Trial reportAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Synergistic Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma and Stromal Vascular Fraction in Atrophic Acne Scar Management: A Mechanistic and Clinical Pilot RCT.
Trial report in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAtrophic acne scarring presents a significant therapeutic challenge with a profound psychosocial impact, and conventional treatments often yield suboptimal results. Autologous biologics, specifically stromal vascular fraction (SVF) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP), have emerged as promising regenerative strategies to address this issue.
methodsThis single-center, pilot, randomized, assessor-blinded controlled trial included 60 patients with severe atrophic acne scars. Patients were randomized into four groups: subcision plus SVF (Group 1), subcision plus combined SVF and PRP (Group 2), subcision plus PRP (Group 3), and subcision alone (Group 4, control). Primary endpoints included clinical improvement documented by digital imaging and changes in qualitative grading scales from baseline to 12 months post-procedure. Additionally, flow cytometry was performed to evaluate the cellular composition and mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) marker expression of the SVF preparations.
resultsGroup 2 (subcision + SVF + PRP) demonstrated superior clinical efficacy, with 53.3% of patients achieving "Grade 3" (marked) physician satisfaction compared to 0% in the control group (p ≤ 0.001). This group also showed significantly greater improvement in scar size and color (p ≤ 0.001). Mechanistically, flow cytometry confirmed that Group 2 contained significantly higher expression of mesenchymal stem cell markers (CD73+ and CD105+) compared to the SVF alone (p ≤ 0.001). While patient-reported FACE-Q scores consistently favored Group 2, differences in specific QoL sub-domains did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.05), likely due to the pilot sample size.
conclusionThe combination of SVF and PRP, when used as an adjuvant to subcision, represents a promising regenerative strategy for atrophic acne scars, achieving clinical results superior to monotherapies or subcision alone. This enhanced therapeutic effect appears attributable to the enrichment of the mesenchymal stem cell population within the "biostimulated" SVF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: 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
Identifiers
42151612What 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.