An Updated Review of Hypertrophic Scarring

Abstract

Hypertrophic scarring (HTS) is an aberrant form of wound healing that is associated with excessive deposition of extracellular matrix and connective tissue at the site of injury. In this review article, we provide an overview of normal (acute) wound healing phases (hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling). We next discuss the dysregulated and/or impaired mechanisms in wound healing phases that are associated with HTS development. We next discuss the animal models of HTS and their limitations, and review the current and emerging treatments of HTS.

1. Introduction

Wound healing is a complex physiologic process in which the body attempts to replace destroyed and damaged tissue with newly generated tissue and restore the skin’s barrier functions. It is an overlapping and sequential process of hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling that involves communication between many different cell types [1]. When this process does not occur in a sequential and finite manner, aberrant wound healing with hypertrophic scarring (HTS) or keloids may occur. These fibroproliferative disorders can be appreciated as elevated scars above the skin level with abundant deposition of extracellular matrix (ECM) components, especially collagen [2]. Although HTS and keloids are often used interchangeably, they are not the same. In HTS, excess scarring is limited to the original site of injury, whereas in keloids, scarring can extend beyond the original wound and is often regarded as a form of benign skin tumor [3,4].

Scarring is a major clinical problem, affecting some 100 million patients in the developed world alone [5]. The reported prevalence of hypertrophic scarring ranges from 32 to 72% [6,7]. Hypertrophic scars are particularly prevalent among adult burn patients, with those with darker skin, younger age, female sex, burns greater than 20% of total body surface area (TBSA), and burns on the neck and upper limbs experiencing the highest risk [6,8]. Following burn injury, nearly 75% of patients develop neuropathic pain [9]. Factors such as scar height, pigmentation, vascularity, and hyperplasia have been associated with increased levels of pain [9]. In one study, nearly 60% of patients who underwent bilateral reduction mammoplasty or median sternotomy incision developed HTS postoperatively, with an increased risk in those who were young [10]. Keloids have been reported in all ethnic groups, but they are significantly more common in individuals of African, Asian, and to a lesser degree, Hispanic descent, with the incidence ranging from 0.09% amongst the European white population, to 16% in the black population in Africa [11,12,13].

Severe HTS may result in scar contractures which can be significantly disfiguring and disabling and may lead to loss of mobility and affect patients’ ability to carry out routine daily activities [14,15]. In patients with severe burns, HTS is associated with decreased quality of life and delayed reintegration into society, in part due to the effect on self-esteem and the resultant desire to hide the scarring [16]. Globally, the wound care cost is estimated to be nearly $20.8 billion annually, with $4 billion per year associated with HTS treatment in the United States alone [17]. Hypertrophic wound care remains one of the largest markets without definitive drug therapy. The global hypertrophic and keloid scar treatment market size is expected to reach $37.9 billion US dollars by 2026 with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 9.9% [18].

Hypertrophic scars typically occur in the second to third decade of life and present 1–2 months following injury [7]. The scar experiences a rapid growth phase for the first 6 months, followed by regression [7]. HTS arises as increased induration and dyspigmentation limited to the site of initial injury in areas of high tension, such as the shoulders, neck, prosternum, knees, and ankles [7]. Diagnosis of hypertrophic scarring is made clinically. Scoring systems such as the Vancouver Scar Scale, Seattle Scar Scale, Hamilton Scar Scale, and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale may be used to assess the degree of hypertrophy [19]. These scales are based on clinical parameters such as lesion thickness, color, pliability, pain, and itching; however, the resulting scar scores are variable, as they are based on subjective clinical assessment. Combining the scar scales with more objective data such as high-resolution ultrasound scanning may be beneficial [20].

In this review article, we provide an overview of normal (also known as, acute) wound healing phases; namely, hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling. We next provide an updated review of the dysregulated and/or impaired mechanisms of HTS associated with each phase of wound healing. We then discuss the animal models of HTS and their limitations, and review the current and emerging treatments of HTS.

2. Overview of Normal Wound Healing

To gain better understanding of the pathophysiology underlying HTS, it is essential to appreciate the processes underlying normal (acute) wound healing in the acute setting. Normal wound healing occurs in four overlapping and complex phases; namely, hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling (Figure 1).

2.1. Phase 1: Hemostasis

Hemostasis begins immediately after injury and could last for several hours. As an immediate response to limit blood loss after injury, the blood vessels’ smooth muscle contracts via vasoconstrictors, such as endothelin, released by the damaged endothelial cells [21]. This is followed by blood clot formation, which occurs in two steps: primary hemostasis and secondary hemostasis. During primary hemostasis, rearrangement and transformation of the actin cytoskeleton occur in platelets, allowing a change in their morphology from disk-shaped to fried egg-shaped cells. This, in turn, causes platelets to interact with each other and the surrounding extracellular matrix (ECM) through activated integrins, allowing for the development of the platelet plug [21,22].

During secondary hemostasis, thrombin becomes activated via the intrinsic and extrinsic coagulation pathways [23]. Activated thrombin cleaves soluble fibrinogen into fibrin and cross-links them to form fibrin mesh, which is incorporated into the fibrin clot at the site of injury to form a thrombus, which enmeshes aggregated platelets and leukocytes into a stronger structure known as the platelet plug [22]. The platelet plug serves three important functions during wound healing: to prevent blood loss after injury, to serve as a source of chemokines and growth factors needed to initiate the inflammatory phase, and to function as a provisional scaffold for inflammatory leukocytes migration into damaged tissue [24,25].

2.2. Phase 2: Inflammation

Following injury, the inflammatory phase begins within minutes, peaks in 2–3 days, and can last 1–2 weeks, depending on the extent of the injury [1]. The primary functions of the inflammation phase during wound healing are to protect wounds against invading pathogens and to jumpstart the subsequent inflammatory and non-inflammatory responses needed for proper healing [26,27]. The inflammatory phase can be divided into early and late phases. During the early phase of inflammation, endothelial cells increase the expression of adhesion molecules, resulting in the recruitment and extravasation of inflammatory cells, such as neutrophils, monocyte, lymphocytes, and mast cells [28,29]. Leukocytes recruitment is mediated by pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin-1 (IL-1), IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), which are released from degranulating platelets, keratinocytes, endothelial cells, and tissue-resident macrophages [1,30,31]. Upon arrival into the wound, monocytes differentiate into pro-inflammatory M1 macrophages, which function to further amplify inflammatory responses by producing more pro-inflammatory cytokines, and assist neutrophils in destroying invading pathogens [32,33]. During the late phase of inflammation, the macrophages polarize into the anti-inflammatory M2 phenotype, which play pivotal roles in the resolution of the inflammatory responses and in the initiation of the proliferation phase through the production of a spectrum of angiogenic and growth factor mediators, such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), PDGF, and FGF2 [33,34,35].

2.3. Phase 3: Proliferation

The proliferative phase, also known as the new tissue regeneration phase, begins approximately 3 days after injury and lasts for about 2–3 weeks. The main events during the proliferative phase are provisional matrix replacement with granulation tissue, angiogenesis, and re-epithelization [36]. Initially, fibroblasts migrate to the site of injury in response to mediators released by platelets and macrophages, such as PDGF, transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β), and connective tissue growth factor (CTGF) [37]. To replace the provisional matrix with granulation tissue, fibroblasts release extracellular matrix (ECM) components (primarily type III collagen, fibronectin, proteoglycans, and hyaluronic acid) [38,39]. Granulation tissue is composed of ECM components, fibroblasts, proliferating blood vessels, macrophages, and lymphocytes, and it is an important indicator of wound healing progression [40].

During re-epithelization, M2 macrophages and keratinocytes produce and release EGF and TGF-β, which in turn induce proliferation and cell migration in epithelial cells bordering the wound edges to re-establish the epidermis integrity at the wound site [41]. Stem cells from hair follicles and sebaceous glands differentiate into keratinocytes to aid in this process [42].

Angiogenesis involves the creation of new vasculature that is 3 to 10 times denser than what is found in normal tissue [43]. It is critical in facilitating the transport of immune cells, oxygen, and nutrients for the cells participating in healing [43]. Angiogenesis is triggered by local hypoxia and several soluble factors, including VEGF (most prominent factor), PDGF, fibroblast growth factor-basic (bFGF), the serine protease thrombin, and members of the TGF-β family [44,45,46,47]. Following the completion of wound healing, most of the newly formed capillaries will regress [43].

2.4. Phase 4: Remodeling

The remodeling phase begins 2–3 weeks following injury and can last up to a year or even longer [48]. Matrix maturation and tissue remodeling depend on the balance between the degradation of extracellular matrix (ECM) components in granulation tissue and their replacement by connective tissue components, namely collagen I. Early in the remodeling phase, ECM components (e.g., collagen III, fibronectin, and hyaluronic acid) are degraded by matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) [49]. Because of the destructive nature of the MMPs, they are tightly regulated by the tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs) [50]. Moreover, fibroblasts differentiate into myofibroblasts which produce thick bundles of collagen I to replace most of the collagen III [51]. Over time, collagen I fiber bundles increase in diameter, resulting in increased wound tensile strength; however, the healed tissue never fully regains the properties of uninjured skin, resulting in a mostly acellular and avascular scar [50]. Scar tissue contains collagen bundles that are smaller and more disorganized and, thus, prone to dehiscence [52,53]. Over time, wound contraction occurs as the result of myofibroblasts bringing the wound edges together with the contractile function of their actin filaments [54].

3. Hypertrophic Scarring Associated with Wound Healing Phases

A large body of evidence suggests that excessive inflammation generates pro-fibrotic molecules, which in turn activate fibroblasts, resulting in HTS [55]. In addition, excessive angiogenesis and prolonged re-epithelialization can extend the release of pro-fibrotic growth factors [56,57]. In the last few years, many biomolecules have been implicated in HTS; however, their exact mechanisms have yet to be fully elucidated, in part due to the complexity and overlapping nature of wound-healing processes. Here, we will examine each phase of wound healing with respect to HTS formation.

3.1. Phase 1: Hemostasis

The fibrin provisional matrix deposited during hemostasis has been implicated in the activation of myofibroblasts and the formation of HTS [58]. In fact, high-density fibrin clot deposition during the early phase of healing may predict the formation of HTS (Figure 2), as calculated by a multiscale mathematical model [59]; however, more studies related to fibrin content and rate of fibrinolysis in experimental models are required to validate the role of the fibrin provisional matrix in the formation of HTS. In addition, during hemostasis, platelets release a multitude of pro-fibrotic growth factors such as PDGF, VEGF, TGF-β1, and CTGF, which have been linked to the formation of HTS (Figure 3) [60]. Interestingly, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) obtained from platelets of the peripheral blood is considered to be a therapeutic option for HTS, as it reduces the expression of pro-fibrotic molecules such as TGF-β1 and CTGF [61]. These reports suggest that while naïve platelets may be anti-fibrotic in nature when activated excessively, they can contribute to HTS development. Clearly, more studies are needed to evaluate the role of naïve versus activated platelets in HTS.

3.2. Phase 2: Inflammation

Excessive inflammation (Figure 2) is the best elucidated pathophysiological reason for HTS formation [55]. As such, many of the accepted therapeutics target inflammation [55]. Excessive infection and tissue necrosis in severe burn wounds cause increased pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) and damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs), toll-like receptor (TLR) signaling, and infiltration of inflammatory cells to the wound site [62,63,64].

Surprisingly, studies of HTS have found chemokine expression to be variable. In a study using the rabbit ear as a model for HTS, the expression of chemokines such as Chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 3 (CCL3), CCL7, and CCL13 maintained increased expression for 21 to 35 days, while CCL2, CCL4, CCL5, and chemokine (C-X3-C motif) ligand 1 (CX3CL1) were maintained at high levels for 21 to 56 days [65]. Another study reported that the expression of CCL3, CXCL1, CXCL2, CXCR2, C3, and Interleukin 10 (IL-10) was reduced in human HTS, 52 weeks following surgery [66]. In another study, SDF1/CXCR4 signaling was found to be increased in human HTS tissue [67]. The underlying reasons for this variability remain unknown and require future investigation.

Inflammatory cells release various factors such as interleukins, interferon, and growth factors [68]. Increased expression of pro-inflammatory and pro-fibrotic growth factors activate fibroblasts and are thus implicated in HTS formation [69]. Interestingly, in a study of HTS tissue at 3 h following surgery, the expression of certain pro-inflammatory factors such as IL-6, IL-8, and CCL2 was found to be reduced during the early phase of healing [70]. Intriguingly, inadequate pro-inflammatory responses have also been reported in hypofibrotic diabetic wounds early after injury, rendering them vulnerable to infection and impaired healing [71,72,73,74]. This delay in inflammatory responses during the acute phase of healing early after injury and its role in the formation of HTS should be further investigated.

IL-6 is a major cytokine that influences the middle and late phases of healing, as it is involved in shifting inflammation from acute to chronic by enhancing monocyte recruitment, M2 macrophage polarization, and ECM deposition [75,76,77]. IL-6 is highly expressed in HTS and is considered to be a therapeutic target for the treatment of HTS [69,78]. The IL-6/STAT3 (Signal transducer and activator of transcription 3) pathway activates many of the genes required for ECM production and fibroblast proliferation, leading to HTS [79]. Other than the IL-6 and inflammatory chemokines, other inflammatory cytokines that are highly expressed in HTS include IL-1β, IL-4, IL-8, IL-17, IL-13, and IL-22 (Figure 3) [69,80,81]. Some of these cytokines, such as IL-4 and IL-13, have been under investigation as therapeutic targets for HTS [82]. The expression of IL-10, an anti-inflammatory cytokine and promising therapeutic molecule, has been found to be low in patients with hypertrophic scarring compared to those with non-hypertrophic scarring [66]. Some studies have suggested that IL-10 directly influences fibroblasts by activating the STAT3 or AKT signaling pathways [83]. It has also been reported that IL-10 reduces scar formation by regulating the TLR4/NF-kB pathway in dermal fibroblasts [84]. However, further investigation is required to elucidate the role of IL-10 in preventing HTS development. Additionally, the expression of other cytokines, such as IL-24, IL-36, IL-37, IL-1RA, and TNF-α, has been found to be low in HTS (Figure 3) [69]. TNF-stimulated gene 6 (TSG-6) has been found to suppress scarring by downregulating the IRE1α/TRAF2/NF-κB signaling pathway [85]. Moreover, alteration in the fatty acid metabolism influences inflammation and can result in excessive scarring [86,87]. In a recent study, the expression of sterol regulatory element-binding protein-1 (SREBP1) and fatty acid synthase (FASN) was shown to be reduced at mRNA and protein levels in pathological HTS and in HTS-derived fibroblasts [86]. In another study, the expression of fatty acid desaturase 1 and 2 (FAD1 and FAD2)—key enzymes in the polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) metabolism with demonstrated anti-inflammatory function [88]—were lower in keloids and keloid-derived fibroblasts [87]. However, the mechanism of altered lipid profile in HTS has not been explored. It is possible that alterations in lipid metabolism might influence HTS through changes in the inflammatory pathways, given that fatty acids play an important role in regulating inflammation [89,90].

3.3. Phase 3: Proliferation

Events of the proliferative phase, such as angiogenesis and ECM deposition, are highly active in HTS, whereas re-epithelialization is prolonged in HTS as keratinocytes remain continually activated (Figure 2) [91,92,93]. Consequently, the granulation tissue becomes denser during HTS formation than in normal scarring (Figure 2). In HTS, cells such as keratinocytes, endothelial cells, and fibroblasts release many pro-fibrotic growth factors such as TGF-β, PDGF, VEGF, and CTGF [94]. This pro-fibrotic environment, in turn, induces fibroblasts to produce more ECM proteins such as collagen, fibronectin, laminin, periostin, fibrillin, and tenascin; however, the expression of certain ECM proteins such as hyaluronic acid, dermatopontin, and decorin are found to be altered or reduced (Figure 3) [95]. Fibroblasts of the deep dermis are responsible for the production of additional factors such as osteopontin, angiotensin-II, and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)-α and contribute to scarring more than fibroblasts of the superficial dermis [96]. Recently, it has been revealed that fibroblasts in the upper dermis also contribute to scarring by producing IL-11, which in turn activates myofibroblasts [97]. TGF-β plays an important role in the formation of HTS, and the TGF-β/SMAD (Suppressor of Mothers against Decapentaplegic) signaling pathway is considered to be a potential therapeutic target of HTS [98]. Molecules such as SMAD interacting protein and bacterial PAMPs such as lipopolysaccharides (LPS) may induce HTS by enhancing the TGF-β1/SMAD signaling pathway [99,100].

Endothelial cells isolated from porcine burn wounds show that endothelial dysfunction and altered expression of angiogenic genes such as endothelin-1, angiopoietin-1, angiopoietin-2, and angiogenin may result in HTS (Figure 3) [57,101]. In turn, angiogenesis is stimulated by the microvesicles released from the myofibroblast [102]. Factors released from these vesicles may result in HTS, as many of them are pro-fibrotic in nature [102,103]. During hypertrophic scarring, keratinocytes remain in their activated state for a prolonged duration of time [92]. Dysregulation in the Notch signaling of keratinocytes may also contribute to HTS formation [104]. Notch 1 signaling and intracellular domains such as Jagged1 and Hes1 are highly expressed in the epidermis of hypertrophic scar patients [104]. This leads to the enhanced expression of pro-fibrotic factors, such as TGF β1, TGF β2, CTGF, IGF-1, VEGF, and EGF (Figure 3) [104]. In addition, epithelial–mesenchymal transition increases ECM deposition and has been shown to contribute to HTS formation [105]. Moreover, keratinocytes produce HMGB1, which activates fibroblasts, resulting in HTS formation [106]. However, certain factors released from keratinocyte-like pigment epithelium-derived growth factor (PEDF) are associated with reduced angiogenesis and HTS formation (Figure 3) [107]. Interestingly, among different growth factors, FGF-2 has an anti-scarring effect since it up-regulates the expression of MMP-1 and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), although further investigations are required to clarify its therapeutic potential [108,109].

3.4. Phase 4: Remodeling

In HTS, the balance of ECM synthesis and remodeling is dysregulated [110]. Both fibroblasts and myofibroblasts continue to deposit collagen III and collagen I in HTS [111]. The persistence of myofibroblasts due to defects in apoptosis results in the deposition of excessive fibrous collagen I and scarring (Figure 2) [112,113,114]. The presence of nodules containing myofibroblasts is a peculiar feature of HTS [50]. Mechanical stretch and TGF-β can stimulate the differentiation of fibroblasts to myofibroblasts, contributing to HTS formation [115,116].

Metalloproteinases (MMPs), such as MMP1 and MMP7, are downregulated during HTS formation, resulting in reduced degradation of ECM components such as collagen I, collagen III, and fibronectin ([117,118] and Figure 2). Administration of MMP1 has been shown to improve scarring [119]. The tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs), such as TIMP1 and TIMP2, reduce the action of MMPs during HTS development (Figure 3) [110]. In contrast, expression of MMP2, MMP9, and MMP13 are shown to be increased in HTS (Figure 3) [110,118]. This upregulation may be a compensatory response to elevated levels of ECM in HTS, but it remains unclear and requires future investigation. In HTS, reduced expression of matrix remodeling proteins results in the disorganization of ECM components [50,113]. Treatment with decorin, a matricellular protein involved in collagen fiber organization, has been shown to reduce HTS formation [120]. In addition, targeting the lysil hydroxylase enzyme, involved in the formation of pyridinoline cross-links, reduces the activity of fibroblast proliferation by regulating TGF-β1 [121].

4. Animal Models of Hypertrophic Scarring

While two-dimensional and three-dimensional cell culture-based in vitro models can be useful for investigating the mechanism of fibroblast in producing excessive ECM and potential therapeutic molecules, the absence of immune and vascular components in these models limits the physiological relevance of the findings emerging from these studies with respect to the mechanisms underlying HTS formation in tissue [122,123]. In the past several decades, many attempts have been made to develop animal models of HTS in different species. Despite these attempts, there are no animal models that can fully recapitulate HTS in humans. Descriptions of each animal model for HTS, as well as their advantages and disadvantages, are summarized in Table 1.

The rabbit ear model has been widely used to study HTS formation despite the involvement of chondrocytes during the healing, where skin and perichondrial layers are removed from the ventral side of the rabbit ear to generate an HTS-like condition [124,125]. The advantages of this model include the simplicity of the procedure, ease of handling of the animal, and ability to create multiple wounds; however, the ventral side of the ear is difficult to handle because of its low thickness, and precaution needs to be taken to avoid damage of the underlying cartilage during the procedure [124,125]. To reduce damage to the rabbit ear cartilage during the procedure, cryosurgery has been attempted to remove the perichondrial layer [126]. In another rabbit ear model for HTS, thermal burn injury has been attempted to create a more elevated scar within a shorter duration which better mimics an HTS condition in humans [127]. However, thermal injury has to be precisely controlled to avoid variability in scarring [127]. Injecting anhydrous alcohol into the subcutaneous and superficial fascia regions of the dorsal skin of a rabbit has been used to model HTS [128]; however, this model appears to be more appropriate for skin fibrosis than the HTS due to the absence of a healing response.

Deep burn injury to the dorsal side of porcine skin creates raised scar tissue and has been used in some studies as a model for HTS [57]. Although there are structural similarities between human and pig skin, the high costs associated with the production of this animal model and the difficulty in handling it have lessened its popularity for HTS studies.

Several groups have also attempted to develop rodent (mouse and rat) models for HTS [129,130,131]. These murine models are inexpensive to produce and easy to handle, but wound healing patterns in rodents differ from that of humans due to the rapid contraction of the panniculus carnosus muscles [132]. To mitigate the effect of rapid wound contraction in rodents, splinting excision wounds have been attempted [130]. For example, splinted full-thickness skin wounds in rodents recapitulate mechanical tension in the wound bed, and the lack of neo-epithelium in this model amplifies myofibroblast function, culminating in hypertrophic features, which are similar to HTS in humans [131]. Similarly, mechanical pressure applied to a wound by a biomechanical loading device also produces HTS-like features in mice [133].

C–X–C motif chemokine receptor 3 (CXCR3)-deficient mice develop thick keratinized scars and have been used in some studies to model HTS, but deficient dermal maturation with poor collagen content has been observed [134,135,136]. Hence, the role of CXCR-3 and its effect on matrix development require further investigation.

By resecting the abdominal wall muscle on the ventral side of mice that produces contractile forces, another murine wound model for scarring has been created, but it is not comparable with the healing mechanism underlying HTS [137].

Some attempts have been made to develop a xenograft model of HTS by grafting tissue from human HTS onto nude mice [138,139]. These mice displayed scar thickness and collagen bundle orientation and morphology resembling human HTS [129]. However, a lack of an immune response and difficulty in maintaining nude mice may obstruct the study of therapeutic molecules in this model.

Developing an ideal animal model for HTS is exceptionally challenging, as the scar endotype is difficult to control in experimental settings [140]. The aforementioned animal models all fall short; therefore, developing an ideal animal model is essential to support studies related to the formation of and therapy for HTS.

5. Conventional and Emerging Treatments for Hypertrophic Scarring

5.1. Conventional Therapies

Treatments of hypertrophic scars often focus on correction of factors that are associated with pathological scar development as described above. These include wound stabilization, minimizing mechanical irritation, balancing wound healing phases, attenuating pro-fibrotic mechanisms, inducing anti-fibrotic mechanisms, and promoting the remodeling of collagenous scar components. Published guidelines on the treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids include many different modalities without one single, widely accepted protocol [3,141]. Several treatments and techniques have been shown to prevent the development of hypertrophic scar development. (These conventional treatments have been summarized in Table 2). Reduction in tension on the dermal layer when closing wounds is effective and can be achieved with fascial and subcutaneous tensile reduction sutures in wounds of adequate depth [142]. Additionally, dermal closure using sutures arranged in a zig-zag pattern or using z-plasties should be performed whenever possible [142,143]. Closure with 3–0 VLoc 90 barbed suture (VLoc, Covidien, North Haven, CT, USA) compared to interrupted suture with 4–0 nylon produced significant improvements in the Vancouver scar scale (VSS) and patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) scores in patients undergoing anterolateral thigh flap procedures with identical methods of deep closure between groups [144].

Following the closure of initial wounds, several therapies can also be applied early in the healing process. Similarly to the aforementioned suturing techniques, wound stabilization using paper tape or silicone sheets can also prevent the dermal inflammation that contributes to hypertrophic scar and keloid formation [145]. Wound compression using pressure garment therapy at 15–40 mmHg has been shown to improve outcomes [146]. Regarding ideal pressure, one review of pressure garment therapy for the treatment of burn wounds found that the application of pressure at 17–24 mmHg resulted in improved scar height, softness, and cosmetic appearance compared to a pressure below 5 mmHg [147]. Cohesive silicone sheets that added pressure to the wound also outperformed silicone gel sheets in improving scar assessment scale scores [148]. Intermittent application of pressure through regular massage therapy has not been shown to improve outcomes, suggesting that constant pressure must be applied [149].

Topical agents applied to heal wounds have also been shown to reduce hypertrophic scar formation, including flavonoids and silicone cream [150,151]. The local injection of Botulinum toxin-A postoperatively has also been shown to significantly improve scar assessment scale scores compared to controls [152,153,154]. In a recent study of optimal dosing of Botulinum toxin-A, postoperative injections of 8 units showed significantly improved Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES) scores compared to the injections of 4 units [155]. The culture of human fibroblasts with Botulinum toxin-A resulted in decreased proliferation, migration, and secretion of pro-fibrotic factors, while JNK phosphorylation levels were increased, providing evidence for possible mechanisms of this benefit [156].

Scar revision is the simplest method of treating pre-existing HTS and encompasses procedures aimed at excisional debulking of hypertrophic scar tissue ([157] and Table 2). Closure during these procedures is specifically directed at providing favorable cosmetic results and should employ the methods described above for prophylaxis against scar recurrence. To be effective, scar revisions should be performed over 1 year from the original injury to give adequate time for the scar to mature [150], as immature scars are prone to hypertrophic healing and give poor results after scar revision [158].

However, excision may not be necessary, as more conservative measures have proven to be effective. For example, in one study, mechanical disruption of existing hypertrophic scars using microneedle roller therapy improved scar pigmentation to resemble surrounding tissue more closely, and significantly improved both the mean patient satisfaction scale (PSS) and observer satisfaction scale (OSS) between preoperative and postoperative sampling [159]. Another study found that microneedle therapy improved modified Vancouver scar scale (mVSS) scores significantly more than carbon dioxide (CO₂) laser therapy for hypertrophic scars [160]. This benefit may be explained by microneedle therapy disrupting existing collagen and stimulating the release of MMP-9 [161].

Pharmacologic agents have also been used frequently in the treatment of hypertrophic scars, with common agents including corticosteroids, chemotherapeutic agents, and Botulinum toxin-A. Corticosteroids provide benefits through their potent anti-inflammatory effects and are believed to induce local vasoconstriction when applied to hypertrophic scars and keloids. Tapes and plasters containing corticosteroids effectively treat hypertrophic scars and keloids when applied to these lesions and should be positioned to avoid contact with surrounding tissue [145]. The most common use of corticosteroids in the treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids by far is the intralesional injection of triamcinolone (TAC). A recent literature review and meta-analysis of this therapy found that compared to 5-FU and verapamil, TAC alone improved scar vascularity [162]. However, TAC therapy also had higher rates of skin atrophy and telangiectasias, especially at the commonly used dose of 40 mg/mL [162]. Significant differences in favor of other agents were found for scar height (5-FU, TAC + 5-FU), scar pliability (TAC + 5-FU, Botulinum toxin-A), scar pigmentation (TAC + 5-FU), VSS score (TAC + 5-FU, TAC + platelet rich plasma), and POSAS score (bleomycin) when compared against TAC alone [163]. A study of TAC vs. TAC + 5-FU found significant differences favoring TAC + 5-FU in mean reduction in scar height, overall POSAS score, and the overall rate of efficacy. Rates of telangiectasias (commonly known as “spider veins”), skin atrophy, hypopigmentation, and recurrence were significantly higher in the group receiving TAC, while the rates of ulceration were significantly higher in the group receiving TAC + 5-FU [164]. A literature review and meta-analysis of intralesional Botulinum toxin-A injection found significantly improved visual analog scale (VAS) scores compared to intralesional corticosteroid and placebo injection [165]. In a split-scar study of patients with existing hypertrophic scars, injection of Botulinum toxin-A was found to significantly improve mean VSS score pre- and post-treatment as compared to the placebo control [166].

The energy-based therapy is well established as a treatment modality for hypertrophic scars and keloids, with its use dating back to the 1980s [167]. Lasers are the mainstay of energy-based treatments, with a multitude of different laser devices utilizing different wavelengths for specific targets [168]. Laser therapy is often used in the treatment of formed hypertrophic scars but can also be used preventatively in the early postoperative period. In a split-scar study of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasties, scar treatment with a 595 nm pulsed-dye laser was associated with significantly improved overall VSS scores compared to an untreated scar [169,170,171,172,173,174].

The guidelines for the use of energy-based treatment for acne scars have included specific recommendations for use with hypertrophic acne scars and keloids. In patients with active acne, a 1064 nm ND:YAG laser is preferred, and pulsed-dye vascular lasers are the laser treatment of choice for hypertrophic acne scars. Pulsed-dye lasers (PDL) may also be used to assist with the delivery of 5-FU and/or TAC. Non-laser devices, including Tixel (Novoxel, Ltd., Berlin, Germany) and EnerJet (PerfAction Technologies Ltd., Rehovot, Israel), were also recommended for the treatment of hypertrophic acne scars [175]. Similar guidelines for traumatic scars recommend non-ablative fractional laser (NAFL) for hypertrophic scars, except in the presence of significant thickness and textural irregularity, where ablative fractional laser (AFL) therapy is preferred [169]. In a study comparing no laser treatment, CO₂ laser treatment alone, and intense pulsed light (IPL) + CO₂ laser, both treatment groups had statistically significant improvements in POSAS score and Manchester scar scale (MSS) score compared to the placebo, without significant difference between the treatment groups. The only significant difference between treatment groups was in favor of the combination therapy for scar color and texture, indicating that CO₂ alone is sufficient and IPL can be used for an additional benefit for these specific factors [176]. Regarding protocols for CO₂ laser, a study of varying densities for fractional CO₂ laser treatment found that high (25.6%) density significantly improved VAS and POSAS scores compared to low (7.4%) and medium (12.6%) densities in treating mature hypertrophic burn scars [170]. A split-scar study of low-energy CO₂ fractional laser treatment showed significantly improved POSAS scores for all elements except for patient-scored irregularity compared to the control for pediatric patients with early-stage hypertrophic burn scars [171]. A study of CO₂, PDL, and CO₂ + PDL for the treatment of hypertrophic burn scars found significant improvements in posttreatment POSAS for all treatment groups. Focused analyses found that scar height was improved by PDL or CO₂ + PDL for scars <0.3 cm, and a significant reduction in scar height was achieved by CO₂ + PDL only for scars older than 9 months. Although the guidelines for hypertrophic acne scars include the use of laser-assisted delivery of corticosteroids, a study of fractional ER:YAG laser alone or in combination with topical clobetasol found no significant benefit from the addition of steroids, with both treatment groups achieving significant posttreatment improvements in scar thickness and POSAS scores [172,175]. Recently, studies have compared IPL to non-laser therapies. Significant differences in scar pliability, hyperpigmentation, and median VAS favored IPL vs. silicone sheet, but significant differences in VAS and histopathological characteristics favored cryotherapy vs. IPL [173,174].

5.2. Emerging Treatments

Given the prevalence of hypertrophic scarring, new treatments are continually developed. Intralesional TAC, for example, was found to improve scar height, pliability, and pigmentation when combined with 5-FU and reduced the number of treatment sessions and remission time when combined with 1550 nm erbium glass fractional laser treatment (Table 3) [163,164,177,178]. While Botox A with TAC showed no difference in scar appearance, it significantly reduced pain and pruritis [179]. Scars treated with RFA plus verapamil and 5-FU experienced the fastest scar volume reduction with relief of symptoms and hyperemia compared to either agent alone [180]. Additionally, the combination of intense pulse light (IPL) and CO₂ laser significantly improved scar color and texture [176]. The combination of lasers with 5-FU and/or TAC delivered intralesionally or via laser assistance has thus been recommended for the treatment of hypertrophic acne scars [169,175].

The role of angiotensin II in scar activity has recently been examined [181]. Human dermal fibroblasts treated with losartan, an angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist, displayed decreased contractile activity, fibroblast migration, gene expression of TGF-β1, type 1 collagen, and MCP-1, while reducing monocyte migration and adhesion [181]. In rat models, the consumption of losartan showed decreased cross-sectional area and elevation index in scars, with decreased α-SMA+ and CD68+ during immunostaining [181]. Another in vivo model demonstrated a reduced incidence of hypertrophic scarring with decreased inflammation, collagen and fibroblast cellularity, vascularization, and myofibroblast activity with the topical administration of oxandrolone and hyaluronic acid gel [182]. Clinically, the administration of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors was shown to reduce the risk of hypertrophic scarring and keloid onset by less than half in patients who underwent sternotomy, while 1,4-diaminobutane (1,4 DAB) in breast reduction patients resulted in significantly greater scar satisfaction and less scar hardness measured by Rex Durometer [183,184].

Autologous fat grafting also presents as a novel therapy to improve the function and appearance of scars. While the underlying mechanism is unknown, exposure to adipocytes decreased the expression of the myofibroblast marker α-SMA and ECM components [185]. The reprogramming of myofibroblasts was found to be triggered by BMP-4 (bone morphogenetic protein 4) and activation of PPARγ (peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma) signaling, which initiated tissue remodeling [185].

As is the case in many other fields of medicine, stem cells are also a promising therapeutic target for HTS. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) isolated from the mouse whisker hair follicle outer root sheath were applied to an in vivo full-thickness wound model [186]. A quantitative evaluation revealed reduced inflammation, cellularity, and collagen filaments, as well as thinner dermal and epidermal layers in the MSC-treated wounds, indicating a reduction in hypertrophic scars. Another study examined the effect of combined treatment with a non-ablative laser and human stem cell-conditioned medium on burn-induced hypertrophic scar formation [187]. The treatment group was found to have reduced erythema, trans-epidermal water loss, and scar thickness.

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has also been identified as a promising therapy for scarring. In one study, primary dermal fibroblasts isolated from hypertrophic scars were cultured in a medium supplemented with 5% PRP or platelet-poor plasma (PPP) [61]. The PRP group was found to have reduced expression of TGF-β1 and connective tissue growth factor (CTGF) mRNA. Other studies have examined combination treatments with both PRP and ablative fractional CO₂ lasers and have found the combination to be more beneficial than either treatment alone [188,189].

In addition, identifying the molecular targets for potential treatments is an ongoing source of investigation. Co-cultures of anti-inflammatory cluster of differentiation 206 (CD206)+ macrophages and fibroblasts showed decreased expression of fibrotic factors, such as type 1 and 2 collagen, alpha-smooth muscle actin, connective tissue growth factor, and TGF-β, with upregulation of MMP-1. IL-6 was also found to be increased in the medium, with an increase in anti-fibrotic gene expression when IL-6 was added to fibroblasts. Cytotherapy with cultured CD206+ macrophages or a direct administration of recombinant human IL-6 has been shown to dampen the expression of pro-fibrotic mediators (e.g., COL1A1 *, COL2A1 *, α-SMA *, CTGF *, and TGF-β1) in fibroblast in cell culture studies [190].

In vitro studies of fibroblasts have revealed that IFN-γ inhibits collagen synthesis [191]. IFN-γ knockout mice were found to have reduced wound closure, lower wound breaking strength, and dampened expression of collagen type 1A (COL1A1) and collagen type 3 A1 (COL3A1) mRNA, but a greater expression of MMP-2 (gelatinase) mRNA [191]. The study concluded IFN-γ may be involved in both the proliferation and maturation stages of wound healing and, therefore, may be a target for potential treatments.

6. Conclusions

As this review illustrates, there has been significant knowledge gained in the field of hypertrophic scarring. A pro-fibrotic environment results in excessive collagen deposition and, therefore, hypertrophic scar formation. In this review article, and for the first time, we highlighted the defective and impaired mechanisms underlying HTS that are associated with each phase of wound healing (hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling). This was an attempt to demonstrate the multifaceted nature of the phase-specific dysregulations and impaired mechanisms that underlie HTS development. We further discussed the current animal models and their limitations in order to highlight the need for better animal models that can more closely reproduce the human condition with respect to HTS development. We also reviewed the current and emerging therapies, which further demonstrate the inadequacy of therapies to address HTS. There is still much to be discovered in regard to the underlying mechanisms contributing to HTS development. A better understanding of the impaired mechanisms underlying HTS would surely lead to the development of more effective targeted therapies to treat this debilitating and costly pathological condition.

Acknowledgements

AcknowledgmentsWe would like to acknowledge Okensama La-Anyane and Ayaan Ahmed for their insightful comments regarding this manuscript.

Competing interests

Conflicts of InterestThe authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. Gurtner G.C., Werner S., Barrandon Y., Longaker M.T.. Wound repair and regeneration. Nature. 2008 doi:10.1038/nature07039 PubMed
2. Diegelmann R.F., Evans M.C.. Wound healing: An overview of acute, fibrotic and delayed healing. Front. Biosci.. 2004 doi:10.2741/1184 PubMed
3. Ogawa R., Akita S., Akaishi S., Aramaki-Hattori N., Dohi T., Hayashi T. et al. Diagnosis and treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars—Japan scar workshop consensus document 2018. Burn. Trauma. 2019 doi:10.1186/s41038-019-0175-y PubMed
4. Limandjaja G.C., Niessen F.B., Scheper R.J., Gibbs S.. Hypertrophic scars and keloids: Overview of the evidence and practical guide for differentiating between these abnormal scars. Exp. Dermatol.. 2021 doi:10.1111/exd.14121 PubMed
5. Marshall C.D., Hu M.S., Leavitt T., Barnes L.A., Lorenz H.P., Longaker M.T.. Cutaneous scarring: Basic science, current treatments, and future directions. Adv. Wound Care. 2018 doi:10.1089/wound.2016.0696 PubMed
6. Lawrence J.W., Mason S.T., Schomer K., Klein M.B.. Epidemiology and impact of scarring after burn injury: A systematic review of the literature. J. Burn. Care Res.. 2012 doi:10.1097/BCR.0b013e3182374452 PubMed
7. Gauglitz G.G., Korting H.C., Pavicic T., Ruzicka T., Jeschke M.G.. Hypertrophic scarring and keloids: Pathomechanisms and current and emerging treatment strategies. Mol. Med.. 2011 doi:10.2119/molmed.2009.00153 PubMed
8. Thompson C.M., Hocking A.M., Honari S., Muffley L.A., Ga M., Gibran N.S.. Genetic risk factors for hypertrophic scar development. J. Burn. Care Res.. 2013 doi:10.1097/BCR.0b013e3182a2aa41 PubMed
9. Shu F., Liu H., Lou X., Zhou Z., Zhao Z., Liu Y. et al. Analysis of the predictors of hypertrophic scarring pain and neuropathic pain after burn. Burns. 2022 doi:10.1016/j.burns.2021.08.007 PubMed
10. Mahdavian Delavary B., van der Veer W.M., Ferreira J.A., Niessen F.B.. Formation of hypertrophic scars: Evolution and susceptibility. J. Plast. Surg. Hand Surg.. 2012 doi:10.3109/2000656X.2012.669184 PubMed
11. Brissett A.E., Sherris D.A.. Scar contractures, hypertrophic scars, and keloids. Facial Plast. Surg.. 2001 doi:10.1055/s-2001-18827 PubMed
12. Huang C., Wu Z., Du Y., Ogawa R.. The epidemiology of keloids. Textbook on Scar Management. 2020 PubMed
13. Kouotou E.A., Nansseu J.R., Omona Guissana E., Mendouga Menye C.R., Akpadjan F., Tounkara T.M. et al. Epidemiology and clinical features of keloids in Black Africans: A nested case–control study from Yaoundé, Cameroon. Int. J. Derm.. 2019 doi:10.1111/ijd.14610 PubMed
14. Kwan P., Hori K., Ding J., Tredget E.E.. Scar and contracture: Biological principles. Hand Clin. 2009 doi:10.1016/j.hcl.2009.06.007 PubMed
15. Hawkins H., Herndon D.. Total Burn Care. 2007
16. Wurzer P., Forbes A.A., Hundeshagen G., Andersen C.R., Epperson K.M., Meyer W.J. et al. Two-year follow-up of outcomes related to scarring and distress in children with severe burns. Disabil. Rehabil.. 2017 doi:10.1080/09638288.2016.1209579 PubMed
17. Aarabi S., Longaker M.T., Gurtner G.C.. Hypertrophic scar formation following burns and trauma: New approaches to treatment. PLoS Med.. 2007 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040234 PubMed
18. Atiyeh B., Ibrahim A.. Nonsurgical management of hypertrophic scars: Evidence-based therapies, standard practices, and emerging methods: An update. Aesthetic Plast. Surg.. 2020 doi:10.1007/s00266-020-01766-3 PubMed
19. Brusselaers N., Pirayesh A., Hoeksema H., Verbelen J., Blot S., Monstrey S.. Burn scar assessment: A systematic review of different scar scales. J. Surg. Res.. 2010 doi:10.1016/j.jss.2010.05.056 PubMed
20. Elrefaie A.M., Salem R.M., Faheem M.H.. High-resolution ultrasound for keloids and hypertrophic scar assessment. Lasers Med. Sci.. 2020 doi:10.1007/s10103-019-02830-4 PubMed
21. Rodrigues M., Kosaric N., Bonham C.A., Gurtner G.C.. Wound Healing: A Cellular Perspective. Physiol. Rev.. 2019 doi:10.1152/physrev.00067.2017 PubMed
22. Gale A.J.. Continuing education course #2: Current understanding of hemostasis. Toxicol. Pathol.. 2011 doi:10.1177/0192623310389474 PubMed
23. Palta S., Saroa R., Palta A.. Overview of the coagulation system. Indian J. Anaesth.. 2014 doi:10.4103/0019-5049.144643 PubMed
24. Martin P.. Wound healing--aiming for perfect skin regeneration. Science. 1997 doi:10.1126/science.276.5309.75 PubMed
25. Singer A.J., Clark R.A.. Cutaneous wound healing. N. Engl. J. Med.. 1999 doi:10.1056/NEJM199909023411006 PubMed
26. Ellis S., Lin E.J., Tartar D.. Immunology of wound healing. Curr. Dermatol. Rep.. 2018 doi:10.1007/s13671-018-0234-9 PubMed
27. Turabelidze A., Dipietro L.A.. Inflammation and wound healing. Endod. Top.. 2011 doi:10.1111/etp.12012
28. Kolaczkowska E., Kubes P.. Neutrophil recruitment and function in health and inflammation. Nat. Rev. Immunol.. 2013 doi:10.1038/nri3399 PubMed
29. Mittal M., Nepal S., Tsukasaki Y., Hecquet C.M., Soni D., Rehman J. et al. Neutrophil activation of endothelial cell-expressed TRPM2 mediates transendothelial neutrophil migration and vascular injury. Circ. Res.. 2017 doi:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.117.311747 PubMed
30. Bettinger D.A., Pellicane J.V., Tarry W.C., Yager D.R., Diegelmann R.F., Lee R. et al. The role of inflammatory cytokines in wound healing: Accelerated healing in endotoxin-resistant mice. J. Trauma. 1994 doi:10.1097/00005373-199406000-00010 PubMed
31. Nosenko M., Ambaryan S., Drutskaya M.. Proinflammatory cytokines and skin wound healing in mice. Mol. Biol.. 2019 doi:10.1134/S0026893319050121 PubMed
32. Kim S.Y., Nair M.G.. Macrophages in wound healing: Activation and plasticity. Immunol. Cell Biol.. 2019 doi:10.1111/imcb.12236 PubMed
33. Kloc M., Ghobrial R.M., Wosik J., Lewicka A., Lewicki S., Kubiak J.Z.. Macrophage functions in wound healing. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med.. 2019 doi:10.1002/term.2772 PubMed
34. Eming S.A., Martin P., Tomic-Canic M.. Wound repair and regeneration: Mechanisms, signaling, and translation. Sci. Transl. Med.. 2014 doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3009337 PubMed
35. Kotwal G.J., Chien S.. Macrophage differentiation in normal and accelerated wound healing. Macrophages. 2017 doi:10.1007/978-3-319-54090-0_14 PubMed
36. Demidova-Rice T.N., Hamblin M.R., Herman I.M.. Acute and impaired wound healing: Pathophysiology and current methods for drug delivery, part 1: Normal and chronic wounds: Biology, causes, and approaches to care. Adv. Ski. Wound Care. 2012 doi:10.1097/01.ASW.0000416006.55218.d0 PubMed
37. Duncan M.R., Frazier K.S., Abramson S., Williams S., Klapper H., Huang X. et al. Connective tissue growth factor mediates transforming growth factor beta-induced collagen synthesis: Down-regulation by cAMP. FASEB J.. 1999 doi:10.1096/fasebj.13.13.1774 PubMed
38. Barker T.H., Engler A.J.. The provisional matrix: Setting the stage for tissue repair outcomes. Matrix Biol.. 2017 doi:10.1016/j.matbio.2017.04.003 PubMed
39. Broughton G., Janis J.E., Attinger C.E.. The basic science of wound healing. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006 doi:10.1097/01.prs.0000225430.42531.c2 PubMed
40. Häkkinen L., Larjava H., Koivisto L.. Granulation tissue formation and remodeling. Endod. Top.. 2011 doi:10.1111/etp.12008
41. Rousselle P., Braye F., Dayan G.. Re-epithelialization of adult skin wounds: Cellular mechanisms and therapeutic strategies. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev.. 2019 doi:10.1016/j.addr.2018.06.019 PubMed
42. Pastar I., Stojadinovic O., Yin N.C., Ramirez H., Nusbaum A.G., Sawaya A. et al. Epithelialization in Wound Healing: A Comprehensive Review. Adv. Wound Care. 2014 doi:10.1089/wound.2013.0473 PubMed
43. DiPietro L.A.. Angiogenesis and wound repair: When enough is enough. J. Leukoc. Biol.. 2016 doi:10.1189/jlb.4MR0316-102R PubMed
44. Grotendorst G., Grotendorst C., Gilman T.. Production of growth factors (PDGF & TGF-beta) at the site of tissue repair. Prog. Clin. Biol. Res.. 1988 PubMed
45. Uutela M., Wirzenius M., Paavonen K., Rajantie I., He Y., Karpanen T. et al. PDGF-D induces macrophage recruitment, increased interstitial pressure, and blood vessel maturation during angiogenesis. Blood. 2004 doi:10.1182/blood-2004-04-1485 PubMed
46. Nissen N.N., Polverini P.J., Gamelli R.L., DiPietro L.A.. Basic fibroblast growth factor mediates angiogenic activity in early surgical wounds. Surgery. 1996 doi:10.1016/S0039-6060(96)80148-6 PubMed
47. Pardali E., Goumans M.-J., ten Dijke P.. Signaling by members of the TGF-β family in vascular morphogenesis and disease. Trends Cell Biol.. 2010 doi:10.1016/j.tcb.2010.06.006 PubMed
48. Sorg H., Tilkorn D.J., Hager S., Hauser J., Mirastschijski U.. Skin wound healing: An update on the current knowledge and concepts. Eur. Surg. Res.. 2017 doi:10.1159/000454919 PubMed
49. Diller R.B., Tabor A.J.. The role of the extracellular matrix (ECM) in wound healing: A review. Biomimetics. 2022 doi:10.3390/biomimetics7030087 PubMed
50. Xue M., Jackson C.J.. Extracellular matrix reorganization during wound healing and its impact on abnormal scarring. Adv. Wound Care. 2015 doi:10.1089/wound.2013.0485 PubMed
51. Reinke J.M., Sorg H.. Wound repair and regeneration. Eur. Surg. Res.. 2012 doi:10.1159/000339613 PubMed
52. Shanmugam V.K., Fernandez S.J., Evans K.K., McNish S., Banerjee A.N., Couch K.S. et al. Postoperative wound dehiscence: Predictors and associations. Wound Repair Regen.. 2015 doi:10.1111/wrr.12268 PubMed
53. Spiliotis J., Tsiveriotis K., Datsis A.D., Vaxevanidou A., Zacharis G., Giafis K. et al. Wound dehiscence: Is still a problem in the 21th century: A retrospective study. World J. Emerg. Surg.. 2009 doi:10.1186/1749-7922-4-12 PubMed
54. Li B., Wang J.H.-C.. Fibroblasts and myofibroblasts in wound healing: Force generation and measurement. J. Tissue Viability. 2011 doi:10.1016/j.jtv.2009.11.004 PubMed
55. Wang Z.C., Zhao W.Y., Cao Y., Liu Y.Q., Sun Q., Shi P. et al. The Roles of Inflammation in Keloid and Hypertrophic Scars. Front. Immunol.. 2020 doi:10.3389/fimmu.2020.603187 PubMed
56. Bellemare J., Roberge C.J., Bergeron D., Lopez-Vallé C.A., Roy M., Moulin V.J.. Epidermis promotes dermal fibrosis: Role in the pathogenesis of hypertrophic scars. J. Pathol. A J. Pathol. Soc. Great Br. Irel.. 2005 doi:10.1002/path.1737 PubMed
57. Molina E.A., Hartmann B., Oliver M.A., Kirkpatrick L.D., Keyloun J.W., Moffatt L.T. et al. Angiogenic gene characterization and vessel permeability of dermal microvascular endothelial cells isolated from burn hypertrophic scar. Sci. Rep.. 2022 doi:10.1038/s41598-022-16376-z PubMed
58. Fuchs P., Calitz C., Pavlović N., Binet F., Solbak S.M.Ø., Danielson U.H. et al. Fibrin fragment E potentiates TGF-β-induced myofibroblast activation and recruitment. Cell. Signal.. 2020 doi:10.1016/j.cellsig.2020.109661 PubMed
59. Wang Y., Guerrero-Juarez C.F., Qiu Y., Du H., Chen W., Figueroa S. et al. A multiscale hybrid mathematical model of epidermal-dermal interactions during skin wound healing. Exp. Derm.. 2019 doi:10.1111/exd.13909 PubMed
60. Werner S., Grose R.. Regulation of wound healing by growth factors and cytokines. Physiol. Rev.. 2003 doi:10.1152/physrev.2003.83.3.835 PubMed
61. Nam S.M., Kim Y.B.. The effects of platelet-rich plasma on hypertrophic scars fibroblasts. Int. Wound J.. 2018 doi:10.1111/iwj.12896 PubMed
62. Agrawal A., Ding J., Agrawal B., Kwan P.O., Tredget E.E.. Stimulation of toll-like receptor pathways by burn eschar tissue as a possible mechanism for hypertrophic scarring. Wound Repair Regen.. 2021 doi:10.1111/wrr.12940 PubMed
63. Wang J., Hori K., Ding J., Huang Y., Kwan P., Ladak A. et al. Toll-like receptors expressed by dermal fibroblasts contribute to hypertrophic scarring. J. Cell Physiol.. 2011 doi:10.1002/jcp.22454 PubMed
64. Williams H., Suda S., Dervish S., Yap Y.T., Holland A.J., Medbury H.J.. Monocyte M1/M2 profile is altered in paediatric burn patients with hypertrophic scarring. Wound Repair Regen.. 2021 doi:10.1111/wrr.12960 PubMed
65. Chen B., Li H., Xia W.. The role of Th1/Th2 cell chemokine expression in hypertrophic scar. Int. Wound J.. 2020 doi:10.1111/iwj.13257 PubMed
66. van den Broek L.J., van der Veer W.M., de Jong E.H., Gibbs S., Niessen F.B.. Suppressed inflammatory gene expression during human hypertrophic scar compared to normotrophic scar formation. Exp. Derm.. 2015 doi:10.1111/exd.12739 PubMed
67. Ding J., Hori K., Zhang R., Marcoux Y., Honardoust D., Shankowsky H.A. et al. Stromal cell-derived factor 1 (SDF-1) and its receptor CXCR4 in the formation of postburn hypertrophic scar (HTS). Wound Repair Regen.. 2011 doi:10.1111/j.1524-475X.2011.00724.x PubMed
68. Henry G., Garner W.L.. Inflammatory mediators in wound healing. Surg. Clin. N. Am.. 2003 doi:10.1016/S0039-6109(02)00200-1 PubMed
69. Zhang D., Li B., Zhao M.. Therapeutic Strategies by Regulating Interleukin Family to Suppress Inflammation in Hypertrophic Scar and Keloid. Front. Pharm.. 2021 doi:10.3389/fphar.2021.667763 PubMed
70. Butzelaar L., Schooneman D.P., Soykan E.A., Talhout W., Ulrich M.M., van den Broek L.J. et al. Inhibited early immunologic response is associated with hypertrophic scarring. Exp. Derm.. 2016 doi:10.1111/exd.13100 PubMed
71. Roy R., Zayas J., Mohamed M.F., Aboonabi A., Delgado K., Wallace J. et al. IL-10 Dysregulation Underlies Chemokine Insufficiency, Delayed Macrophage Response, and Impaired Healing in Diabetic Wounds. J. Investig. Dermatol.. 2022 doi:10.1016/j.jid.2021.08.428 PubMed
72. Roy R., Zayas J., Singh S.K., Delgado K., Wood S.J., Mohamed M.F. et al. Overriding impaired FPR chemotaxis signaling in diabetic neutrophil stimulates infection control in murine diabetic wound. eLife. 2022 doi:10.7554/eLife.72071 PubMed
73. Wood S., Jayaraman V., Huelsmann E.J., Bonish B., Burgad D., Sivaramakrishnan G. et al. Pro-inflammatory chemokine CCL2 (MCP-1) promotes healing in diabetic wounds by restoring the macrophage response. PLoS ONE. 2014 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0091574 PubMed
74. Goldufsky J., Wood S.J., Jayaraman V., Majdobeh O., Chen L., Qin S. et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa uses T3SS to inhibit diabetic wound healing. Wound Repair Regen.. 2015 doi:10.1111/wrr.12310 PubMed
75. Kaplanski G., Marin V., Montero-Julian F., Mantovani A., Farnarier C.. IL-6: A regulator of the transition from neutrophil to monocyte recruitment during inflammation. Trends Immunol.. 2003 doi:10.1016/S1471-4906(02)00013-3 PubMed
76. Fernando M.R., Reyes J.L., Iannuzzi J., Leung G., McKay D.M.. The pro-inflammatory cytokine, interleukin-6, enhances the polarization of alternatively activated macrophages. PLoS ONE. 2014 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0094188 PubMed
77. Juhl P., Bondesen S., Hawkins C.L., Karsdal M.A., Bay-Jensen A.C., Davies M.J. et al. Dermal fibroblasts have different extracellular matrix profiles induced by TGF-β, PDGF and IL-6 in a model for skin fibrosis. Sci. Rep.. 2020 doi:10.1038/s41598-020-74179-6 PubMed
78. Xue H., McCauley R.L., Zhang W., Martini D.K.. Altered interleukin-6 expression in fibroblasts from hypertrophic burn scars. J. Burn. Care Rehabil.. 2000 doi:10.1097/00004630-200021020-00010 PubMed
79. Ray S., Ju X., Sun H., Finnerty C.C., Herndon D.N., Brasier A.R.. The IL-6 trans-signaling-STAT3 pathway mediates ECM and cellular proliferation in fibroblasts from hypertrophic scar. J. Investig. Dermatol.. 2013 doi:10.1038/jid.2012.499 PubMed
80. Kwan P.O., Ding J., Tredget E.E.. Serum Decorin, Interleukin-1β, and Transforming Growth Factor-β Predict Hypertrophic Scarring Postburn. J. Burn Care Res.. 2016 doi:10.1097/BCR.0000000000000271 PubMed
81. Zhang J., Qiao Q., Liu M., He T., Shi J., Bai X. et al. IL-17 Promotes Scar Formation by Inducing Macrophage Infiltration. Am. J. Pathol.. 2018 doi:10.1016/j.ajpath.2018.04.005 PubMed
82. Nguyen J.K., Austin E., Huang A., Mamalis A., Jagdeo J.. The IL-4/IL-13 axis in skin fibrosis and scarring: Mechanistic concepts and therapeutic targets. Arch. Dermatol. Res.. 2020 doi:10.1007/s00403-019-01972-3 PubMed
83. Shi J., Li J., Guan H., Cai W., Bai X., Fang X. et al. Anti-fibrotic actions of interleukin-10 against hypertrophic scarring by activation of PI3K/AKT and STAT3 signaling pathways in scar-forming fibroblasts. PLoS ONE. 2014 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0098228 PubMed
84. Shi J., Shi S., Xie W., Zhao M., Li Y., Zhang J. et al. IL-10 alleviates lipopolysaccharide-induced skin scarring via IL-10R/STAT3 axis regulating TLR4/NF-κB pathway in dermal fibroblasts. J. Cell Mol. Med.. 2021 doi:10.1111/jcmm.16250 PubMed
85. Ma L., Hua L., Yu W., Ke L., Li L.. TSG-6 inhibits hypertrophic scar fibroblast proliferation by regulating IRE1α/TRAF2/NF-κB signalling. Int. Wound J.. 2022 doi:10.1111/iwj.13950 PubMed
86. Yang J.-X., Li S.-Y., Chen M.-L., He L.-R.. The role of altered fatty acid in pathological scars and their dermal fibroblasts. Chin. J. Traumatol.. 2022 doi:10.1016/j.cjtee.2022.03.006 PubMed
87. Yang J., Chen M., He L.. To Explore Ideas From the Altered Metabolites: The Metabolomics of Pathological Scar. J. Craniofacial Surg.. 2022 doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000008470 PubMed
88. Gromovsky A.D., Schugar R.C., Brown A.L., Helsley R.N., Burrows A.C., Ferguson D. et al. Δ-5 fatty acid desaturase FADS1 impacts metabolic disease by balancing proinflammatory and proresolving lipid mediators. Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol.. 2018 doi:10.1161/ATVBAHA.117.309660 PubMed
89. Fritsche K.L.. The science of fatty acids and inflammation. Adv. Nutr.. 2015 doi:10.3945/an.114.006940 PubMed
90. Vinolo M.A., Rodrigues H.G., Nachbar R.T., Curi R.. Regulation of inflammation by short chain fatty acids. Nutrients. 2011 doi:10.3390/nu3100858 PubMed
91. van der Veer W.M., Niessen F.B., Ferreira J.A., Zwiers P.J., de Jong E.H., Middelkoop E. et al. Time course of the angiogenic response during normotrophic and hypertrophic scar formation in humans. Wound Repair Regen.. 2011 doi:10.1111/j.1524-475X.2011.00692.x PubMed
92. Machesney M., Tidman N., Waseem A., Kirby L., Leigh I.. Activated keratinocytes in the epidermis of hypertrophic scars. Am J. Pathol.. 1998 PubMed
93. Ma L., Gan C., Huang Y., Wang Y., Luo G., Wu J.. Comparative proteomic analysis of extracellular matrix proteins secreted by hypertrophic scar with normal skin fibroblasts. Burn. Trauma. 2014 doi:10.4103/2321-3868.130191 PubMed
94. Lian N., Li T.. Growth factor pathways in hypertrophic scars: Molecular pathogenesis and therapeutic implications. Biomed Pharm.. 2016 doi:10.1016/j.biopha.2016.09.010 PubMed
95. Eremenko E., Ding J., Kwan P., Tredget E.E.. The Biology of Extracellular Matrix Proteins in Hypertrophic Scarring. Adv. Wound Care. 2022 doi:10.1089/wound.2020.1257 PubMed
96. Varkey M., Ding J., Tredget E.E.. Differential collagen-glycosaminoglycan matrix remodeling by superficial and deep dermal fibroblasts: Potential therapeutic targets for hypertrophic scar. Biomaterials. 2011 doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.06.070 PubMed
97. Huang X., Gu S., Liu C., Zhang L., Zhang Z., Zhao Y. et al. CD39+ fibroblasts enhance myofibroblast activation by promoting IL-11 secretion in hypertrophic scars. J. Investig. Dermatol.. 2022 doi:10.1016/j.jid.2021.07.181 PubMed
98. Zhang T., Wang X.F., Wang Z.C., Lou D., Fang Q.Q., Hu Y.Y. et al. Current potential therapeutic strategies targeting the TGF-β/Smad signaling pathway to attenuate keloid and hypertrophic scar formation. Biomed. Pharm.. 2020 doi:10.1016/j.biopha.2020.110287 PubMed
99. Fang X., Hu X., Zheng Z., Tao K., Wang H., Guan H. et al. Smad interacting protein 1 influences transforming growth factor-β. J. Mol. Histol.. 2019 doi:10.1007/s10735-019-09844-w PubMed
100. Li X.P., Liu P., Li Y.F., Zhang G.L., Zeng D.S., Liu D.L.. LPS induces activation of the TLR4 pathway in fibroblasts and promotes skin scar formation through collagen I and TGF-β in skin lesions. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Pathol.. 2019 PubMed
101. Ogawa R., Akaishi S.. Endothelial dysfunction may play a key role in keloid and hypertrophic scar pathogenesis–keloids and hypertrophic scars may be vascular disorders. Med. Hypotheses. 2016 doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2016.09.024 PubMed
102. Laberge A., Merjaneh M., Arif S., Larochelle S., Moulin V.J.. Shedding of proangiogenic microvesicles from hypertrophic scar myofibroblasts. Exp. Derm.. 2021 doi:10.1111/exd.14178 PubMed
103. Wilgus T.A.. Vascular endothelial growth factor and cutaneous scarring. Adv. Wound Care. 2019 doi:10.1089/wound.2018.0796 PubMed
104. Li B., Gao C., Diao J.S., Wang D.L., Chu F.F., Li Y. et al. Aberrant Notch signalling contributes to hypertrophic scar formation by modulating the phenotype of keratinocytes. Exp Derm.. 2016 doi:10.1111/exd.12897 PubMed
105. Yuan F.L., Sun Z.L., Feng Y., Liu S.Y., Du Y., Yu S. et al. Epithelial-mesenchymal transition in the formation of hypertrophic scars and keloids. J. Cell Physiol.. 2019 doi:10.1002/jcp.28830 PubMed
106. Zhao J., Yu J., Xu Y., Chen L., Zhou F., Zhai Q. et al. Epidermal HMGB1 activates dermal fibroblasts and causes hypertrophic scar formation in reduced hydration. J. Investig. Dermatol.. 2018 doi:10.1016/j.jid.2018.04.036 PubMed
107. Ma D., Chen L., Shi J., Zhao Y., Vasani S., Chen K. et al. Pigment epithelium-derived factor attenuates angiogenesis and collagen deposition in hypertrophic scars. Wound Repair Regen.. 2020 doi:10.1111/wrr.12828 PubMed
108. Eto H., Suga H., Aoi N., Kato H., Kuno S., Tabata Y. et al. Therapeutic potential of fibroblast growth factor-2 for hypertrophic scars: Upregulation of MMP-1 and HGF expression. Lab. Investig.. 2012 doi:10.1038/labinvest.2011.127 PubMed
109. Spyrou G.E., Naylor I.L.. The effect of basic fibroblast growth factor on scarring. Br. J. Plast. Surg.. 2002 doi:10.1054/bjps.2002.3831 PubMed
110. Ulrich D., Ulrich F., Unglaub F., Piatkowski A., Pallua N.. Matrix metalloproteinases and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases in patients with different types of scars and keloids. J. Plast. Reconstr. Aesthetic Surg.. 2010 doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2009.04.021 PubMed
111. Oliveira G.V., Hawkins H.K., Chinkes D., Burke A., Tavares A.L., Ramos-e-Silva M. et al. Hypertrophic versus non hypertrophic scars compared by immunohistochemistry and laser confocal microscopy: Type I and III collagens. Int. Wound J.. 2009 doi:10.1111/j.1742-481X.2009.00638.x PubMed
112. Moulin V., Larochelle S., Langlois C., Thibault I., Lopez-Vallé C.A., Roy M.. Normal skin wound and hypertrophic scar myofibroblasts have differential responses to apoptotic inductors. J. Cell Physiol.. 2004 doi:10.1002/jcp.10415 PubMed
113. Sidgwick G.P., Bayat A.. Extracellular matrix molecules implicated in hypertrophic and keloid scarring. J. Eur. Acad Derm. Venereol.. 2012 doi:10.1111/j.1468-3083.2011.04200.x PubMed
114. Gabbiani G.. The myofibroblast in wound healing and fibrocontractive diseases. J. Pathol.. 2003 doi:10.1002/path.1427 PubMed
115. Junker J.P., Kratz C., Tollbäck A., Kratz G.. Mechanical tension stimulates the transdifferentiation of fibroblasts into myofibroblasts in human burn scars. Burns. 2008 doi:10.1016/j.burns.2008.01.010 PubMed
116. Darby I.A., Laverdet B., Bonté F., Desmoulière A.. Fibroblasts and myofibroblasts in wound healing. Clin. Cosmet. Investig. Dermatol.. 2014 doi:10.2147/CCID.S50046 PubMed
117. Lee D.E., Trowbridge R.M., Ayoub N.T., Agrawal D.K.. High-mobility Group Box Protein-1, Matrix Metalloproteinases, and Vitamin D in Keloids and Hypertrophic Scars. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. Glob. Open. 2015 doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000000391 PubMed
118. Travis T.E., Ghassemi P., Prindeze N.J., Moffatt L.T., Carney B.C., Alkhalil A. et al. Matrix Metalloproteinases Are Differentially Regulated and Responsive to Compression Therapy in a Red Duroc Model of Hypertrophic Scar. Eplasty. 2018 PubMed
119. Keskin E.S., Keskin E.R., Öztürk M.B., Çakan D.. The Effect of MMP-1 on Wound Healing and Scar Formation. Aesthetic Plast Surg.. 2021 doi:10.1007/s00266-021-02369-2 PubMed
120. McArdle C., Abbah S.A., Bhowmick S., Collin E., Pandit A.. Localized temporal co-delivery of interleukin 10 and decorin genes using amediated by collagen-based biphasic scaffold modulates the expression of TGF-β1/β2 in a rabbit ear hypertrophic scarring model. Biomater. Sci.. 2021 doi:10.1039/D0BM01928C PubMed
121. Ying M., Chen Y., Yuan B.. Knockdown of lysyl oxidase like 1 inhibits the proliferation and pro-fibrotic effects of transforming growth factor-β1-induced hypertrophic scar fibroblasts. Can. J. Physiol. Pharm.. 2021 doi:10.1139/cjpp-2021-0242 PubMed
122. Raktoe R.S., Rietveld M.H., Out-Luiting J.J., Kruithof-de Julio M., van Zuijlen P.P., van Doorn R. et al. The effect of TGFβRI inhibition on fibroblast heterogeneity in hypertrophic scar 2D in vitro models. Burns. 2021 doi:10.1016/j.burns.2021.01.004 PubMed
123. Moulin V.J.. Three-dimensional model of hypertrophic scar using a tissue-engineering approach. Myofibroblasts. 2021 doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-1382-5_28 PubMed
124. Sun Q., Yu E.T., Zhou Y., Tong S., Sun X., Li K.Z. et al. The Effects of Timing of Postoperative Radiotherapy on Hypertrophic Scar in a Rabbit Model. Med. Sci. Monit. Int. Med. J. Exp. Clin. Res.. 2020 doi:10.12659/MSM.921263 PubMed
125. Huang J., Chen J., Wo Y., Wang X., Zhang Y., Chen X. et al. CO2 Fractional Laser Combined with 5-Fluorouracil Ethosomal Gel Treatment of Hypertrophic Scar Macro-, Microscopic, and Molecular Mechanism of Action in a Rabbit Animal Model. Rejuvenation Res.. 2021 doi:10.1089/rej.2019.2204 PubMed
126. Tunca M., Gamsızkan M., Yürekli A., Alp Göksel B., Fuat Çiçek A., Çalışkan E.. Cryosurgery to remove perichondrium for the rabbit ear hypertrophic scar model: A simplified method. Acta Dermatovenerol. Alp. Pannonica Adriat.. 2019 doi:10.15570/actaapa.2019.15 PubMed
127. Friedrich E.E., Niknam-Bienia S., Xie P., Jia S.X., Hong S.J., Mustoe T.A. et al. Thermal injury model in the rabbit ear with quantifiable burn progression and hypertrophic scar. Wound Repair Regen.. 2017 doi:10.1111/wrr.12518 PubMed
128. Zu W., Jiang B., Liu H.. Establishment of a long-term hypertrophic scar model by injection of anhydrous alcohol: A rabbit model. Int. J. Exp. Pathol.. 2021 doi:10.1111/iep.12389 PubMed
129. Alrobaiea S.M., Ding J., Ma Z., Tredget E.E.. A novel nude mouse model of hypertrophic scarring using scratched full thickness human skin grafts. Adv. Wound Care. 2016 doi:10.1089/wound.2015.0670 PubMed
130. Davidson J.M., Yu F., Opalenik S.R.. Splinting Strategies to Overcome Confounding Wound Contraction in Experimental Animal Models. Adv. Wound Care. 2013 doi:10.1089/wound.2012.0424 PubMed
131. Son D.O., Hinz B.. A Rodent Model of Hypertrophic Scarring: Splinting of Rat Wounds. Methods Mol. Biol.. 2021 doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-1382-5_27 PubMed
132. Naldaiz-Gastesi N., Bahri O.A., López de Munain A., McCullagh K.J.A., Izeta A.. The panniculus carnosus muscle: An evolutionary enigma at the intersection of distinct research fields. J. Anat.. 2018 doi:10.1111/joa.12840 PubMed
133. Aarabi S., Bhatt K.A., Shi Y., Paterno J., Chang E.I., Loh S.A. et al. Mechanical load initiates hypertrophic scar formation through decreased cellular apoptosis. FASEB J.. 2007 doi:10.1096/fj.07-8218com PubMed
134. Sylakowski K., Hwang M.P., Justin A., Whaley D., Wang Y., Wells A.. The matricellular protein decorin delivered intradermally with coacervate improves wound resolution in the CXCR3-deficient mouse model of hypertrophic scarring. Wound Repair Regen.. 2022 doi:10.1111/wrr.13017 PubMed
135. Yates C.C., Krishna P., Whaley D., Bodnar R., Turner T., Wells A.. Lack of CXC chemokine receptor 3 signaling leads to hypertrophic and hypercellular scarring. Am. J. Pathol.. 2010 doi:10.2353/ajpath.2010.090564 PubMed
136. Yates C.C., Whaley D., Kulasekeran P., Hancock W.W., Lu B., Bodnar R. et al. Delayed and deficient dermal maturation in mice lacking the CXCR3 ELR-negative CXC chemokine receptor. Am. J. Pathol.. 2007 doi:10.2353/ajpath.2007.061092 PubMed
137. Jimi S., Saparov A., Koizumi S., Miyazaki M., Takagi S.. A novel mouse wound model for scar tissue formation in abdominal muscle wall. J. Vet. Med. Sci.. 2021 doi:10.1292/jvms.21-0464 PubMed
138. Li Y., Shan X., Mao Q., Xiang R., Cai Z.. Botulinum toxin type a intralesional monotherapy for treating human hypertrophic scar in a dose-dependent manner: In an animal model. J. Plast. Reconstr. Aesthetic Surg.. 2021 doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2021.03.062 PubMed
139. Li Z., Li S., Li K., Jiang X., Zhang J., Liu H.. A highly simulated scar model developed by grafting human thin split-thickness skin on back of nude mouse: The remodeling process, histological characteristics of scars. Biochem. Biophys Res. Commun.. 2020 doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2020.03.140 PubMed
140. Ud-Din S., Bayat A.. Classification of distinct endotypes in human skin scarring: SCAR—A novel perspective on dermal fibrosis. Adv. Wound Care. 2022 doi:10.1089/wound.2020.1364 PubMed
141. Nast A., Eming S., Fluhr J., Fritz K., Gauglitz G., Hohenleutner S. et al. German S2k guidelines for the therapy of pathological scars (hypertrophic scars and keloids). J. Dtsch Derm. Ges.. 2012 doi:10.1111/j.1610-0387.2012.08012.x PubMed
142. Ogawa R., Akaishi S., Huang C., Dohi T., Aoki M., Omori Y. et al. Clinical applications of basic research that shows reducing skin tension could prevent and treat abnormal scarring: The importance of fascial/subcutaneous tensile reduction sutures and flap surgery for keloid and hypertrophic scar reconstruction. J. Nippon Med. Sch.. 2011 doi:10.1272/jnms.78.68 PubMed
143. Ogawa R., Akaishi S., Kuribayashi S., Miyashita T.. Keloids and Hypertrophic Scars Can Now Be Cured Completely: Recent Progress in Our Understanding of the Pathogenesis of Keloids and Hypertrophic Scars and the Most Promising Current Therapeutic Strategy. J. Nippon Med. Sch.. 2016 doi:10.1272/jnms.83.46 PubMed
144. Chen H.H., Huang T., Hsu Y., Chen H.. Prospective clinical trial comparing barbed dermal suture and interrupted suture closure of the anterolateral thigh flap donor site in a Taiwanese population based on the Vancouver scar scale and the patient and observer scar assessment scale. J. Plast. Reconstr. Aesthet. Surg.. 2021 doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2021.06.015 PubMed
145. Ogawa R.. Keloid and Hypertrophic Scars Are the Result of Chronic Inflammation in the Reticular Dermis. Int. J. Mol. Sci.. 2017 doi:10.3390/ijms18030606 PubMed
146. Macintyre L., Baird M.. Pressure garments for use in the treatment of hypertrophic scars--a review of the problems associated with their use. Burns. 2006 doi:10.1016/j.burns.2004.06.018 PubMed
147. Engrav L.H., Heimbach D.M., Rivara F.P., Moore M.L., Wang J., Carrougher G.J. et al. 12-Year within-wound study of the effectiveness of custom pressure garment therapy. Burns. 2010 doi:10.1016/j.burns.2010.04.014 PubMed
148. Moortgat P., Meirte J., Maertens K., Lafaire C., De Cuyper L., Anthonissen M.. Can a Cohesive Silicone Bandage Outperform an Adhesive Silicone Gel Sheet in the Treatment of Scars? A Randomized Comparative Trial. Plast. Reconstr. Surg.. 2019 doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000005369 PubMed
149. Rogers N.T., Fancourt D.. Cultural Engagement Is a Risk-Reducing Factor for Frailty Incidence and Progression. J. Gerontol. Ser. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci.. 2020 doi:10.1093/geronb/gbz004 PubMed
150. Lee H.J., Jang Y.J.. Recent Understandings of Biology, Prophylaxis and Treatment Strategies for Hypertrophic Scars and Keloids. Int. J. Mol. Sci.. 2018 doi:10.3390/ijms19030711 PubMed
151. Kalasho B.D., Kikuchi R., Zoumalan C.I.. Silicone-Based Scar Cream for Post Upper Eyelid Blepharoplasty-associated Cicatricial and Hypertrophic Scarring. J. Drugs Dermatol.. 2019 PubMed
152. Kim S.H., Lee S.J., Lee J.W., Jeong H.S., Suh I.S.. Clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of botulinum toxin type A injection for reducing scars in patients with forehead laceration: A double-blinded, randomized controlled study. Medicine. 2019 doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000016952 PubMed
153. Huang R.L., Ho C.K., Tremp M., Xie Y., Li Q., Zan T.. Early Postoperative Application of Botulinum Toxin Type A Prevents Hypertrophic Scarring after Epicanthoplasty: A Split-Face, Double-Blind, Randomized Trial. Plast. Reconstr. Surg.. 2019 doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000006069 PubMed
154. Abedini R., Mehdizade Rayeni N., Haddady Abianeh S., Rahmati J., Teymourpour A., Nasimi M.. Botulinum Toxin Type A Injection for Mammoplasty and Abdominoplasty Scar Management: A Split-Scar Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Study. Aesthetic Plast. Surg.. 2020 doi:10.1007/s00266-020-01916-7 PubMed
155. Chen Z., Pang R., Wei Z., Zhang H., Liu W., Li G.. The effect of botulinum toxin injection dose on the appearance of surgical scar. Sci. Rep.. 2021 doi:10.1038/s41598-021-93203-x PubMed
156. Park G.S., An M.K., Yoon J.H., Park S.S., Koh S.H., Mauro T.M. et al. Botulinum toxin type A suppresses pro-fibrotic effects via the JNK signaling pathway in hypertrophic scar fibroblasts. Arch. Dermatol. Res.. 2019 doi:10.1007/s00403-019-01975-0 PubMed
157. Shin J.U., Park J., Lee J.H., Lee K.H., Kim Y.O., Yun C.O. et al. Extramarginal excision is preferable for hypertrophic scars. Int. J. Derm.. 2014 doi:10.1111/ijd.12481 PubMed
158. Schweinfurth J.M., Fedok F.. Avoiding pitfalls and unfavorable outcomes in scar revision. Facial Plast. Surg.. 2001 doi:10.1055/s-2001-18822 PubMed
159. Vijaya Lakshmi Y., Swetha Reddy L., Naga Neelima Devi K., Phani Kumar K., Guru Karthik G., Srinivas Chakravarthy P. et al. Evaluation of Microneedling Therapy in Management of Facial Scars. J. Craniofacial Surg.. 2020 doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000006145 PubMed
160. Esmat S., Shokeir H.A., Samy N.A., Mahmoud S.B., Sayed S.S.E.D., Shaker E. et al. Automated Microneedling Versus Fractional CO2 Laser in Treatment of Traumatic Scars: A Clinical and Histochemical Study. Dermatol. Surg.. 2021 doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000003227 PubMed
161. El Mofty M., Esmat S., Hunter N., Mashaly H.M., Dorgham D., Shaker O. et al. Effect of different types of therapeutic trauma on vitiligo lesions. Dermatol. Ther.. 2017 doi:10.1111/dth.12447 PubMed
162. Wong T.-S., Li J.Z.-H., Chen S., Chan J.Y.-W., Gao W.. The efficacy of triamcinolone acetonide in keloid treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Med.. 2016 doi:10.3389/fmed.2016.00071 PubMed
163. Zhuang Z., Li Y., Wei X.. The safety and efficacy of intralesional triamcinolone acetonide for keloids and hypertrophic scars: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Burns. 2021 doi:10.1016/j.burns.2021.02.013 PubMed
164. Khalid F.A., Mehrose M.Y., Saleem M., Yousaf M.A., Mujahid A.M., Rehman S.U. et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of intralesional triamcinolone and combination of triamcinolone with 5-fluorouracil in the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars: Randomised control trial. Burns. 2019 doi:10.1016/j.burns.2018.08.011 PubMed
165. Bi M., Sun P., Li D., Dong Z., Chen Z.. Intralesional Injection of Botulinum Toxin Type A Compared with Intralesional Injection of Corticosteroid for the Treatment of Hypertrophic Scar and Keloid: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Med. Sci. Monit.. 2019 doi:10.12659/MSM.916305 PubMed
166. Elshahed A.R., Elmanzalawy K.S., Shehata H., ElSaie M.L.. Effect of botulinum toxin type A for treating hypertrophic scars: A split-scar, double-blind randomized controlled trial. J. Cosmet. Derm.. 2020 doi:10.1111/jocd.13627 PubMed
167. Henderson D.L., Cromwell T.A., Mes L.G.. Argon and carbon dioxide laser treatment of hypertrophic and keloid scars. Lasers Surg. Med.. 1984 doi:10.1002/lsm.1900030402 PubMed
168. Nouri K., Rivas M.P., Stevens M., Ballard C.J., Singer L., Ma F. et al. Comparison of the effectiveness of the pulsed dye laser 585 nm versus 595 nm in the treatment of new surgical scars. Lasers Med. Sci.. 2009 doi:10.1007/s10103-009-0698-8 PubMed
169. Seago M., Shumaker P.R., Spring L.K., Alam M., Al-Niaimi F., Rox Anderson R. et al. Laser Treatment of Traumatic Scars and Contractures: 2020 International Consensus Recommendations. Lasers Surg. Med.. 2020 doi:10.1002/lsm.23201 PubMed
170. Tawfic S., Sayed S., Nada A., Manaa D., Shalaby S.. High- Versus Low-Density Fractional Laser in the Treatment of Hypertrophic Postburn Scars: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Dermatol. Surg.. 2020 doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002293 PubMed
171. Won T., Ma Q., Chen Z., Gao Z., Wu X., Zhang R.. The efficacy and safety of low-energy carbon dioxide fractional laser use in the treatment of early-stage pediatric hypertrophic scars: A prospective, randomized, split-scar study. Lasers Surg. Med.. 2022 doi:10.1002/lsm.23459 PubMed
172. Manuskiatti W., Kaewkes A., Yan C., Ng J.N., Glahn J.Z., Wanitphakdeedecha R.. Hypertrophic Scar Outcomes in Fractional Laser Monotherapy Versus Fractional Laser-Assisted Topical Corticosteroid Delivery: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Acta Derm. Venereol.. 2021 doi:10.2340/00015555-3781 PubMed
173. Babu P., Meethale Thiruvoth F., Chittoria R.K.. Intense pulsed light vs silicone gel sheet in the management of hypertrophic scars: An interventional comparative trial in the Indian population. J. Cosmet. Laser Ther.. 2019 doi:10.1080/14764172.2018.1525741 PubMed
174. Salem S.A.M., Abdel Hameed S.M., Mostafa A.E.. Intense pulsed light versus cryotherapy in the treatment of hypertrophic scars: A clinical and histopathological study. J. Cosmet. Derm.. 2021 doi:10.1111/jocd.13971 PubMed
175. Salameh F., Shumaker P.R., Goodman G.J., Spring L.K., Seago M., Alam M. et al. Energy-based devices for the treatment of Acne Scars: 2022 International consensus recommendations. Lasers Surg. Med.. 2022 doi:10.1002/lsm.23484 PubMed
176. Daoud A.A., Gianatasio C., Rudnick A., Michael M., Waibel J.. Efficacy of Combined Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) With Fractional CO. Lasers Surg. Med.. 2019 doi:10.1002/lsm.23092 PubMed
177. Waibel J.S., Wulkan A.J., Rudnick A., Daoud A.. Treatment of hypertrophic scars using laser-assisted corticosteroid versus laser-assisted 5-fluorouracil delivery. Dermatol. Surg.. 2019 doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001678 PubMed
178. Shin J., Cho J.T., Park S.I., Jung S.N.. Combination therapy using non-ablative fractional laser and intralesional triamcinolone injection for hypertrophic scars and keloids treatment. Int. Wound J.. 2019 doi:10.1111/iwj.13213 PubMed
179. Rasaii S., Sohrabian N., Gianfaldoni S., Hadibarhaghtalab M., Pazyar N., Bakhshaeekia A. et al. Intralesional triamcinolone alone or in combination with botulinium toxin A is ineffective for the treatment of formed keloid scar: A double blind controlled pilot study. Dermatol. Ther.. 2019 doi:10.1111/dth.12781 PubMed
180. Teplyi V., Grebchenko K.. THE USAGE OF RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION FOR TREATMENT OF KELOIDS AND HYPERTROPHIC SCARS. Probl. Radiac Med. Radiobiol.. 2019 doi:10.33145/2304-8336-2019-24-561-573 PubMed
181. Murphy A., LeVatte T., Boudreau C., Midgen C., Gratzer P., Marshall J. et al. Angiotensin II Type I Receptor Blockade Is Associated with Decreased Cutaneous Scar Formation in a Rat Model. Plast. Reconstr. Surg.. 2019 doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000006173 PubMed
182. Sobec R.L., Fodor L., Bodog F.. Topical Oxandrolone Reduces Ear Hypertrophic Scar Formation in Rabbits. Plast. Reconstr. Surg.. 2019 doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000005275 PubMed
183. Wang P., Gu L., Yang X., An Y., Bi H., Zhao Z. et al. Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor Reduces the Risk of Developing Hypertrophic Scars and Keloids following Median Sternotomy in Diabetic Patients: A Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Study Using the National Database of Health Insurance Claims of Japan. Plast. Reconstr. Surg.. 2021 doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000007935 PubMed
184. Dolynchuk K.N., Tredget E.E.. A Preliminary Report of the Biochemical and Clinical Effects of 1,4-Diaminobutane on Prevention of Human Hypertrophic Scars. Plast. Reconstr. Surg.. 2020 doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000006413 PubMed
185. Hoerst K., van den Broek L., Sachse C., Klein O., von Fritschen U., Gibbs S. et al. Regenerative potential of adipocytes in hypertrophic scars is mediated by myofibroblast reprogramming. J. Mol. Med.. 2019 doi:10.1007/s00109-019-01772-2 PubMed
186. Li H., Ziemer M., Stojanovic I., Saksida T., Maksimovic-Ivanic D., Mijatovic S. et al. Mesenchymal Stem Cells From Mouse Hair Follicles Reduce Hypertrophic Scarring in a Murine Wound Healing Model. Stem Cell Rev. Rep.. 2022 doi:10.1007/s12015-021-10288-7 PubMed
187. Joo S.Y., Cho Y.S., Lee S.Y., Seo C.H.. Regenerative effect of combined laser and human stem cell-conditioned medium therapy on hypertrophic burn scar. Burns doi:10.1016/j.burns.2022.06.007 PubMed
188. Dai Z., Lou X., Shen T., Sun Y., Xiao Y., Zheng X. et al. Combination of ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser and platelet-rich plasma treatment to improve hypertrophic scars: A retrospective clinical observational study. Burn. Trauma. 2021 doi:10.1093/burnst/tkab016 PubMed
189. Ebrahimi Z., Alimohamadi Y., Janani M., Hejazi P., Kamali M., Goodarzi A.. Platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of scars, to suggest or not to suggest? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Tissue Eng. Regen. Med.. 2022 doi:10.1002/term.3338 PubMed
190. Kurachi I., Kurita E., Takushima A., Suga H.. Human CD206+ Macrophages Show Antifibrotic Effects on Human Fibroblasts through an IL-6-Dependent Mechanism In Vitro. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021 doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000007563 PubMed
191. Kanno E., Tanno H., Masaki A., Sasaki A., Sato N., Goto M. et al. Defect of interferon γ leads to impaired wound healing through prolonged neutrophilic inflammatory response and enhanced MMP-2 activation. Int. J. Mol. Sci.. 2019 doi:10.3390/ijms20225657 PubMed