Journal of

---

Background and Aim: Hypertrophic scars are highly resistant to the treatment and have a high recurrence rate. Affected patients suffer from aesthetic and functional complications, which may influence their quality of life. Nowadays, various therapeutic modalities have been used in the treatment of hypertrophic scars, but patients' problems remain because of high recurrence rate. This study evaluated the efficacy of intralesional injection of botulinum toxin A in the treatment of hypertrophic scar lesions.

Methods: This randomised controlled trial was performed during 2014 and 2015. Each patient`s lesion was randomly allocated in ine of the two arms of the study: one half of the lesion received monthly 8 IU/cm³ of 200 IU/ml intralesional botulinum toxin A (Dysport, Ipsen Biopharma Ltd., UK) and the other half was injected with the same volume of normal saline. Injections were repeated three times. After 9 months, lesions were evaluated according to Vancouver scar scale.

Results: Twenty-one patients with a mean age of 27.2 years completed the study. In the intervention the mean lesions` pigmentation scale decrease to 0.73, vascularity to 0.9 and pliability to 0.98 (P<0.01), but there was no significant change in lesions height (P=0.32).

Conclusion: It seems that injection of botulinum toxin A in hypertrophic scar lesions acts as useful adjuvant for other treatment methods.

---

Background and Aim: Skin wrinkles are typically the result of aging process. Botulinum toxin injection is a method that has many applicants. This study was performed to determine the personality disorders individuals who requested to inject botulinum toxin to improve facial wrinkles.

Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed on women and men with facial wrinkles who were referred for botulinum toxin injection to laser clinic of Yazd in 2016. The Millon questionnaire was used to determine the personality disorders. Finally, the data were analyzed by using SPSS 22 software and descriptive statistical tests.

Results: 51 individuals participated in this study with a mean age of 35.9±9.5 years. The highest frequencies were in the age group under 35 years old with 26 (51%), females with 45 (88.2%), Bachelor's degree and above with 31 (60.8%) and married status with 35 (68.6% individuals). Obsessive-compulsive disorder with frequency of 7 (13.7%) and dramatic personality trait with frequency of 6 (11.8%) were the most common disorders after normal condition. The influence of factors such as age, sex, education and marital status were not significant in the prevalence of personality disorders.

Conclusion: Most individuals who requested botulinum toxin injection had a normal psychiatric condition followed by obsessive-compulsive disorder and dramatic personality trait. This indicates the importance of beauty in the social status of the individuals which forces them to remove wrinkles for a more effective presence in the community.

---

Background and aim: As the use of botulinum toxin to treat glabellar lines increases, particularly in Iran, where foreign products (e.g. Dysport) are relatively expensive, it becomes important to compare the efficacy, side effects, and duration of action of two locally produced botulinum toxin brands, Masport® and Dyston®. This study seeks to assess and compare the treatment results of these two medications.
 

Methods: In this cross-sectional, descriptive, retrospective study, the medical records of 81 patients who visited Razi Dermatology Hospital for the treatment of moderate to severe glabellar lines were reviewed. Data related to patient satisfaction, duration of action, and side effects of Masport® and Dyston® botulinum toxin were collected and analyzed via a questionnaire.
 

Results: The mean satisfaction score was 7 for the Dyston® group and 7.7 for the Masport® group, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P=0.142). Additionally, the mean duration of action was 3.5 months for Dyston® and 3.8 months for Masport®, with no significant difference observed. Headache was the most common side effect reported, with no other major adverse events noted. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of side effects between the two groups.
 

Conclusion: The findings of this study indicate that both Dyston® and Masport® have similar efficacy and safety profiles. The choice between them can be primarily based on cost and patient or physician preference rather than any significant therapeutic differences. Larger studies are recommended to further validate these findings.