Background Hypertrophic scars cause aesthetic concerns and negatively affect the quality of life. A gold standard treatment for hypertrophic scars has not been established due to various responses of modalities. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) is a noninvasive and affects scar remodeling by fibroblast regulation. This study investigated the effectiveness of ESWT for hypertrophic scars. Methods Twenty-nine patients were enrolled. All patients underwent ESWT once a week for 6 consecutive weeks. Their scars were assessed using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), erythema index, melanin index, and scar pliability before treatment and again 4 weeks after treatment completion. Results Thirty-four hypertrophic scars in this study had persisted for between 6 months and 30 years. Most scars developed after surgical incision (55.88%). The chest and upper extremities were the predominant areas of occurrence (35.29% each). Most of the POSAS subscales and total scores were significantly improved 4 weeks after treatment (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the pain, itching, and pigmentation subscale were improved. The pliability, melanin index, and erythema index were also improved, but without significance. The patients were satisfied with the results and symptoms alleviation, although subjective score changes were insignificant. No serious adverse events were found. The patients reported pruritus in 62.5% and good pain tolerance in 37.5%. Subgroup analyses found no differences in scar etiologies or properties at different parts of the body. Conclusion The ESWT is a modality for hypertrophic scar treatment with promising results. Most of POSAS subscales were significantly improved.

Background: Seborrhea leads to facial greasiness and unpleasant feeling. People with seborrhea also have trouble with selecting moisturizers. l‐Carnitine and epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) are reported anti‐sebum properties. However, neither efficacy comparison nor the combination effect of the two topical anti‐sebum agents was studied. Moisturizing cream with these agents is supposed to provide skin with an optimal water–oil balance.Aims: To compare the efficacy of moisturizer containing 2% l‐carnitine or 5% EGCG alone on sebum controlling, and the synergistic effect of these two agents.Methods: Three study creams were formulated by adding three kinds of anti‐sebum agents which were 2% l‐carnitine, 5% EGCG, and 2% l‐carnitine plus 5% EGCG in moisturizing cream base of dimethicone and glycerin. A randomized clinical trial was conducted. Ninety subjects, divided into three groups, applied the cream for 4 weeks. Sebum level, skin capacitance, and transepidermal water loss (TEWL) were evaluated at Weeks 0, 1, 2, and 4. Life qualities and subjective outcomes were assessed before and after treatment.Results: The mean sebum reduction from baseline was statistically significant in all treatment groups (p < 0.01). The median time to oil control was longer in l‐carnitine group. The combine group had significantly greater anti‐sebum efficacy than l‐carnitine group (p = 0.009). All three groups had significant improvement of other objective parameters and subjective outcomes.Conclusions: The anti‐sebum moisturizing cream exhibited beneficial effect on the sebum reduction with improve skin hydration in people with seborrhea and made users satisfied. The EGCG group and the combine group show the greater anti‐sebum effect than the l‐carnitine group.

Background: Seborrheic dermatitis is a chronic, relapsing inflammatory condition requiring acute and maintenance treatment. Ectoine, a natural extremolyte with barrier-supportive and anti-inflammatory properties, offers a potential non-steroidal option. Methods: In this double-blind randomized controlled trial, 40 participants received 7% ectoine or 1% hydrocortisone cream twice daily for up to 4 weeks. Responders entered a 12-week maintenance phase and were re-randomized to ectoine or placebo. Outcomes included change in Seborrheic Dermatitis Area and Severity Index (SEDASI) from baseline, Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA), remission and relapse rates, time to relapse, and adverse events. Results: SEDASI decreased from baseline in both groups. The reduction was larger with hydrocortisone, but the between-group mean difference at Week 4 was −2.01 (95% CI, −4.81 to 0.78; p = 0.151). Median time to relapse was 56 versus 28 days with ectoine and placebo, respectively (log-rank p = 0.066). Adverse events were mild. Conclusions: Overall, 7% Ectoine reduced disease severity during the acute phase, though numerically less than 1% hydrocortisone; the non-significant difference does not exclude a clinically relevant advantage of hydrocortisone. Ectoine showed a non-significant trend toward longer time to relapse.