Scholarlink

Aim and objectives <p>To compare the effectiveness of microneedling and dermabrasion in managing facial scars.</p> Materials and methods <p>Twenty patients with facial scars (rolling, boxcar, hypertrophic, and ice pick types) were randomized into two groups. Group A underwent microneedling using a 1.5&#xa0;mm derma roller, while Group B received motorized dermabrasion with a diamond fraise. Scar severity was assessed using the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES), Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI).</p> Results <p>Both treatments showed significant scar improvement. In Group A, 73% of patients demonstrated marked reduction, with SBSES scores improving from 4.40 ± 0.52 to 0.50 ± 0.53 at 6&#xa0;months. Group B showed improvement in 53% of patients, with scores reducing to 0.90 ± 0.99. DLQI scores improved significantly in both groups. Dermabrasion required fewer sessions (1.20 ± 0.42 vs. 3.20 ± 0.63) but caused more erythema. Microneedling had fewer side effects, mainly transient pigmentation.</p> Conclusion <p>Both modalities were effective in scar reduction, with dermabrasion offering quicker results. Microneedling was better tolerated. Combining these treatments with adjuncts like platelet-rich plasma or subcision may enhance outcomes. Future studies should explore multimodal protocols to improve efficacy and minimize downtime.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of dermabrasion and micro-needling therapy in the management of facial scars—a clinical study

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月12日

查看全文
  • Noble Parappattu Thomas,
  • Shubha Lakshmi,
  • K. S. N. Shiva Bharani,
  • M. Anuradha,
  • Apoorva Gopal Mulgund,
  • Mohd Mahboob Pasha,
  • H. N. Madhumitha

摘要

Aim and objectives

To compare the effectiveness of microneedling and dermabrasion in managing facial scars.

Materials and methods

Twenty patients with facial scars (rolling, boxcar, hypertrophic, and ice pick types) were randomized into two groups. Group A underwent microneedling using a 1.5 mm derma roller, while Group B received motorized dermabrasion with a diamond fraise. Scar severity was assessed using the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES), Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI).

Results

Both treatments showed significant scar improvement. In Group A, 73% of patients demonstrated marked reduction, with SBSES scores improving from 4.40 ± 0.52 to 0.50 ± 0.53 at 6 months. Group B showed improvement in 53% of patients, with scores reducing to 0.90 ± 0.99. DLQI scores improved significantly in both groups. Dermabrasion required fewer sessions (1.20 ± 0.42 vs. 3.20 ± 0.63) but caused more erythema. Microneedling had fewer side effects, mainly transient pigmentation.

Conclusion

Both modalities were effective in scar reduction, with dermabrasion offering quicker results. Microneedling was better tolerated. Combining these treatments with adjuncts like platelet-rich plasma or subcision may enhance outcomes. Future studies should explore multimodal protocols to improve efficacy and minimize downtime.