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 can not 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 .
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 .
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 .
Comparison of a 1,550 nm Erbium: glass fractional laser and a chemical reconstruction of skin scars (CROSS) method in the treatment of acne scars: a simultaneous split-face trial.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Acne scarring is a common complication of acne but no effective single treatment modality has been developed . To compare the efficacy of 1,550 nm Er : Glass fractional laser and chemical reconstruction of skin scar ( CROSS ) method in the treatment of acne scars . STUDY DESIGN / MATERIAL S AND METHODS A split-face trial was conducted in 20 patients ( 10 rolling , 10 icepick types ) with acne scars . One side was treated with the 1,550 nm Er : Glass fractional laser three times with a 6-week interval . And the other side was treated with CROSS method two times every 12 weeks . RESULTS Significant improvement was observed in both sides of the face . In rolling type , the objective and subjective improvement rates were significantly higher in the sides treated with laser than CROSS method . However , in icepick type , there were no statistically significant differences between the two treatment sides . In the laser sides , grade s of pain were significantly higher than that of treated with CROSS method . However , downtimes and lasting days of erythema were significantly longer in the sides treated with CROSS method . CONCLUSION A 1,550 nm Er : Glass fractional laser and CROSS method are both well-tolerated and effective treatment options in the acne scars . However , there was a relatively small difference between the two treatment modalities . Therefore , dermatologists should consider the acne scar type to select the treatment options . Lasers Surg . Med . 41:545 - 549 , 2009 . ( c ) 2009 Wiley-Liss ,
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 can not 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 .
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 .
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 .