Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety between picosecond 1,064 nanometer laser and fractional radiofrequency in the treatment of acne scars.
Introduction: Fractional radiofrequency appears to be a superior treatment for atrophic acne scars in Asians, however, no study has directly compared between the novel fractional picosecond 1,064 nm technology
Materials / method: Thirty-six patients with moderate to severe acne scaring were included in this prospective, randomized, split-face controlled trail study. Half side of the face were randomly to receive fractional 1064 nm picosecond laser or fractional radiofrequency for 4 monthly sessions with 1, 3 and 6 months follow-up after final laser treatment.
Results: The mean percentage of ECCA score improvement at 6 months on picosecond laser and fractional radiofrequency side were 42.04% and 41.71% respectively compared to baseline. However, there was no statistic significant difference between both groups (p= 0.973). Additionally in subgroup analysis of acne scar subtype, rolling scar showed remarkably more improvement than boxcar scar. Both treated sides also demonstrated statistically significant in scar volume reduction at 6 months by imaging analysis utilizing 3-D camera with no statistic significant difference (p =0.615).
Conclusion: Both have shown comparable efficacy with minimize PIH for atrophic acne scar treatment in Asians, however, fractional radiofrequency has significant greater pain tolerance whereas fractional 1,064 nm picosecond laser seems to have shorter recovery time.
Disclosures
Did you receive any funding to support your research for this TOPIC?
No
Were you provided with any honoraria, payment or other compensation for your work on this study?
No
Do you have any financial relationship with any entity which may closely compete with the medications, materials or instruments covered by your study?
No
Do you own or have you applied for any patents in conjunction with the instruments, medications or materials discussed in your study?
No
This work was not supported by any direct or non direct funding. It is under the author's own responsability