000			03457nam a22005537a 4500
008			200709s20202020 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022			_a1076-0512
024			_a10.1097/DSS.0000000000001887 [doi]
040			_aOvid MEDLINE(R)
099			_a30893164
245			_aEffectiveness of Early Laser Treatment in Surgical Scar Minimization: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
251			_aDermatologic Surgery. 46(3):402-410, 2020 03.
252			_aDermatol Surg. 46(3):402-410, 2020 03.
252			_zDermatol Surg. 46(3):402-410, 2020 Mar.
253			_aDermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.]
260			_c2020
260			_fFY2020
265			_sppublish
266			_d2020-07-09
268			_aDermatologic Surgery. 46(3):402-410, 2020 Mar.
501			_aAvailable online from MWHC library: 1999 - present, Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 - 2006
520			_aBACKGROUND: Studies investigating the efficacy of lasers to minimize early surgical scars are low powered and report variable results. To further examine the evidence, the authors performed a systemic review and meta-analysis.
520			_aCONCLUSION: The outcome supports the efficacy of lasers in minimizing primarily closed surgical scars when treated <1 month after surgery.
520			_aMATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Northern Light Life Sciences Conference Abstracts, and Cochrane Library was performed between November 6, 2015, and November 20, 2015. After assessing for inclusion, data extraction used the PRISMA checklist. Assessment for quality, validity, and risk of bias applied a scale devised by Jadad and colleagues, the Oxford Pain Validity Scale, and the RevMan risk of bias assessment tool, respectively. The GRADEpro application graded overall quality, and statistical analysis was performed with RevMan.
520			_aOBJECTIVE: To present the evidence of randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy of laser modalities in minimizing surgical scars when applied <1 month after operation.
520			_aRESULTS: Approximately 4,373/4,397 abstracts and 16/24 full articles were excluded using predefined criteria, leaving 8 articles in the systematic review and 4 in the meta-analysis. The primary outcome reached statistical significance favoring the intervention group with standardized mean difference 0.39 (95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.74) and p = .03.
546			_aEnglish
650			_a*Cicatrix/th [Therapy]
650			_a*Laser Therapy/mt [Methods]
650			_a*Postoperative Complications/th [Therapy]
650			_aHumans
650			_aPain Measurement
650			_aRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic
651			_aMedStar Health Research Institute
651			_aMedStar Heart & Vascular Institute
651			_aMedStar Washington Hospital Center
656			_aDermatology
656			_aFirefighters' Burn and Surgical Research Laboratory
656			_aSurgery/Burn Services
657			_aJournal Article
700			_aDeKlotz, Cynthia
700			_aFernandez, Stephen J
700			_aKent, Rhett A
700			_aPrindeze, Nicholas J
700			_aShupp, Jeffrey W
790			_aDeKlotz CMC, Fernandez S, Kent RA, Prindeze N, Shupp J
856			_uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1097/DSS.0000000000001887 _zhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1097/DSS.0000000000001887
942			_cART _dArticle
999			_c4173 _d4173