A split-face comparative study to evaluate efficacy of combined subcision and dermaroller against combined subcision and cryoroller in treatment of acne scars

A Split Face Comparative Interventional Study to Evaluate the Efficacy of Fractional Carbon Dioxide Laser against Combined use of Fractional Carbon Dioxide Laser and Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Acne Scars

Background

Fractional carbon dioxide laser (FCL) is an established treatment option for acne scars, but use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as an adjuvant still requires elaborate studies.

Aim

To compare the efficacy and safety of FCL alone and combined use of FCL with PRP in the treatment of acne scars.

Materials and Methods

This was a split-face (right-left) comparative study including 32 patients with moderate to severe acne scars. The patients underwent three sessions of FCL along with PRP and FCL alone on right and left sides of the face, respectively, at an interval of 6 weeks. Goodman and Baron qualitative and quantitative scores were used for the evaluation of results along with visual analog scale (VAS) for patient satisfaction and physician assessment of scars. Adverse effects following the procedure were also evaluated and compared.

Results

There was significant improvement of scars over both sides of the face, but the difference between right and left sides was not statistically significant according to Goodman and Baron qualitative (p 0.9115) and quantitative score (p 0.6957). On assessing VAS score, patients were more satisfied with the right side, but the values were not statistically significant (p 0.8571). Physician assessment grading showed comparable results over both the sides (p 1). There was no difference in adverse effects between both sides of the face.

Conclusions

Inclusion of intradermal PRP to FCL did not produce any statistically significant synergistic effects in the treatment of acne scars.

Subcision in acne scarring: A review of clinical trials

Post-acne scarring is the most common permanent consequence of acne vulgaris. Subcision is an intervention in which a needle or blunt cannula is inserted under the scar and moved back and forth to cut fibrotic strands and form new connective tissue, thereby elevating the atrophic scars. In this study, we reviewed the efficacy and adverse effects of different subcision techniques alone or in combination with other modalities to manage acne scars. The terms (subcision), (subcision AND acne scar), and (subcision AND scar) were searched in PubMed and Google Scholar. We included all available reports on clinical trials written in English and published before June 2022. A total of 16 relevant articles were identified after reviewing the abstracts and full texts. Four articles compared blunt cannula-based subcision as a modified technique with needle-based subcision as a conventional method, while the others investigated the combination of subcision with other modalities. According to our findings, subcision is a safe and effective method for treating atrophic acne scars. Needle-based subcision and cannula-based subcision offer comparable efficacy, with the latter causing fewer side effects and inducing greater patient satisfaction. Combining subcision with the application of autologous tissues (platelet gel) or artificial materials (hyaluronic acid gels and threads) as fillers can improve outcomes and prevent the re-depressing of scars, as can its combination with frequent suctioning. Combinations with microneedling or fractionated microneedle radiofrequency have also been safe and effective. We conclude that modifications of the subcision procedure lessen its side effects, and combination therapies improve its efficacy.

Subcision for Atrophic Acne Scarring: A Comprehensive Review of Surgical Instruments and Combinatorial Treatments

Subcutaneous incisionless surgery, also known as subcision, is a minimally invasive procedure that is commonly indicated for the treatment of atrophic acne scars. In recent years, many new techniques have been developed to maximize results from this procedure. This review article aims to identify an updated list of instruments and combinatorial treatments available for atrophic acne scar patients undergoing subcision. We constructed a comprehensive PubMed search term and performed triple-blinded screening on all resulting studies for mentions of subcision as indicated by acne scarring. Our results show that there are four main categories of subcision tools that are commonly employed to treat atrophic acne scars: needles, cannulas, wires, and blunt-blade instruments. Usage of these devices varies by scar depth, personal preference, and combinatorial treatment options. Overall, subcision is a particularly effective treatment for atrophic acne scars, and there is vast potential for further innovation with this technique.

A Comprehensive Review of Non-Energy-Based Treatments for Atrophic Acne Scarring

Scarring is a dire consequence of acne vulgaris. Particularly, atrophic acne scarring is highly prevalent among young adults, and its physical and psychological effects can persist throughout their lives if left untreated. This literature review will analyze various non-energy-based approaches to treating atrophic acne scarring, emphasizing recent advances within the last 5 to 10 years. To accomplish this, we performed a PubMed search for various acne scar treatments such as chemical peels, dermabrasion, microdermabrasion, subcision, microneedling, punch techniques, dermal fillers, and thread lifting. Our findings and analysis show that there is no panacean solution to treating atrophic acne scars, which explains the evolving trend towards developing unique combinatorial treatments. Although a fair comparison of each treatment approach is difficult to achieve due to the studies’ varying sample sizes, strength of evidence, treatment execution, etc, there still remains a level of consensus on what treatments are well suited for particular scar types.

A combined approach of subcision with either cross-linked hyaluronic acid or threads in the treatment of atrophic acne scars

BACKGROUND

Acne scars are one of the most common cosmetic concerns causing psychosocial distress.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of subcision versus its combination with either cross-linked hyaluronic acid (HA) or poly-l-lactic acid (PLLA) threads in the treatment of atrophic post-acne scars.

METHODS

Forty patients of both genders with atrophic acne scars were subjected to subcision 1 month apart for 3 sessions. After the last session of subcision, the patients were reclassified randomly into 2 equal groups each received either HA or threads in one side of the face leaving the other side that underwent subcision before as a control. Clinical assessment was carried out by the physicians and patients. Photographs and skin biopsies were obtained. Follow-up was 6 months.

RESULTS

A significant clinical improvement was achieved in 67.3% of patients after subcision alone compared to 94.1%, 82.4% of subcision combined with HA or threads, respectively. Patients' satisfaction was higher in the combined groups compared to subcision alone (p < 0.0001). Side effects were tolerable and transient.

CONCLUSION

Subcision combined with HA or threads could offer a higher significant clinical improvement of acne scars than subcision alone.

The Importance of Nanocarrier Design and Composition for an Efficient Nanoparticle-Mediated Transdermal Vaccination

The World Health Organization estimates that the pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus claimed more than 3 million lives in 2020 alone. This situation has highlighted the importance of vaccination programs and the urgency of working on new technologies that allow an efficient, safe, and effective immunization. From this perspective, nanomedicine has provided novel tools for the design of the new generation of vaccines. Among the challenges of the new vaccine generations is the search for alternative routes of antigen delivery due to costs, risks, need for trained personnel, and low acceptance in the population associated with the parenteral route. Along these lines, transdermal immunization has been raised as a promising alternative for antigen delivery and vaccination based on a large absorption surface and an abundance of immune system cells. These features contribute to a high barrier capacity and high immunological efficiency for transdermal immunization. However, the stratum corneum barrier constitutes a significant challenge for generating new pharmaceutical forms for transdermal antigen delivery. This review addresses the biological bases for transdermal immunomodulation and the technological advances in the field of nanomedicine, from the passage of antigens facilitated by devices to cross the stratum corneum, to the design of nanosystems, with an emphasis on the importance of design and composition towards the new generation of needle-free nanometric transdermal systems.

Clinical and Histopathological evaluation of different tools for the Subcision of Atrophic Acne Scars

BACKGROUND

Acne scarring can lead to social and psychological distress.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety, efficacy, and long-term improvement of subcision using tri-beveled hypodermic (Th) needle versus cannula for the treatment of atrophic post-acne scars.

METHODS

Forty-six patients with atrophic post-acne scars were treated with subcision using (Th) needle on one side of the face and a blunt cannula on the other side of the face for 6 sessions one month apart. The primary outcome was based on the clinical improvement and patient satisfaction score. Skin biopsies were taken at baseline and 3months after the final session. Follow-up was 9 months.

RESULTS

Three months after the final session, a statistically highly significant difference was detected in both sides from the baseline (p < 0.001). The overall improvement was 73.9% on the (Th) needle side versus 65.2% on the cannula side (p = 0.68). There was no significant difference in acne severity scarring grade between both sides (p = 0.86). The mean number of sessions was significantly less in the (Th) needle side (p < 0.001). Collagen deposition and reorganization were achieved with both modalities. Patient satisfaction showed no significant difference between both sides. The side effects were mild and significantly higher in the (Th) needle side (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Both modalities are effective and economic techniques. However, using a cannula is associated with much fewer side effects, more convenient for the patients and physicians compared to the (Th) needle.

A Comparative Study of Microneedling Alone Versus Along with Platelet-Rich Plasma in Acne Scars

Context:

There are several modalities of treating acne scars. The combination of microneedling and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a synergistic approach to treat acne scars.

Aims:

The aim was to compare the efficacy of microneedling alone versus microneedling with PRP in acne scars.

Materials and Methods:

This was a split face study conducted on 36 patients with acne scars who underwent four sessions of microneedling with PRP on right side and microneedling alone on left side at monthly interval. The total scars with subtypes and Ecchelle D’Evaluation Cliniques des Cicatrices D’Acne (ECCA) score were assessed at baseline and second, fourth, and sixth visits. Visual analog score (VAS) was evaluated by both physicians and patients.

Statistical Analysis:

The statistical analysis was carried out using Statistical Package for Social Sciences. Paired-t test and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used to compare the results.

Results:

Mean age was 23.7±3.2 years with 17 male and 19 female patients. The mean total scars on right and left sides declined from 42.14±21.15 to 25.08±14.14 and 43.28+23.08 to 27.17±15.68, respectively, with insignificant differences (P-value = 0.094). ECCA score on right and left sides declined from 88.31±32.78 to 62.92±23.68 and 89.58±32.43 to 66.25±23.89, respectively (P-value = 0.058). VAS evaluated by patient and physician showed maximum improvement at second and third visits, respectively.

Conclusions:

This study showed no added advantage of topical application of PRP over microneedling in acne scars.

Split-face Comparative Study of Efficacy of Platelet-rich Plasma Combined with Microneedling versus Microneedling alone in Treatment of Post-acne Scars

Context:

Skin conditions contribute substantial burden toward global morbidity and mortality. Acne vulgaris, with its rising prevalence, has become a cause of concern among researchers as well as dermatologists due to scarring.

Aims:

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of microneedling alone versus microneedling combined with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in post-acne scars using a split-face method.

Materials and Methods:

Thirty patients with atrophic post-acne facial scars were offered four sittings of treatment monthly once. As a standard protocol, the right side of the face was subjected to microneedling with PRP (Group A) and the left side of the face with microneedling alone (Group B). Objective evaluation of improvement was performed by the physician recording the acne scar assessment score at baseline and thereafter at every visit using Goodman and Baron scale. Alongside patients also graded the improvement in acne scars at the end of the study.

Statistical Analysis Used:

The collected information was entered in MS Excel (Bellevue, WA, USA) and analyzed using appropriate statistical methods with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). The significance of the outcomes of the study was assessed by calculating the P value and the value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

The mean age of patients was 25 years. Thirteen (43%) patients in Group A had an excellent response as compared to 6 (20%) patients in Group B according to physician assessment. Patient’s satisfaction was more in Group A as compared to Group B as 11 (36%) patients had more than 75% improvement in Group A as compared to 1 (3%) patient in Group B.

Conclusion:

The study showed a decrease in scar severity grade in all the patients enrolled for treatment. However, the combined use of microneedling and PRP was found to be more effective than a single method used for treatment of acne scars.

Topical Tazarotene Gel, 0.1%, as a Novel Treatment Approach for Atrophic Postacne Scars: A Randomized Active-Controlled Clinical Trial

Importance

Evidence is robust for the effectiveness of microneedle therapy in the management of postacne atrophic scarring. A home-based topical treatment with an efficacy comparable to microneedling would be a useful addition in the armamentarium of acne scar management.

Objective

To compare the efficacy of topical tazarotene gel, 0.1%, with microneedling therapy in the management of moderate to severe atrophic acne scars.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Prospective, observer-blinded, active-controlled, randomized clinical trial with 6 months of follow-up conducted between June 2, 2017, and February 28, 2018, at a tertiary care hospital in India. Thirty-six patients with grade 2 to 4 facial atrophic postacne scars and without a history of procedural treatment of acne scars within the previous year were recruited. Analyses were conducted using data from the evaluable population.

Interventions

Both halves of each participant's face were randomized to receive either microneedling or topical tazarotene therapy. Microneedling was conducted on 1 side of the face with a dermaroller having a needle length of 1.5 mm for a total of 4 sessions during the course of 3 months. Participants were instructed to apply topical tazarotene gel, 0.1%, to the other side of the face once every night during this same period.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Patients were followed up at 3 and 6 months by a blinded observer, and improvements in acne scar severity based on Goodman and Baron quantitative and qualitative scores and a subjective independent dermatologist score (range, 0-10, with higher scores indicating better improvement) were assessed. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a patient global assessment score (ranging from 0 for no response to 10 for maximum improvement) at these follow-up visits.

Results

There were 36 participants (13 men and 23 women; mean [range] age, 23.4 [18-30] years), and the median (interquartile range [IQR]) duration of acne was 6 (4-8) years. For the 34 participants included in the complete data analyses, the median (IQR) quantitative score for acne scar severity at the 6-month follow-up visit following treatment with either tazarotene (from a baseline of 8.0 [6.0-9.8] to 5.0 [3.0-6.0]) or microneedling (from a baseline of 7.0 [6.0-10.8] to 4.5 [3.0-6.0]) indicated significant improvement (P < .001) that was comparable for both treatments (median [IQR] change in severity score from baseline, 2.5 [2.0-4.0] vs 3.0 [2.0-4.0]; P = .42). By contrast, median qualitative acne scar scores were the same for both treatment groups at baseline and did not significantly change following either treatment.

Conclusions and Relevance

The present clinical trial showed comparable outcomes of both treatments for the overall improvement of quantitative facial acne scar severity.

Level of Evidence

1.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03170596.

Subcision: Indications, adverse reactions, and pearls

BACKGROUND

Subcision, also known as subcutaneous incisionless surgery, is a surgical intervention used to treat a variety of skin conditions including atrophic acne scars, depressed scars, cellulite, and wrinkles.

AIMS

We plan to prepare a review article about the indications of subcision, its adverse reactions, and pearls.

PATIENTS/METHODS

We searched the literature for the information about subcision and its applications from papers published up to March 2019. The search was performed through the databases of the National Library of Medicine.

RESULTS

After a thorough review of the published papers about subcision, we finally chose to review 40 articles that had proper sample size and design to prepare this review article. Twenty-one papers were related to the application of subcision in the treatment of acne scar and other scars. Four articles were about the application of subcision to treat cellulite, and eight articles were related to other applications of subcision such as the treatment of striae or nasolabial fold. The remaining seven articles include published review papers about subcision or acne scar classification.

CONCLUSION

Subcision seems to be effective on various skin conditions including acne scar, other depressed scars, and cellulite. It is easy to apply and inexpensive with short downtime and no significant complications. Subcision needs proper technique and adequate experience.

Adult female acne: a guide to clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Acne in women is often associated with anxiety and depression, and may persist from adolescence as well as manifest for the first time in adulthood. Genetic and hormonal factors contribute to its etiopathogenesis, and maintenance treatment is required, usually for years, due to its clinical evolution.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a guide for the clinical practice of adult female acne.

METHODS

A team of five experts with extensive experience in acne conducted a literature review of the main scientific evidence and met to discuss the best practices and personal experiences to develop a guide containing recommendations for the clinical practice of adult female acne.

RESULTS

The group of specialists reached consensus on the main guidelines for clinical practice, providing detailed recommendations on clinical picture, etiopathogenesis, laboratory investigation and treatment of adult female acne.

CONCLUSION

Different from teenage acne, adult female acne presents some characteristics and multiple etiopathogenic factors that make its management more complex. This guide provides recommendations for best clinical practices and therapeutic decisions. However, the authors consider that additional studies are needed in order to provide more evidence for adult female acne to be better understood.

Resurfacing of Facial Acne Scars With a New Variable-Pulsed Er:YAG Laser in Fitzpatrick Skin Types IV and V

Introduction:

The Er:YAG laser, considered to be less effective than CO₂ laser in its traditional form, in its new modulated version has variable pulse technology that is claimed to be superior to the earlier versions of the laser.

Aim:

The aim of the study was to check efficacy and safety of the new variable square pulse (VSP) Er:YAG laser in the management of acne scar in patients with Fitzpatrick skin types IV and V.

Materials and Methods:

This retrospective study consisted of 80 patients (Fitzpatrick skin types IV and V) with atrophic and hypertrophic facial acne scars. Records of the patients who had undergone four treatment sessions with VSP technology equipped with Er:YAG laser were extracted. Each patient had undergone a minimum of four sessions. Fractional mode at medium laser pulse (SP) and long pulse (LP) was employed for the depressed center of the scars to stimulate neocollagenogenesis. Short laser pulse (MSP) in nonfractionated mode was used for ablating the raised scar border and hypertrophic scars. Goodman and Baron global scarring grading system was used for qualitative and quantitative assessments. Patient’s satisfaction to the treatment and observer’s assessment of improvement (based on photographs) was graded as poor (<25% improvement), fair (25–50% improvement), good (51–75% improvement), and excellent (>75% improvement).

Results:

At the end of the four sessions, the number of patients in grade IV postacne scarring reduced from 16 to 2 and that in grade III from 47 to 29. The mean score significantly dropped from 36.94 to 27.5. Subjective assessment revealed that 78 of 80 patients had noticed more than 25% improvement, with 50 of them showing more than 50% improvement at the end of four sessions. Eight patients perceived an excellent response and 42 reported a good response. This is notably higher than the observer’s grading, which showed an excellent response in only 2 patients and a good response in 35. Adverse effects were limited to prolonged erythema (two patients), prolonged crusting (one patient), and postinflammatory hyperpigmentation (one patient).

Conclusion:

Ninety-seven percent of the subjects in our study perceived at least a fair improvement. We also saw a significant change in the objective score with a fall of the mean quantitative score from 36.94 to 27.15. This underscores the new variable-pulsed Er:YAG laser’s effectiveness in the treatment of acne scars. It also has the added advantage of lesser adverse events and faster healing.

A systematic review of treatments for acne scarring. Part 1: Non-energy-based techniques

Acne is a common condition that can result in permanent scarring. We have performed a comprehensive literature search of the last 10 years in order to determine the efficacy and side effects of commonly used treatments against post-acne scarring. A total of 36 relevant articles were identified on the following interventions: subcision (10), dermabrasion (one), microneedling (eight), dermal fillers (five), and chemical peeling (12). Post acne scarring is a common and challenging condition with no easy and definitive solution. The above interventions have been used with varying degrees of efficacy, each having both pros and cons. All have been deemed to be safe with few and transient adverse reactions. However, further trials with larger number of patients are necessary in order to reach more concrete conclusions regarding their efficacy.

Microneedling: Advances and widening horizons

Microneedling is a very simple, safe, effective, and minimally invasive therapeutic technique. It was initially introduced for skin rejuvenation, however, now it is being used for a very wide range of indications including acne scar, acne, post-traumatic/burn scar, alopecia, skin rejuvenation, drug delivery, hyperhidrosis, stretch marks, and many more. Moreover, during the last 10 years, many new innovations have been made to the initial instrument, which was used for microneedling. This technique can be combined with other surgical techniques to provide better results. In particular, it is a very safe technique for dark skin types, where risk of postinflammatory pigmentation is very high with other techniques that damage the epidermis. In this review article, we are updating on the different instruments now available for this procedure, and its efficacy when performed alone or in combination with other techniques for various indications.

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.

Skin needling as a treatment for acne scarring: An up-to-date review of the literature

Background

Skin needling is a technique used to improve the appearance of acne scarring.

Objective

To comprehensively review the medical literature regarding skin needling as a treatment for acne scarring.

Methods

A literature search was performed using the PubMed, Medline, and Embase databases, in addition to reviewing the bibliographies of relevant articles.

Results

Ten studies presented patients treated with skin needling alone, while eight studies discussed skin needling in combination with other treatments for acne scarring. All studies showed improvements in scarring after needling, with 12 reporting statistical significance. The median number of treatments when needling was used alone was three, the median duration between treatments was 4 weeks, and the median needle length used was 1.5 mm. Reported adverse events were infrequent and included post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation, “tram track” scarring, acne, and milia. There were no reports of bacterial infections.

Limitations

The studies reviewed were heterogeneous in design and of variable validity, with some not reporting statistical significance.

Conclusion

There is moderate evidence to suggest that skin needling is beneficial and safe for the treatment of acne scarring. However, double-blinded, randomized controlled trials are required to make more definitive conclusions.

Formulation design for topical drug and nanoparticle treatment of skin disease

The skin has evolved to resist the penetration of foreign substances and particles. Topical therapeutic and cosmeceutical delivery is a growing field founded on selectively overcoming this barrier. Both the biology of the skin and the nature of the formulation/active ingredient must be aligned for efficient transcutaneous delivery. This review discusses the biological changes in the skin barrier that occur with common dermatological conditions. This context is the foundation for the discussion of formulation strategies to improve penetration profiles of common active ingredients in dermatology. Finally, we compare and contrast those approaches to recent advances described in the research literature with an eye toward the future of topical formulation design.