Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35426044›Full record

SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2022

Microneedling Monotherapy for Acne Scar: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Yu-Chun Shen, Wen-Kuan Chiu, Yi-No Kang, Chiehfeng Chen

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yu-Chun ShenSchool of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Wen-Kuan ChiuDivision of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Municipal Wanfang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Yi-No KangCochrane Taiwan, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chiehfeng ChenDivision of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Municipal Wanfang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. clifchen@tmu.edu.tw.ORCID 0000-0002-1595-6553
Taipei Medical University · TWNational Taipei University of Nursing and Health Science · TWTaipei Medical University Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAcne scarring, formed by the deposition of collagen following inflammatory acne, not only represents a cosmetic problem but also poses a psychological health risk to patients. As microneedling has become a common treatment for acne scarring, an increasing number of studies have compared the efficacy and safety of microneedling. In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing microneedling with other treatments.

methodThree databases, namely Embase, PubMED, and Cochrane library, were searched until June 20, 2021, for RCTs only. Studies using microneedling in both treatments were excluded.

resultsTwelve studies, totaling 414 participants, were included in our meta-analysis. For objective scar improvement, the pooled estimate analysis of the first group, treated with microneedling without radiofrequency, yielded a mean difference of 0.42 (95% CI-0.12-0.73%) with a significant difference at the 5% significance level. The second group, treated with fractional radiofrequency microneedling, exhibited no significance at the 5% significance level. Regarding subjective satisfaction, most results exhibited no significant difference between microneedling and other treatments. Although no case of secondary scarring or infection was reported in our study, the pooled result of postinflammatory hyperpigmentation was significant at the 5% significance level and preferred microneedling treatment.

conclusionMicroneedling without radiofrequency achieved superior results in terms of scar improvement. No form of microneedling caused postinflammatory hyperpigmentation-an advantage in acne scar treatment. Thus, microneedling is a favorable choice for the treatment of acne scarring. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Indexed as

Acne VulgarisHyperpigmentationCicatrixCollagenHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeCollagenAcne scarMeta-analysisMicroneedlingSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35426044
OpenAlexW4224106111

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.