Qiu Kaizhen, Gan Wenjun, Chen Xiaodong
Guangdong Medical University, Zhanjiang, Guangdong, China.
Department of Burn Surgery, The First People's Hospital of Foshan, Foshan, Guangdong, China.
Skin Res Technol. 2024 Aug;30(8):e13881. doi: 10.1111/srt.13881.
Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of stromal vascular fraction (SVF) in treating scars using the latest meta-analysis.
We used PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science to search the studies used to evaluate the efficacy of SVF in scar treatment. At least one of the following outcome measures were reported: vascularity, pigmentation, thickness, relief, pliability, surface area, pain, itching and color.
A total of four eligible articles comprising 145 patients (64 SVF patients and 81 non-SVF patients) were included. The findings of this meta-analysis indicated that SVF had significant therapeutic effects in terms of vascularity (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -1.12, -0.02; p = 0.04), itching (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -0.61, -0.13; p = 0.002), POSAS (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -5.93, -1.47; p = 0.001), and thickness (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -1.04, -0.35; p < 0.001). In terms of OSAS (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -9.14, 0.59; p = 0.09), pigmentation (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -1.02, 0.06; p = 0.08), relief (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -1.14, 0.16; p = 0.14), surface area (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -0.91, 0.26; p = 0.27), PSAS (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -7.20, 0.49; p = 0.09), pain (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -0.87, 0.07; p = 0.10), pliability (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -0.57, 0.01; p = 0.06), and color (SMD/MD, 95% CI: -1.78, 0.48; p = 0.26), there were no significant statistical differences.
In view of the heterogeneity and potential selective bias, further large-scale, prospective, and multicenter clinical trials are needed to confirm the efficacy and reliability of SVF in the treatment of scars.
我们的目的是通过最新的荟萃分析评估基质血管成分（SVF）治疗瘢痕的有效性。
我们使用PubMed、Embase、Cochrane和Web of Science检索用于评估SVF治疗瘢痕疗效的研究。报告了以下至少一项结局指标：血管化、色素沉着、厚度、平整度、柔韧性、表面积、疼痛、瘙痒和颜色。
共纳入4篇符合条件的文章，包括145例患者（64例SVF治疗患者和81例非SVF治疗患者）。该荟萃分析的结果表明，SVF在血管化（标准化均数差/均数差，95%可信区间：-1.12，-0.02；p = 0.04）、瘙痒（标准化均数差/均数差，95%可信区间：-0.61，-0.13；p = 0.002）、患者及观察者瘢痕评估量表（POSAS）（标准化均数差/均数差，95%可信区间：-5.93，-1.47；p = 0.001）和厚度（标准化均数差/均数差；95%可信区间：-1.04，-0.35；p < 0.001）方面具有显著治疗效果。在观察者瘢痕评估量表（OSAS）（标准化均数差/均数差，95%可信区间：-9.14, 0.59；p = 0.09）、色素沉着（标准化均数差/均数差；95%可信区间：-1.02, 0.06；p = 0.08）、平整度（标准化均数差/均数差；95%可信区间：-1.14, 0.16；p = 0.14）、表面积（标准化均数差/均数差；95%可信区间：-0.91, 0.26；p = 0.27）、患者瘢痕评估量表（PSAS）（标准化均数差/均数差；95%可信区间：-7.20, 0.49；p = 0.09）、疼痛（标准化均数差/均数差；95%可信区间：-0.87, 0.07；p = 0.10）、柔韧性（标准化均数差/均数差；95%可信区间：-0.57, 0.01；p = 0.06）和颜色（标准化均数差/均数差；95%可信区间：-1.78, 0.48；p = 0.26）方面，无显著统计学差异。
鉴于存在异质性和潜在的选择偏倚，需要进一步开展大规模、前瞻性和多中心临床试验，以证实SVF治疗瘢痕的疗效和可靠性。
