Treatment of acne scars with fractional CO2 laser at 1-month versus 3-month intervals: an intra-individual randomized controlled trial

Advancements in Acne Scar Treatment: Exploring Novel Therapies

BACKGROUND

Acne-induced scarring remains a formidable challenge, compelling patients to explore surgical interventions. This study aims to delve into and showcase recent strides in acne scar treatment, with a specific focus on innovative therapies.

METHODS

Conducting a narrative review spanning studies from 2013 to 2023, this paper provides a general overview of interventions. The review included English-language studies with full-text availability. Rigorous data screening and extraction by two independent authors covered diverse facets, including study particulars, participant profiles, measurement tools, intervention durations, outcomes, and key findings. The initial search was performed within PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and the gray literature.

RESULTS

Ultimately, 26 studies meeting inclusion criteria were included and reviewed for final analysis.

CONCLUSION

Recognizing the varied nature of acne scars, this narrative review underscores the need for personalized treatment strategies, considering scar type and severity. The study also emphasizes the potential necessity of combining treatments for optimal results. Despite substantial progress, ongoing research and more extensive studies are imperative to continually refine acne scar treatment outcomes, ultimately enhancing the well-being of those affected by this condition.

An Assessment of Current Clinician- and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Acne Scarring and Dyspigmentation: A Scoping Review

Acne-associated scarring and dyspigmentation (ie, erythema, hyperpigmentation) are common sequelae with significant psychosocial impact, but little is known about what measures are most often used to assess these outcomes. This scoping review evaluates the use of current patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and clinician-reported outcome measures (ClinROMs) for acne scars and dyspigmentation. For scars, 7 PROMs and 18 ClinROMs were used, with most being unvalidated. Similarly, for dyspigmentation, 4 PROMs and 8 ClinROMs were identified, but no validated PROMs were identified. These results highlight reliance on unvalidated measures in research and clinical trials and suggest the need for developing high-quality validated measures, particularly PROMs, to improve research quality and develop better treatments.

Effect of CO2 fractional laser combined with recombinant human epidermal growth factor gel on skin barrier

To evaluate the impact of CO2 fractional laser combined with recombinant human epidermal growth factor (rhEGF) gel on skin barrier in acne scar patients. In a retrospective analysis, we examined 105 acne scar patients admitted between July 2018 and August 2021. Of these, 51 received only CO2 fractional laser (control group), while 54 underwent a combination of CO2 fractional laser and rhEGF gel (observation group). We assessed treatment efficacy, symptom relief, skin barrier parameters, pre- and posttreatment inflammatory factors, adverse reactions, posttreatment quality of life, and patient satisfaction. The observation group exhibited a higher overall response rate, significantly shorter wound healing, scab formation, and scab detachment times. Additionally, this group showed increased stratum corneum water content, decreased pH, and transdermal water loss (TEWL), and reduced hypersensitive C-reactive protein and interleukin-6 expression posttreatment. Quality of life scores were higher, with fewer adverse reactions and greater treatment satisfaction. Combining CO2 fractional laser with rhEGF gel markedly improves acne scar treatment efficacy, enhances skin barrier function, reduces inflammation, and elevates quality of life. Its safety profile supports its broader clinical adoption.

TFOS Lifestyle: Impact of cosmetics on the ocular surface

In this report the use of eye cosmetic products and procedures and how this represents a lifestyle challenge that may exacerbate or promote the development of ocular surface and adnexal disease is discussed. Multiple aspects of eye cosmetics are addressed, including their history and market value, psychological and social impacts, possible problems associated with cosmetic ingredients, products, and procedures, and regulations for eye cosmetic use. In addition, a systematic review that critically appraises randomized controlled trial evidence concerning the ocular effects of eyelash growth products is included. The findings of this systematic review highlight the evidence gaps and indicate future directions for research to focus on ocular surface outcomes associated with eyelash growth products.

Fractional CO2 -laser versus microneedle radiofrequency for acne scars: A randomized, single treatment, split-face trial

BACKGROUND

Ablative fractional CO₂ laser (AFL) is an established first-line energy-based treatment for acne scars. Microneedle radiofrequency (MNRF) is an emerging treatment, also targeting the skin in fractions. No studies have so far compared AFL with MNRF for acne scars in a direct controlled, side-by-side comparison. In this study, we compared AFL and MNRF treatments for acne scars in a randomized split-face trial with blinded response evaluation, objective measures, and patient-reported outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHOD

Fifteen patients with moderate to severe acne scars were included. At baseline each patient had two similar test areas identified, these were randomized to receive a single treatment with either AFL or MNRF. Standardized multilayer techniques were applied with AFL and MNRF, first targeting the scar base, thereafter the entire scar area. Outcome measures included blinded evaluation of clinical improvement of scar texture (0-10 scale) at 1- and 3-months follow-up, local skin reactions (LSR), pain according to Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), skin integrity quantified by transepidermal water loss, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients completed the study with a median test area size of 24.6 cm² (interquartile range [IQR] 14.9-40.6). A single treatment with AFL or MNRF equally resulted in a median 1-point texture improvement after 3 months follow-up (p < 0.001). Best responders achieved up to a 3-point improvement (n = 3 test areas, 10% of treatment areas). Erythema and loss of skin integrity was more intense after AFL compared with MNRF after 2-4 days (p < 0.001). Patients reported MNRF (VAS 7.0) to be significantly more painful than AFL (5.5) (p = 0.009). Patients were generally satisfied with the overall outcome on a 10-point scale at median 6 for both treatments (IQR 5-7).

CONCLUSION

AFL and MNRF treatments are equally effective at improving texture in skin with acne scars. AFL resulted in more pronounced LSRs whereas MNRF was more painful. Patients were generally satisfied with the overall outcome.

Research trends and hotspot analysis of fractional carbon dioxide laser: A bibliometric and visualized analysis via Citespace

INTRODUCTION

There is limited basic research on carbon dioxide (CO₂ ) fractional laser, indicating blind spots in CO₂ fractional laser treatment of certain diseases. This study aimed to organize previous literature, summarize the current research, and speculate on possible future development.

METHODS

We searched document data on fractional CO₂ lasers from the Web of Science core collection database and retrieved 928 articles from 2004 to 2021. CiteSpace software was used to analyze the main institutions, authors, subject hotspots, and research frontiers in global CO₂ fractional laser research.

RESULTS

The results revealed that 928 related papers were published in the past 18 years (2004-2021), and the number has increased annually. The publications were written by 3239 authors from 626 institutions in 60 countries/regions. The United States (US) dominates this field (312 documents), followed by Italy (289), and South Korea (88). Lasers in Surgery and Medicine is the journal with the most publications and citations, and Uebelhoer is the central author. The main research hotspots include vulvovaginal atrophy, fractional photothermolysis, keloids, drug delivery, gene expressions, facial acne scarring, resurfacing, vitiligo, and photo damage.

CONCLUSION

Using CiteSpace, this paper draws a map of authors, institutions, and keywords in fractional CO₂ laser from 2004 to 2021; summarizes the main authors, institutions, research hotspots, and cutting-edge topics of global fractional CO₂ laser technology in recent years; and summarizes the current application status of global fractional CO₂ laser in disease treatment. It also provides new ideas for the future application and research of fractional CO₂ lasers.

Controlling Inflammation Pre-Emptively or at the Time of Cutaneous Injury Optimises Outcome of Skin Scarring

Inflammation plays an active role during the wound healing process. There is a direct association between the extent of injury as well as inflammation and the amount of subsequent cutaneous scarring. Evidence to date demonstrates that high levels of inflammation are associated with excessive dermal scarring and formation of abnormal pathological scars such as keloids and hypertrophic scars. In view of the multiple important cell types being involved in the inflammatory process and their influence on the extent of scar formation, many scar therapies should aim to target these cells in order to control inflammation and by association help improve scar outcome. However, most current treatment strategies for the management of a newly formed skin scar often adopt a watch-and-wait approach prior to commencing targeted anti-inflammatory therapy. Moreover, most of these therapies have been evaluated in the remodelling phase of wound healing and the evaluation of anti-inflammatory treatments at earlier stages of healing have not been fully explored and remain limited. Taken together, in order to minimise the risk of developing a poor scar outcome, it is clear that adopting an early intervention prior to skin injury would be optimal, however, the concept of pre-emptively priming the skin prior to injury has not yet been thoroughly evaluated. Therefore, the aim of this review was to evaluate the available literature regarding scar therapies that aim to target inflammation which are commenced prior to when a scar is formed or immediately after injury, with a particular focus on the role of pre-emptive priming of skin prior to injury in order to control inflammation for the prevention of poor scarring outcome.

A systematic review of evaluating the efficacy of acne scar treatment by Fractional Laser with or without using adjunctive treatments

Fractional laser (FL) resurfacing has proved its effectiveness in acne scars treatments. To evaluate the efficacy of Fractional laser systems for treatment of acne scars as a monotherapy, and as adjunctive therapy with other treatment types. A systematic literature review was performed by searching the electronic databases PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase. Fractional laser has proven therapeutic efficacy of over 26% in treating acne scars, with minor and transient side effects, and well-tolerant pain. The application of PRP not only accelerated recovery and reduced adverse events, but also enhanced localized collagen neogenesis and redistribution. The addition of surgical treatments to Fractional Laser Systemes (FLS) therapy delivers the best treatment results for Icepick scars. Fractional laser is an effective tool for treating acne scars. The degree of effectiveness varies according to the laser parameters, the number of treatment sessions, skin photo type, the severity and the type of scars. The application of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) and Fractional Radiofrequency Microneedle (FRM) in addition to the FL treatment improves the therapeutic efficacy and reduces the appearance of Post Inflammatory Hyper-Pigmentation (PIH), and is the ideal treatment for dark-skinned patients. FL therapy along with surgical methods such as subsicion and punch techniques provided the best improvements for deep scars.

Comparative appraisal with meta-analysis of erbium vs. CO2 lasers for atrophic acne scars

Recent advances in laser technology allowed the development of systems that improve texture, appearance and pliability of skin in acne scars (AS). Currently, comprehensive comparative studies on the efficacy of the most commonly used fractional systems in AS are lacking. Thus, the aim of this work was to appraise and compare the clinical response to erbium versus CO₂ lasers in AS in the form of a meta-analysis. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library were searched. Main clinical outcomes were investigator-reported scar improvement and participant-reported scar improvement. Five studies were included in this meta-analysis. Scar improvement was similar for both types of laser in terms of investigator-reported scar improvement (RR: 0.60 95 % CI: 0.35-1.02) and participant-reported scar improvement (RR: 0.99 95 % CI: 0.79-1.25). A sensitivity analysis that excluded studies with high risk of bias found the CO₂ lasers to be superior to the erbium lasers (RR: 0.47 95 % CI: 0.24-0.93): However, the subgroup analysis showed the CO₂ laser not to be significantly different from either the non-ablative erbium (RR: 0.65 95 % CI: 0.34-1.24) or the ablative erbium laser (RR: 0.60 95 % CI: 0.35-1.02). The CO₂ laser produced a slightly greater clinical response compared to the erbium lasers based on the physician's assessment. Overall, the two devices do not differ largely in terms of efficacy but may be complementary, with each resurfacing laser better suited for different clinical tasks.

Identifying and appraising patient-reported outcome measures on treatment satisfaction in acne: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

After dermatitis, acne is the next skin disease to contribute most to the burden of skin diseases worldwide. Recently, seven core outcome domains have been identified, which together form an Acne Core Outcome Set (ACORN). One of these was satisfaction with acne treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To identify studies that described the development of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS), evaluated one or more measurement properties of a PROM, or evaluated the interpretability of a PROM in patients with acne regarding treatment satisfaction.

METHODS

The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) search strategy for identifying PROMS on acne treatment satisfaction was used. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, PsycINFO and Academic Search premier (June 2020). Study selection, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality according to COSMIN guidance were carried out independently by two authors.

RESULTS

Only one study could be included, describing the development of a treatment satisfaction measure in patients with acne. The development was assessed as inadequate and data on measurement properties were lacking. Additionally, we found 188 studies reporting treatment satisfaction solely as an outcome, using a wide variety of methods, none of them standardized or validated.

CONCLUSIONS

We could not find a PROM on treatment satisfaction to recommend for a core outcome set in acne. There is an unmet need for a PROM on treatment satisfaction in acne that is robustly developed, designed and validated.

Use of combined fractional carbon dioxide laser and fractional microneedle radiofrequency for the treatment of acne scars: A retrospective analysis of 1-month treatment outcome on scar severity and patient satisfaction

BACKGROUND

Acne scars lead to social and psychological problems for patients, and they should be treated effectively. Ablative and nonablative lasers have been used for the treatment of acne scars in recent years.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectivity of combined FCL and FmRF treatment for acne scars retrospectively.

METHODS

A total of 72 patients with acne scars who received FCL + FmRF treatment between 2014 and 2016 were included in this study. Photographs of patients before treatment and 1 month following the last treatment session were scored by two blinded researchers, according to the ECCA acne scar scoring method. Patients were contacted via telephone after 1 month following the last treatment and asked to evaluate their satisfaction with the treatment outcome using a 5-point Likert-type scale.

RESULTS

A significant decrease was noted in ECCA scores after the treatment along with temporary side effects. Change from pretreatment scores was significantly higher in patients very satisfied vs satisfied with treatment. The number of treatment sessions was positively correlated with treatment-related change in ECCA scores.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, our findings revealed association of FCL + FmRF treatment with significantly improved ECCA scores, mild pain experience, and low rate of side effects in patients with acne scars, despite usage of high-energy FLC dose and five sessions of treatment on average. More remarkable improvement in ECCA scores during treatment seems to be associated with higher patient satisfaction and to be more likely in patients with darker skin types.

Early treatment using fractional CO2 laser before skin suture during scar revision surgery in Asians

Fractional CO₂ laser is one of the most effective treatment options used to resurface scars. However, most previous studies have been performed on mature scars at least 2 months after surgery. Recent studies have emphasized the importance of early treatment to reduce scar formation. In the present study, we described our experience with fractional CO₂ laser intervention before skin suture during scar revision surgery in Asians, and found the treatment was safe and effective.

A systematic review of treatments for acne scarring. Part 2: Energy-based techniques

INTRODUCTION

Acne scarring is a very common problem, which can be extensive, and may lead to significant psychosocial morbidity. Multiple types of treatments are used to ameliorate atrophic scars with varying degrees of success. This paper provides an overview of the various energy-based modalities that are commonly employed against acne scarring.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of papers published since 2008 was performed in order to determine the efficacy and adverse reactions of commonly used energy-based treatments against post-acne scarring.

RESULTS

A total of 59 relevant articles were identified covering a multitude of different devices.

DISCUSSION

Ablative lasers seem to achieve the highest degree of efficacy, albeit this is associated with significant pain and downtime, and the risk for long-term pigmentary changes. Non-ablative fractional photothermolysis (FP) has a much safer profile but cannot achieve as good cosmetic results. The efficacies of fractional radiofrequency microneedling and radiofrequency are slightly inferior to that of FP but offer an even safer adverse profile. Little evidence is available on the remaining devices, with larger studies required in order to reach more solid conclusions.

CONCLUSION

Multiple devices have been used with varying levels of efficacy and very different safety profiles. There is an overall lack of high-quality evidence about the effects of different interventions. Furthermore, no standardised scale is available for acne scarring, leading to variability in evaluation and interpretation of data in different studies.

Fractional carbon dioxide laser for the treatment of facial atrophic acne scars: prospective clinical trial with short and long-term evaluation

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fractional carbon dioxide laser for the treatment of acne scars. Thirty-one participants, 15 female and 16 male, whose mean age was 34.84 ± 10.94 years, were included in this prospective study. The study took place between 2012 and 2016. Participants were evaluated with the "ECCA Grading Scale" before the first session, 3 months (short-term evaluation) and 3 years after the last session (long-term evaluation). Participants received two or three treatment sessions at 4-week intervals, with a 10,600 nm fractional carbon dioxide laser with pulse energies ranging between 100 and 160 mJ, 120 spot type, 75-100 spot/cm² density, and 30 W power. Self-assessments by the participants were done 3 months and 3 years after the last session. The mean ECCA score was 107.90 ± 39.38 before the first session, and 82.17 ± 36.23 at the time of short-term evaluation (p = 0.000). The grade of improvement at the short-term evaluation was as follows: no improvement, mild, moderate, and significant improvement for 7 (22.6%), 11 (35.5%), 9 (29%), and 4 (12.9%) of the participants, respectively. Regarding self-assessments, 80.6 and 61.3% of the participants rated themselves as having at least mild improvement at the short-term and the long-term follow-up periods, respectively. The results of this study suggest that fractional carbon dioxide laser is an efficient treatment option for acne scars. Furthermore, self-assessment results show that more than half of the participants still experience at least mild improvement at the end of 3 years.

Treatment of Facial Acne Scarring With Fractional Carbon Dioxide Laser in Asians, a Retrospective Analysis of Efficacy and Complications

BACKGROUND

Fractional carbon dioxide (CO2) laser resurfacing unites the idea of fractional photothermolysis with an ablative 10,600-nm wavelength. This technology permits effective treatment of acne scarring, with shorter recovery and a decreased side effect profile as compared to traditional CO2 laser resurfacing.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to study the efficacy and safety of fractional CO2 laser for acne scars in Asian patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of all patients treated with the fractional CO2 laser for facial acne scarring between January 2, 2008, and December 31, 2010, at the National Skin Centre, Singapore. Data reviewed included sex, age, and severity of acne, type of scarring, previous treatment history, frequency of treatments, adverse events, and efficacy.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ten fractional CO2 laser treatments for facial acne scars were performed on 107 patients (65 men and 42 women, Fitzpatrick skin Types II to V) during the study period. Sixteen of 107 patients experienced (15.0%) adverse events. The adverse events include hyperpigmentation (6.4%), blistering (4.0%), crusting (2.9%), aggravation of inflammatory acne lesions (1.7%), and scarring (0.6%). There were no reported side effects of hypopigmentation, bacterial or viral infection. Follow-up results after final laser treatment showed that 66.4% of patients reported Grade 1 skin texture improvement, that is, <25% (n = 71); 30.0% had Grade 2 improvement, that is, 25% to 50% improvement (n = 31); 3.7% had Grade 3 improvement, that is, 51% to 75% improvement (n = 4); and 0.9% had Grade 4 improvement, that is, >75% improvement (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrated the efficacy and safety of a fractional CO2 laser in the treatment of acne scars in Asian. Future studies are required to establish optimum treatment parameters and achieve better clinical results.

Lasers and ancillary treatments for scar management Part 2: Keloid, hypertrophic, pigmented and acne scars

The formation of a wide range of excessive scars following various skin injuries is a natural consequence of healing. Scars resulting from surgery or trauma affect approximately 100 million people per annum in the developed world and can have profound physical, aesthetic, psychological and social consequences. Thus, scar treatment is a priority for patient and physician alike. Laser treatment plays an important role in scar management with additional support from ancillary modalities. Subsequent to part 1: Burns scars, part 2 focuses on our strategies and literature review of treatment of keloid, hypertrophic, pigmented and acne scars where lasers are used in conjunction with other measures, and illustrated with case studies.

Interventions for acne scars

BACKGROUND

Acne scarring is a frequent complication of acne and resulting scars may negatively impact on an affected person's psychosocial and physical well-being. Although a wide range of interventions have been proposed, there is a lack of high-quality evidence on treatments for acne scars to better inform patients and their healthcare providers about the most effective and safe methods of managing this condition. This review aimed to examine treatments for atrophic and hypertrophic acne scars, but we have concentrated on facial atrophic scarring.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions for treating acne scars.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to November 2015: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library (2015, Issue 10), MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974), and LILACS (from 1982). We also searched five trials registers, and checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews for further references to randomised controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which allocated participants (whether split-face or parallel arms) to any active intervention (or a combination) for treating acne scars. We excluded studies dealing only or mostly with keloid scars.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently extracted data from each of the studies included in this review and evaluated the risks of bias. We resolved disagreements by discussion and arbitration supported by a method expert as required. Our primary outcomes were participant-reported scar improvement and any adverse effects serious enough to cause participants to withdraw from the study.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 trials with 789 adult participants aged 18 years or older. Twenty trials enrolled men and women, three trials enrolled only women and one trial enrolled only men. We judged eight studies to be at low risk of bias for both sequence generation and allocation concealment. With regard to blinding we judged 17 studies to be at high risk of performance bias, because the participants and dermatologists were not blinded to the treatments administered or received; however, we judged all 24 trials to be at a low risk of detection bias for outcome assessment. We evaluated 14 comparisons of seven interventions and four combinations of interventions. Nine studies provided no usable data on our outcomes and did not contribute further to this review's results.For our outcome 'Participant-reported scar improvement' in one study fractional laser was more effective in producing scar improvement than non-fractional non-ablative laser at week 24 (risk ratio (RR) 4.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25 to 12.84; n = 64; very low-quality evidence); fractional laser showed comparable scar improvement to fractional radiofrequency in one study at week eight (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.68; n = 40; very low-quality evidence) and was comparable to combined chemical peeling with skin needling in a different study at week 48 (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.67; n = 26; very low-quality evidence). In a further study chemical peeling showed comparable scar improvement to combined chemical peeling with skin needling at week 32 (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.75; n = 20; very low-quality evidence). Chemical peeling in one study showed comparable scar improvement to skin needling at week four (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.83; n = 27; very low-quality evidence). In another study, injectable fillers provided better scar improvement compared to placebo at week 24 (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.59; n = 147 moderate-quality evidence).For our outcome 'Serious adverse effects' in one study chemical peeling was not tolerable in 7/43 (16%) participants (RR 5.45, 95% CI 0.33 to 90.14; n = 58; very low-quality evidence).For our secondary outcome 'Participant-reported short-term adverse events', all participants reported pain in the following studies: in one study comparing fractional laser to non-fractional non-ablative laser (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06; n = 64; very low-quality evidence); in another study comparing fractional laser to combined peeling plus needling (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.16; n = 25; very low-quality evidence); in a study comparing chemical peeling plus needling to chemical peeling (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.20; n = 20; very low-quality evidence); in a study comparing chemical peeling to skin needling (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.15; n = 27; very low-quality evidence); and also in a study comparing injectable filler and placebo (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.10 to 11.10; n = 147; low-quality evidence).For our outcome 'Investigator-assessed short-term adverse events', fractional laser (6/32) was associated with a reduced risk of hyperpigmentation than non-fractional non-ablative laser (10/32) in one study (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.45; n = 64; very low-quality evidence); chemical peeling was associated with increased risk of hyperpigmentation (6/12) compared to skin needling (0/15) in one study (RR 16.00, 95% CI 0.99 to 258.36; n = 27; low-quality evidence). There was no difference in the reported adverse events with injectable filler (17/97) compared to placebo (13/50) (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.27; n = 147; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of high-quality evidence about the effects of different interventions for treating acne scars because of poor methodology, underpowered studies, lack of standardised improvement assessments, and different baseline variables.There is moderate-quality evidence that injectable filler might be effective for treating atrophic acne scars; however, no studies have assessed long-term effects, the longest follow-up being 48 weeks in one study only. Other studies included active comparators, but in the absence of studies that establish efficacy compared to placebo or sham interventions, it is possible that finding no evidence of difference between two active treatments could mean that neither approach works. The results of this review do not provide support for the first-line use of any intervention in the treatment of acne scars.Although our aim was to identify important gaps for further primary research, it might be that placebo and or sham trials are needed to establish whether any of the active treatments produce meaningful patient benefits over the long term.

Comparison of four different lasers for acne scars: Resurfacing and fractional lasers

BACKGROUND

Acne scars are common and cause cosmetic problems. There is a multitude of treatment options for acne scars, including dermabrasion, chemical peeling, and fillers, but the advent of laser technology has greatly improved the treatment of acne scars. Although several laser systems are available, studies comparing their efficacy are limited. This study compares the results of treatments using resurfacing (carbon dioxide, CO2; erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet, Er:YAG) versus fractional (nonablative fractional laser, NAFL; ablative fractional laser, AFL) lasers.

METHODS

A retrospective photographic analysis of 58 patients who underwent laser treatment for facial atrophic acne scars was performed. Clinical improvement was assessed by six blinded investigators with a scale graded from 0 to 10. Adverse events were also noted.

RESULTS

Mean improvement scores of the CO2, Er:YAG, NAFL, and AFL groups were 6.0, 5.8, 2.2, and 5.2, respectively. The NAFL group showed a significantly lower score than the other groups. The mean number of treatments was significantly greater in the fractional laser groups than in the resurfacing laser groups. The resurfacing laser groups had a prolonged recovery period and high risk of complications. The Er:YAG laser caused less erythema or pigmentation compared to the CO2 laser.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the CO2 laser, Er:YAG laser, and AFL improved the acne scars, the CO2 laser had a greater downtime. Three consecutive AFL treatments are as effective as a single treatment with resurfacing lasers, with shorter social downtime periods and less adverse effects.

Efficacy of Punch Elevation Combined with Fractional Carbon Dioxide Laser Resurfacing in Facial Atrophic Acne Scarring: A Randomized Split-face Clinical Study

Background:

A number of treatments for reducing the appearance of acne scars are available, but general guidelines for optimizing acne scar treatment do not exist. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness and side effects of fractional carbon dioxide (CO₂) laser resurfacing combined with punch elevation with fractional CO₂ laser resurfacing alone in the treatment of atrophic acne scars.

Materials and Methods:

Forty-two Iranian subjects (age range 18–55) with Fitzpatrick skin types III to IV and moderate to severe atrophic acne scars on both cheeks received randomized split-face treatments: One side received fractional CO₂ laser treatment and the other received one session of punch elevation combined with two sessions of laser fractional CO₂ laser treatment, separated by an interval of 1 month. Two dermatologists independently evaluated improvement in acne scars 4 and 16 weeks after the last treatment. Side effects were also recorded after each treatment.

Results:

The mean ± SD age of patients was 23.4 ± 2.6 years. Clinical improvement of facial acne scarring was assessed by two dermatologists blinded to treatment conditions. No significant difference in evaluation was observed 1 month after treatment (P = 0.56). Their evaluation found that fractional CO₂ laser treatment combined with punch elevation had greater efficacy than that with fractional CO₂ laser treatment alone, assessed 4 months after treatment (P = 0.02). Among all side effects, coagulated crust formation and pruritus at day 3 after fractional CO₂ laser treatment was significant on both treatment sides (P < 0.05).

Conclusion:

Concurrent use of fractional laser skin resurfacing with punch elevation offers a safe and effective approach for the treatment of acne scarring.

Acne scarring: A review of available therapeutic lasers

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The utilization of lasers in dermatology has greatly expanded in recent decades. Acne scarring is a common indication in which lasers play an important therapeutic role.

STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS

Available lasers include traditional ablative lasers, such as carbon dioxide and erbium lasers, traditional non-ablative lasers, such as neodymium, diode, alexandrite, pulsed dye lasers and intense pulse light, as well as both ablative, and non-ablative fractional laser systems.

CONCLUSION

We sought to provide a framework for understanding the various types of lasers available to treat acne scars and review the primary literature pertaining to the efficacy, safety, and advantages of each laser discussed.