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 fractional microneedling radiofrequency and bipolar radiofrequency on acne and acne scar and investigation of mechanism: comparative randomized controlled clinical trial
Fractional microneedling radiofrequency ( FMR ) is one of the promising methods in acne treatment . Moreover , bipolar radiofrequency ( BR ) generates heat thereby which induces neocollagenosis . FMR may have the potential to be a safe and effective treatment for the patients both with acne and acne scar . This study was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of FMR and BR in acne and acne scar treatment . Furthermore , mechanism of the FMR treatment was investigated through skin tissues obtained from subjects . Twenty subjects with mild-to-moderate acne and acne scars were treated in a split-face manner with FMR and BR . Two sessions of treatment was done 4 weeks apart in a total 12-week prospect i ve single-blind , r and omized clinical trial . Clinical assessment and sebum measurement were carried out for the evaluation of efficacy and safety . Skin tissues were acquired for investigation of molecular changes . FMR was more effective for acne scar especially in icepick and boxcar scar compared to BR . Both inflammatory and non-inflammatory acne lesions decreased by 80 and 65 % in the FMR-treated side at the final visit of 12 weeks , respectively . FMR treatment result ed in significant reduction of sebum excretion . Both treatments showed no severe adverse effects other than erythema . The FMR showed superior efficacy in acne and acne scar compared with BR . Increased expression of TGFβ and collagen I and decreased expression of NF-κB , IL-8 are suggested to involve in the improvement of acne scar and acne lesion by FMR
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 .