Efficacy of Laser in Hair Removal: A Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laser hair removal is an increasingly prevalent trend of cosmetic procedures. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of hair reduction among several types of laser interventions. METHODS: The selected studies searched in PubMed and EMBASE were assessed for quality of evidence, and extracted data on absolute hair count and hair reduction rate. Qualitative data were synthesized using standardized mean difference (SMD) in frequentist network meta-analysis because various measurement units were used among selected studies. Inconsistency and small study effects were examined by design-by-treatment interaction model and comparison-adjusted funnel plot. RESULTS: A total of 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 652) were contributed to network meta-analysis. Pooled results revealed that diode laser showed significantly lower absolute hair count within three-month (SMD = -13.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -22.25 to -4.17) and around six months follow-up (SMD = -11.01, 95% CI: -18.24 to -3.77) as compared with those in control group, but no significant difference among laser interventions. All side effects observed were transient without leaving any permanent scars. CONCLUSION: Eliminating unwanted hair with lasers or intense pulsed light is safe and effective; however, which type of intervention is more beneficial in the long-term process should be studied with a longer follow-up time.

Assisted therapy with platelet-rich plasma for burn patients: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy has been used in different medical fields, but its effectiveness in burn wound healing remains debatable. In this study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available evidence on burn patients treated with PRP to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the treatment. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of PRP in patients with burn injuries were selected. Eligible retrospective studies were abstracted and assessed for the risk of bias by two reviewers and results of mean time to complete epithelization and wound closure rate in the included studies were analyzed. Studies on the correlation between PRP and burn wound healing published in English or Chinese before March 2020 were retrieved from PubMed. RESULTS: Eight studies (including 449 patients) met our inclusion criteria. Qualitative analysis revealed that compared with the control group, the PRP group had significantly better wound closure rates at weeks 2 (mean difference (MD): 12.79 [95% confidence interval (CI): 7.08, 18.49]; I2: 0%; p < 0.0001) and 3 (MD: 12.66 [95% CI: 5.97, 19.34]; I2: 55%; p = 0.0002) and time to complete epithelialization (MD: -3.45 [95% CI: -4.87, -2.04] (days); I2: 0%; p < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in infection rate or graft take rate. CONCLUSIONS: PRP application can accelerate wound closure, however, it has no effect on the rates of wound infection and graft take rate.

Negative pressure wound therapy for burn patients: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), which has been applied in various medical specialties to accelerate wound healing, has been the object of a few investigations. We explored the effectiveness of NPWT and the possibility of its inclusion in burn management guidelines. Randomised controlled trials comparing NPWT with non-NPWT treatments for burn wounds were extracted from PubMed. For the risk of bias analysis, all included studies were evaluated according to the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the approaches outlined in the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) Handbook. Outcomes such as graft take rate in the first week, infection rate, and overall complication rate were analysed. Six studies that included a total of 701 patients met our inclusion criteria. Qualitative analysis revealed that the NPWT group had a significantly better overall graft rate in the first week (P = 0.001) and a significantly lower infection rate (P = 0.04). No significant difference in the overall complication rate was found. Our results indicate that NPWT is a safe method for stimulating healing and lowering the infection rate of burn wounds. NPWT can be part of general burn management, and its incorporation into burn treatment guidelines is recommended.