TY - JOUR
T1 - Effectiveness and Safety of Energy-Based Devices for Acne Scars
T2 - A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
AU - Li, Man Yun
AU - Huang, Ya Li
AU - Chen, Jin Hua
AU - Kang, Yi No
AU - Chen, Chiehfeng
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright 2023, American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Inc.
PY - 2023/11
Y1 - 2023/11
N2 - Background: Acne vulgaris is an inflammatory disease of the pilosebaceous unit in teenagers. Acne-induced inflammation leads to acne scarring. Scholars have discussed acne scar treatments; however, energy-based devices with satisfactory outcomes remain unidentified. Objective: To measure quartile grading scale and visual analog scale (VAS) to study the difference between energy-based devices. Methods: We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated patients with acne scars. The primary outcomes were the quartile grading scale and VAS scores. We used Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis to evaluate indirectness, imprecision, heterogeneity, and incoherence. Results: A total of 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. The quartile grading scale results revealed that ablative fractional laser was significantly more effective than nonablative fractional laser (standard mean difference [SMD]: 0.516, confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.281-0.750) and radiofrequency treatment (SMD: 0.941, 95% CI: 0.540-1.342). Moreover, nonablative fractional laser was significantly more effective than radiofrequency treatment (SMD: 0.426, 95% CI: 0.049-0.802). No significant difference in VAS score was found among the devices. Conclusion: Ablative fractional laser is an effective treatment for acne scars although it is associated with more pain.
AB - Background: Acne vulgaris is an inflammatory disease of the pilosebaceous unit in teenagers. Acne-induced inflammation leads to acne scarring. Scholars have discussed acne scar treatments; however, energy-based devices with satisfactory outcomes remain unidentified. Objective: To measure quartile grading scale and visual analog scale (VAS) to study the difference between energy-based devices. Methods: We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated patients with acne scars. The primary outcomes were the quartile grading scale and VAS scores. We used Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis to evaluate indirectness, imprecision, heterogeneity, and incoherence. Results: A total of 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. The quartile grading scale results revealed that ablative fractional laser was significantly more effective than nonablative fractional laser (standard mean difference [SMD]: 0.516, confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.281-0.750) and radiofrequency treatment (SMD: 0.941, 95% CI: 0.540-1.342). Moreover, nonablative fractional laser was significantly more effective than radiofrequency treatment (SMD: 0.426, 95% CI: 0.049-0.802). No significant difference in VAS score was found among the devices. Conclusion: Ablative fractional laser is an effective treatment for acne scars although it is associated with more pain.
KW - Acne Vulgaris/complications
KW - Adolescent
KW - Cicatrix/etiology
KW - Humans
KW - Network Meta-Analysis
KW - Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
KW - Treatment Outcome
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85160068817&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85160068817&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1089/fpsam.2022.0383
DO - 10.1089/fpsam.2022.0383
M3 - Article
C2 - 36946785
AN - SCOPUS:85160068817
SN - 2689-3614
VL - 25
SP - 521
EP - 527
JO - Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine
JF - Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine
IS - 6
ER -