
doi: 10.1111/jocd.12909
pmid: 30964227
SummaryBackgroundFractional CO2 laser and platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) treatments have been used in the treatment of acne scars. However, an objective method of assessment has been lacking.ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of CO2 laser versus the combination of PRP and fractional CO2 laser in treatment of acne scar.Patients and methodsThirty patients with atrophic acne scar lesions were included in this study. Patients were randomized to receive fractional CO2 laser therapy to one side of the face while the other side of the face was treated with fractional CO2 laser followed by intradermal PRP injection. Follow‐up using the skin analysis camera system and photography was done for three months.ResultsA dramatic improvement was observed in the scar depth on both sides of the face. However, the combined fractional CO2 laser and PRP showed more significant improvement. Improvements in the scar appearance and skin texture were reported by the patients. Although 70% of our patients were of a dark skin type, no hyperpigmentation was reported.ConclusionThe combined use of fractional CO2 laser and PRP achieved better results. It reduced the downtime of the fractional CO2 laser. The use of the skin analysis camera provided an objective assessment of the results.
Adult, Male, Injections, Intradermal, Platelet-Rich Plasma, Combined Modality Therapy, Blood Transfusion, Autologous, Cicatrix, Young Adult, Treatment Outcome, Patient Satisfaction, Face, Acne Vulgaris, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Lasers, Gas, Photography, Humans, Female, Skin
Adult, Male, Injections, Intradermal, Platelet-Rich Plasma, Combined Modality Therapy, Blood Transfusion, Autologous, Cicatrix, Young Adult, Treatment Outcome, Patient Satisfaction, Face, Acne Vulgaris, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Lasers, Gas, Photography, Humans, Female, Skin
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 60 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
