Elham Behrangi; Azadeh Goodarzi; Mohamadreza Ghasemi; Fatemeh Zahra Mohamadi; Parvaneh Hassani; Reza Gharajeh; Zahra Azizian
Abstract
Background: Acne scarring can significantly affect patients’ quality of life, particularly when it involves the face. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of microneedling with and without platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus fractional CO2 laser therapy in treating acne scarring.Methods: This ...
Read More
Background: Acne scarring can significantly affect patients’ quality of life, particularly when it involves the face. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of microneedling with and without platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus fractional CO2 laser therapy in treating acne scarring.Methods: This randomized clinical study was performed on 90 patients with acne scarring. All the patients were divided into three groups (n = 30 per each): group A received microneedling, group B received microneedling plus PRP, and group C was treated by fractional CO2 laser. Each patient underwent three treatment sessions across three week intervals. The severity and depth of acne scars were graded using Goodman and Baron’s scale and Visio Face systems, respectively.Results: Out of 90 patients, 30 in group A, 22 in group B, and 26 in group C completed the trial. Analysis was done based on the per-protocol method on a total of 78 patients. Regarding the severity of acne scarring, significantly better results were obtained for groups A and B than for group C (P ≤ 0.001), while no meaningful difference was seen between groups A and B. Also, there was a significant difference between group B and other groups in terms of patients’ satisfaction (P = 0.04). The Visio Face systems showed that the depth of acne scars in group B had better improvement than in other groups (P = 0.02).Conclusion: Microneedling plus PRP led to the most patient satisfaction and highest improvement in acne scar depth. However, considering the fewer side effects and acceptable cost-benefit profile of microneedling alone compared with fractional CO2 laser or microneedling plus PRP, isolated microneedling could be considered the first choice for treating acne scars.
Balighi Kamran; Jamshidi Samaneh; Daneshpajooh Maryam; Lajevardi Vahideh; Aalami Harandi Sima; Ghassemi Hamed
Volume 14, Issue 3 , 2011, , Pages 95-99
Abstract
Background: Treatment of acne scars is a therapeutic challenge that may require multiple modalities. Subcision is a procedure that has been reported to be beneficial in the treatment of acne scars. Although subcision is a valuable method, its efficacy is mild to moderate due to the high recurrence rate. ...
Read More
Background: Treatment of acne scars is a therapeutic challenge that may require multiple modalities. Subcision is a procedure that has been reported to be beneficial in the treatment of acne scars. Although subcision is a valuable method, its efficacy is mild to moderate due to the high recurrence rate. This study aimed to evaluate the novel complementary treatment of repeated suction sessions plus subcision at the recurrence period of subcised scars. Methods: The standard technique of subcision was applied to treat scars in 12 patients; then, one side of the face underwent repeated suctioning for 2 weeks. All patients completed treatment and the follow-up period. The patients’ and investigators’ assessments of improvement were both recorded. Results: According to patients and investigators, subcision plus suction showed 81% and 65% improvement after 3 month, respectively. Subcision alone, after 3 month, was associated with 62% and 33.3% improvement according to patients and investigators, respectively. The rate of response showed a significant difference with the use of repeated suctioning. The side-effects of local edema and bruising were all transient. Conclusion: Subcision plus frequent suctioning at the recurrence period of subcision appears to be a safe technique that increases the efficacy of subcision without considerable complications.