The authors conducted a prospective study of fractional CO2 laser treatment of mature burn scars, comparing objective and subjective scar measurements evaluating at least one treatment and one control scar on the same patient pre- and post treatments. After institutional review board approval, burn survivors with mature blatant burn scars were invited to enter the study. A series of three fractional CO2 laser treatments was performed in an office setting, using topical anesthetic cream, at 40 to 90 mJ, 100 to 150 spots per cm(2). Subjective and objective measurements of scar physiology and appearance were performed before and at least 1 month after the treatment series on both the treated and the control scar. A total of 80 scars, 48 treatment and 32 control scars, were included in the study. Treatment pain score averaged at 4.7/10 during and at 2.4/10 5 minutes after the treatment. All treated scars showed improvement. Objectively measured thickness, sensation, erythema, and pigmentation improved significantly in the treated scars (P = .001, .001, .004, and .001). Elasticity improved, but without statistical significance. Vancouver scar scale assessments by an independent observer improved from 8 to 6; patient self-reported pain and pruritus remained unchanged in both groups. Fractional CO2 laser treatment is a promising entity in the treatment of burn scars. Our study results show significant differences in objective measurements between the treated scars and the untreated control scars over the same time period. In scar treatment studies, the patient/observer and Vancouver scar scales may not be sensitive enough to detect outcome differences.

Burn scars show significant differences in structure, pigment, and hair density/sparsity from unburned skin, yet no formal documentation of these changes can be found in the literature. Evaluation of these differences is essential to assessing future intervention outcomes. The study was a prospective controlled clinical trial. Included were 19 adult burn survivors (18–63 years old, average age 47; 15 male, 4 female, 14 Caucasian, 2 African American, 1 Hispanic; 11 flame burns, 5 scald burns, 2 grease burns and 1 electrical burn, 2%–60% TBSA) with conspicuous, mature scars. All study subjects had either skin-grafted or nongrafted scars, as well as healthy skin in the same body area, to control for intraindividual variability. All scars were at least 9 months old and at a minimum 2 × 2 cm2 in size. On each individual, at least one nongrafted scar or one grafted scar and healthy skin was imaged with a high-definition ultrasound device (Longport, Inc., Glen Mills, PA, 35MHz probe, 1500 m/s). Vancouver scar scale was assessed. Although scarred skin had significantly fewer follicles than healthy skin in both grafted (P < .0001) and un-grafted sites (P = .0090), there were even significantly fewer follicles in grafted scars than un-grafted scars (P = .0095). In thickness of the sub-epidermal layer, there was no difference between grafted and un-grafted scars (P = .1900). Both kinds of scars had a significantly thicker sub-epidermal layer than healthy skin (P = .0010). Vancouver scar scale was 7.4 for grafted and 4.6 for nongrafted scars with grafted flame burn scars ranging higher than all others (5–11). There was no discomfort during the imaging, and no adverse events occurred during the study period. Our study demonstrates two clear morphologic differences between scars and healthy skin: thickness of the sub-epidermal layer and hair follicle density. Grafted burn scars were shown to contain fewer hair follicles than un-grafted scars.

The purpose of this study was to determine, in principle, whether microdermabrasion can alter waffle-pattern (meshed split-thickness skin graft) burn scars after scar maturation. Matured waffle-pattern mesh-graft scars were treated with multiple microdermabrasion sessions over the course of a year (maximum 20). Before and after treatment, the treated scars and the control scar on the same patient were assessed with subjective and objective scar assessment tools (scar scales, cutometer [elasticity], laser Doppler flowmeter [vascularity], Semmes-Weinstein filaments [sensation], and high-resolution ultrasound [thickness]). The treatment resulted in continuous improvement of some physiologic skin functions like perfusion response (feedback), thickness, and elasticity when compared with nontreated scar, although no statistical significance was reached. Both Vancouver scar scale and patient assessment scales showed significant improvement. The study showed that even mature waffle pattern scars can be modified by minimally invasive interventions. Larger study groups and more economic treatment modalities need to be studied in the future.