Clinical Observation of Sequential Laser Therapy Combined with Tension Reducer for Postoperative Tension Incision Scar Growth

Figures & data

Table 1 Comparison of General Clinical Information Between the Two Groups of Patients

Groups	Example	Male	Female	Face	Neck	Forequarters	Arms	Legs	Age	Number of Laser Treatments
Combined treatment group	11	4	7	1	0	6	2	3	7.5 (6.5,22)	3 (2, 3)
Conventional treatment group	15	9	6	1	5	6	1	3	6.5 (3.5,25)	3 (2.5, 4.5)
Test values		c^2=2.181		c^2=4.861					Z=0.443	Z=0.838
P		0.14		0.302					0.658	0.402

Figure 1 Schematic diagram of tension reducer.

Table 2 Comparison of Scar Width, Scar Thickness, Scar Hardness, Modified Vancouver Score, and Pruritus Score Between Two Groups of Patients

Groups	Number of Scars	Width of Scar (mm)	Thickness of Scar (mm)	Scar Hardness (HA)	Modified Vancouver Scar Scale	Pruritus Score
Combined treatment group	12	8.00 (5.00, 18.00)	1.25 (0.14, 1.90)	31.80 (21.00, 37.20)	6.00±2.17	0 (0, 1)
Conventional treatment group	16	5.50 (4.00, 11.50)	2.90 (2.35, 3.50)	42.60 (32.50, 47.00)	8.25±1.91	0 (0, 2)
Test values		0.798	2.883	2.718	2.904	0.959
P		0.425	0.004	0.007	0.007	0.013

Figure 2 Female, 7 years old, (A) Is one month post-treatment, (B) Is three months post-treatment, and (C) Is six months post-treatment.

Figure 3 Female, 2 years old, (A) Is one month post-treatment, (B) Is three months post-treatment, and (C) Is six months post-treatment.