Cosmetic Dermatology

Update on Acne Scar Treatment

Cutis. 2018 July;102(1):21-25, 47-48

References

White GM. Recent findings in the epidemiologic evidence, classification, and subtypes of acne vulgaris. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1998;39(2, pt 3):S34-S37.
Yazici K, Baz K, Yazici AE, et al. Disease-specific quality of life is associated with anxiety and depression in patients with acne. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2004;18:435-439.
Orentreich DS, Orentreich N. Subcutaneous incisionless (subcision) surgery for the correction of depressed scars and wrinkles. Dermatol Surg. 1995;21:543-549.
Fabbrocini G, De Padova M, De Vita V, et al. Periorbital wrinkles treatment using collagen induction therapy. Surg Cosmet Dermatol. 2009;1:106-111.
Fabbrocini G, De Vita V, Pastore F, et al. Collagen induction therapy for the treatment of upper lip wrinkles. J Dermatol Treat. 2012;23:144-152.
Fabbrocini G, De Vita V, Di Costanzo L, et al. Skin needling in the treatment of the aging neck. Skinmed. 2011;9:347-351.
El-Domyati M, Barakat M, Awad S, et al. Microneedling therapy for atrophic acne scars: an objective evaluation. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2015;8:36-42.
Fabbrocini G, Fardella N, Monfrecola A, et al. Acne scarring treatment using skin needling. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2009;34:874-879.
Alam M, Han S, Pongprutthipan M, et al. Efficacy of a needling device for the treatment of acne scars: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150:844-849.
Dhurat R, Sukesh M, Avhad G, et al. A randomized evaluator blinded study of effect of microneedling in androgenetic alopecia: a pilot study. Int J Trichology. 2013;5:6-11.
Dhurat R, Mathapati S. Response to microneedling treatment in men with androgenetic alopecia who failed to respond to conventional therapy. Indian J Dermatol. 2015;60:260-263.
Fabbrocini G, De Vita V, Fardella N, et al. Skin needling to enhance depigmenting serum penetration in the treatment of melasma [published online April 7, 2011]. Plast Surg Int. 2011;2011:158241.
Bariya SH, Gohel MC, Mehta TA, et al. Microneedles: an emerging transdermal drug delivery system. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2012;64:11-29.
Fabbrocini G, De Vita V, Izzo R, et al. The use of skin needling for the delivery of a eutectic mixture of local anesthetics. G Ital Dermatol Venereol. 2014;149:581-585.
De Vita V. How to choose among the multiple options to enhance the penetration of topically applied methyl aminolevulinate prior to photodynamic therapy [published online February 22, 2018]. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther. doi:10.1016/j.pdpdt.2018.02.014.
Fernandes D. Minimally invasive percutaneous collagen induction. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2005;17:51-63.
Goodman GJ, Baron JA. Postacne scarring—a quantitative global scarring grading system. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2006;5:48-52.
Majid I. Microneedling therapy in atrophic facial scars: an objective assessment. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2009;2:26-30.
Dogra S, Yadav S, Sarangal R. Microneedling for acne scars in Asian skin type: an effective low cost treatment modality. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2014;13:180-187.
Fabbrocini G, De Vita V, Monfrecola A, et al. Percutaneous collagen induction: an effective and safe treatment for post-acne scarring in different skin phototypes. J Dermatol Treat. 2014;25:147-152.
Hashim PW, Levy Z, Cohen JL, et al. Microneedling therapy with and without platelet-rich plasma. Cutis. 2017;99:239-242.
Wang HL, Avila G. Platelet rich plasma: myth or reality? Eur J Dent. 2007;1:192-194.
Marx RE. Platelet-rich plasma: evidence to support its use. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004;62:489-496.
Fabbrocini G, De Vita V, Pastore F, et al. Combined use of skin needling and platelet-rich plasma in acne scarring treatment. Cosmet Dermatol. 2011;24:177-183.
Chawla S. Split face comparative study of microneedling with PRP versus microneedling with vitamin C in treating atrophic post acne scars. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2014;7:209-212.
Asif M, Kanodia S, Singh K. Combined autologous platelet-rich plasma with microneedling verses microneedling with distilled water in the treatment of atrophic acne scars: a concurrent split-face study. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2016;15:434-443.
Ibrahim MK, Ibrahim SM, Salem AM. Skin microneedling plus platelet-rich plasma versus skin microneedling alone in the treatment of atrophic post acne scars: a split face comparative study. J Dermatolog Treat. 2018;29:281-286.
Goodman GJ, Baron JA. Postacne scarring: a qualitative global scarring grading system. Dermatol Surg. 2006;32:1458-1466.
You H, Kim D, Yoon E, et al. Comparison of four different lasers for acne scars: resurfacing and fractional lasers. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2016;69:E87-E95.
Osman MA, Shokeir HA, Fawzy MM. Fractional erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet laser versus microneedling in treatment of atrophic acne scars: a randomized split-face clinical study. Dermatol Surg. 2017;43(suppl 1):S47-S56.
Lee JW, Kim BJ, Kim MN, et al. The efficacy of autologous platelet rich plasma combined with ablative carbon dioxide fractional resurfacing for acne scars: a simultaneous split-face trial. Dermatol Surg. 2011;37:931-938.
Gawdat HI, Hegazy RA, Fawzy MM, et al. Autologous platelet rich plasma: topical versus intradermal after fractional ablative carbon dioxide laser treatment of atrophic acne scars. Dermatol Surg. 2014;40:152-161.
Abdel Aal AM, Ibrahim IM, Sami NA, et al. Evaluation of autologous platelet rich plasma plus ablative carbon dioxide fractional laser in the treatment of acne scars. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2018;20:106-113.
Min S, Yoon JY, Park SY, et al. Combination of platelet rich plasma in fractional carbon dioxide laser treatment increased clinical efficacy of for acne scar by enhancement of collagen production and modulation of laser-induced inflammation. Lasers Surg Med. 2018;50:302-310.
Roberts AB, Sporn MB, Assoian RK, et al. Transforming growth factor type beta: rapid induction of fibrosis and angiogenesis in vivo and stimulation of collagen formation in vitro. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1986;83:4167-4171.
Schmidt EV. The role of c-myc in cellular growth control. Oncogene. 1999;18:2988-2996.
Varga J, Rosenbloom J, Jimenez SA. Transforming growth factor beta (TGF beta) causes a persistent increase in steady-state amounts of type I and type III collagen and fibronectin mRNAs in normal human dermal fibroblasts. Biochem J. 1987;247:597-604.
Chen J, Somanath PR, Razorenova O, et al. Akt1 regulates pathological angiogenesis, vascular maturation and permeability in vivo. Nat Med. 2005;11:1188-1196.
Repertinger SK, Campagnaro E, Fuhrman J, et al. EGFR enhances early healing after cutaneous incisional wounding. J Invest Dermatol. 2004;123:982-989.
Landau M. Chemical peels. Clin Dermatol. 2008;26:200-208.
Drake LA, Dinehart SM, Goltz RW, et al. Guidelines of care for chemical peeling. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1995;33:497-503.
Meaike JD, Agrawal N, Chang D, et al. Noninvasive facial rejuvenation. part 3: physician-directed-lasers, chemical peels, and other noninvasive modalities. Semin Plast Surg. 2016;30:143-150.
Leheta TM, Abdel Hay RM, El Garem YF. Deep peeling using phenol versus percutaneous collagen induction combined with trichloroacetic acid 20% in atrophic post-acne scars; a randomized controlled trial.J Dermatol Treat. 2014;25:130-136.
El-Domyati M, Abdel-Wahab H, Hossam A. Microneedling combined with platelet-rich plasma or trichloroacetic acid peeling for management of acne scarring: a split-face clinical and histologic comparison.J Cosmet Dermatol. 2018;17:73-83.
Hession MT, Graber EM. Atrophic acne scarring: a review of treatment options. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2015;8:50-58.
Dayan SH, Bassichis BA. Facial dermal fillers: selection of appropriate products and techniques. Aesthet Surg J. 2008;28:335-347.
Munavalli GS, Smith S, Maslowski JM, et al. Successful treatment of depressed, distensible acne scars using autologous fibroblasts: a multi-site, prospective, double blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:1226-1236.

Laser Treatment

Laser skin resurfacing has shown to be efficacious in the treatment of both acne vulgaris and acne scarring. Various lasers have been utilized, including nonfractional CO₂ and erbium-doped:YAG (Er:YAG) lasers, as well as ablative fractional lasers (AFLs) and nonablative fractional lasers (NAFLs).²⁹

One retrospective study of 58 patients compared the use of 2 resurfacing lasers—10,600-nm nonfractional CO₂ and 2940-nm Er:YAG—and 2 fractional lasers—1550-nm NAFL and 10,600-nm AFL—in the treatment of atrophic acne scars.²⁹ A retrospective photographic analysis was performed by 6 blinded dermatologists to evaluate clinical improvement on a scale of 0 (no improvement) to 10 (excellent improvement). The mean improvement scores of the CO₂, Er:YAG, AFL, and NAFL groups were 6.0, 5.8, 2.2, and 5.2, respectively, and the mean number of treatments was 1.6, 1.1, 4.0, and 3.4, respectively. Thus, patients in the fractional laser groups required more treatments; however, those in the resurfacing laser groups had longer recovery times, pain, erythema, and postinflammatory hyperpigmentation. The investigators concluded that 3 consecutive AFL treatments could be as effective as a single resurfacing treatment with lower risk for complications.²⁹

A split-face RCT compared the use of the fractional Er:YAG laser on one side of the face to microneedling with a 2.0-mm needle on the other side for treatment of atrophic acne scars.³⁰ Thirty patients underwent 5 treatments at 1-month intervals. At 3-month follow-up, the areas treated with the Er:YAG laser showed 70% improvement from baseline compared to 30% improvement in the areas treated with microneedling (P<.001). Histologically, the Er:YAG laser showed a higher increase in dermal collagen than microneedling (P<.001). Furthermore, the Er:YAG laser yielded significantly lower pain scores (P<.001); however, patients reported higher rates of erythema, swelling, superficial crusting, and total downtime.³⁰

Lasers With PRP
More recent studies have examined the use of laser therapy in addition to PRP for the treatment of acne scars (Table 2).^31-34 Abdel Aal et al³³ examined the use of the ablative fractional CO₂ laser with and without intradermal PRP in a split-face study of 30 participants with various types of acne scarring (ie, boxcar, ice pick, and rolling scars). Participants underwent 2 treatments at 4-week intervals. Evaluations were performed by 2 blinded dermatologists 6 months after the final laser treatment using the qualitative Goodman and Baron scale.²⁸ Both treatments yielded improvement in scarring, but the PRP-treated side showed shorter durations of postprocedure erythema (P=.0052) as well as higher patient satisfaction scores (P<.001) than laser therapy alone.³³

In another split-face study, Gawdat et al³² examined combination treatment with the ablative fractional CO₂ laser and PRP in 30 participants with atrophic acne scars graded 2 to 4 on the qualitative Goodman and Baron scale.²⁸ Participants were randomized to 2 different treatment groups: In group 1, half of the face was treated with the fractional CO₂ laser and intradermal PRP, while the other half was treated with fractional CO₂ laser and intradermal saline. In group 2, half of the face was treated with fractional CO₂ laser and intradermal PRP, while the other half was treated with fractional CO₂ laser and topical PRP. All patients underwent 3 treatment sessions at 1-month intervals with assessment occurring a 6-month follow-up using the qualitative Goodman and Baron Scale.²⁸ In all participants, areas treated with the combined laser and PRP showed significant improvement in scarring (P=.03) and reduced recovery time (P=.02) compared to areas treated with laser therapy only. Patients receiving intradermal or topical PRP showed no statistically significant differences in improvement of scarring or recovery time; however, areas treated with topical PRP had significantly lower pain levels (P=.005).³²

Lee et al³¹ conducted a split-face study of 14 patients with moderate to severe acne scarring treated with an ablative fractional CO₂ laser followed by intradermal PRP or intradermal normal saline injections. Patients underwent 2 treatment sessions at 4-week intervals. Photographs taken at baseline and 4 months posttreatment were evaluated by 2 blinded dermatologists for clinical improvement using a quartile grading system. Erythema was assessed using a skin color measuring device. A blinded dermatologist assessed patients for adverse events. At 4-month follow-up, mean (SD) clinical improvement on the side receiving intradermal PRP was significantly better than the control side (2.7 [0.7] vs 2.3 [0.5]; P=.03). Erythema on posttreatment day 4 was significantly less on the side treated with PRP (P=.01). No adverse events were reported.³¹

Another split-face study compared the use of intradermal PRP to intradermal normal saline following fractional CO₂laser treatment.³⁴ Twenty-five participants with moderate to severe acne scars completed 2 treatment sessions at 4-week intervals. Additionally, skin biopsies were collected to evaluate collagen production using immunohistochemistry, quantitative polymerase chain reaction, and western blot techniques. Experimental fibroblasts and keratinocytes were isolated and cultured. The cultures were irradiated with a fractional CO₂laser and treated with PRP or platelet-poor plasma. Cultures were evaluated at 30 minutes, 24 hours, and 48 hours. Participants reported 75% improvement of acne scarring from baseline in the side treated with PRP compared to 50% improvement of acne scarring from baseline in the control group (P<.001). On days 7 and 84, participants reported greater improvement on the side treated with PRP (P=.03 and P=.02, respectively). On day 28, skin biopsy evaluation yielded higher levels of TGF-β1 (P=.02), TGF-β3 (P=.004), c-myc (P=.004), type I collagen (P=.03), and type III collagen (P=.03) on the PRP-treated side compared to the control side. Transforming growth factor β increases collagen and fibroblast production, while c-myc leads to cell cycle progression.^35-37 Similarly, TGF-β1, TGF-β3, types I andIII collagen, and p-Akt were increased in all cultures treated with PRP and platelet-poor plasma in a dose-dependent manner.³⁴ p-Akt is thought to regulate wound healing³⁸; however, PRP-treated keratinocytes yielded increased epidermal growth factor receptor and decreased keratin-16 at 48 hours, which suggests PRP plays a role in increasing epithelization and reducing laser-induced keratinocyte damage.³⁹ Adverse effects (eg, erythema, edema, oozing) were less frequent in the PRP-treated side.³⁴

Economic Stewardship in Acne Management

Update on Acne Scar Treatment

References

Laser Treatment

Pages

Next Article: