treatments and Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Wound Healing and Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Systemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
- Keywords
- scar treatment, treatment efficacy and safety
- MeSH terms
- Administration, Topical, Bandages, Cicatrix, Humans, Pressure, Wound Healing, Genetic Therapy, Cryotherapy, Silicone Gels, Laser Therapy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review