SynthesisPeerJ2025
Optimal treatment options for acne scars in patients with historic acne: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Microneedling with Topical Insulin Versus Microneedling with Platelet-rich Plasma for Post-Acne Scars: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Minimally invasive interventions for atrophic acne scars: a PubMed/PMC-based systematic evidence review and exploratory network meta-analysis toward phenotype-guided interpretation.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- A Combined Injectable and Fractional 1470 nm Laser Approach for the Management of Facial Atrophic Acne Scars: Prospective Ultrasound-Based Evaluation.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of autologous cell-based therapies for atrophic acne scar treatment: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis with in-depth methodological and clinical insights.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acne is a common skin condition that can cause permanent scarring and profoundly affect patients' quality of life. Despite the increasing diversity of acne scar treatments, there is a dearth of comprehensive evidence-based guidelines to help clinicians and patients make the best choices. This study aimed to comprehensively assess the efficacy and safety of existing acne scar treatments through a network meta-analysis. Method: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were thoroughly searched for relevant studies from database establishment to September 19, 2024. Outcome included Echelle d'evaluation clinique des cicatrices d'acne (ECCA), Goodman and Baron Scale (GBS), pain, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed using the gemtc package in R. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB 2) tool, while publication bias was assessed Results: A total of 68 randomized controlled trials were enrolled, comprising 4,480 patients with acne scarring. Laser + platelet-rich plasma (PRP) ranked best in reducing ECCA scores (surface under cumulative ranking curve to the total area (SUCRA): 98.4%), laser + filler injection ranked best in reducing GBS (SUCRA: 72.1%), and laser + chemical peels ranked the best in patient satisfaction (SUCRA: 89.6%). Microneedling was ranked as the most tolerable in terms of pain (SUCRA: 72.6%). In addition, no strong evidence suggesting a treatment reduced the risk of erythema nor post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation compared to the other treatments. Conclusions: The evidence suggests laser combined with PRP or filler injections are the best options for reducing scar severity, while laser combined with chemical peeling yields the best patient satisfaction. Laser combined with other therapies should be considered to optimize treatment of acne scarring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.