Joris van Dongen

152 Chapter 7 Table 1a. Clinical studies on lipofilling to improve scar appearance. Reference Study type Study population Intervention Balkin et al. 2014 Retrospective, controlled Patients with cleft lip repair (n=30, 37 sides). Immediately treated. Intervention: submucosal, subcutaneous, intra-muscular and periosteal lipofilling (n=20) Control: no lipofilling treatment (n=10) Benjamin et al. 2015 Case-report 1 Patient with scarring of the lower extremity after trauma. Intervention: subcutaneous lipofilling (2 interventions) Bollero et al. 2014 Prospective, non-controlled, non-blinded, non- randomized Patients with scars after trauma (n=19). Intervention: subscar lipofilling (28 interventions) Bruno et al. 2013 Prospective, controlled, non-blinded, non- randomized Patients with burn wound scars (n=93 scars). Mean scar age of 2.3 years. Intervention: intra- and subscar lipofilling (n=93) Control: saline injection (n=93) Byrne et al. 2015 Retrospective, non-controlled Patients with burn wounds scars of hand (n=13). Mean scar age of 2.3 years. Intervention: subdermal lipofilling Coleman 2006 Case-report 1 patient with chronic acne scars. Intervention: subdermal lipofilling Guisantes et al. 2012 Cases-report Patients with retractile and dystrophic scars (n=8) Intervention: intrascar lipofilling depending on treated area (11 interventions) Klinger et al. 2008 Cases-report Patients with scars as a result of hemifacial 2nd and 3d degree burns (n=3). Scar age of 2, 3 and 13 years. Intervention: dermal-hypodermal junction lipofilling (2 interventions per patient) Maione et al. 2014 Prospective, controlled, non-blinded, non- randomized Patients with short-limb deformity syndrome presented retractile and painful scars (age >1 year) caused by surgical procedures (n=36). Intervention: dermal-hypodermal junction lipofilling (n=36) Control: saline injection (n=36)