ReviewClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2026
Exploring the Therapeutic Potential of Botulinum Toxin in Treating Post-Acne Sequelae: A Critical Review.
Review in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 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
Botulinum toxin has expanded beyond muscle paralysis to multi-target skin regulation, with growing interest in its use for post-acne erythema, atrophic scars, and enlarged pores. However, the quality of evidence varies widely. This article critically integrates the mechanisms and clinical evidence of intradermal microdroplet injection for treating post-acne sequelae. Botulinum toxin may inhibit inflammation, regulate sebum secretion, influence vasodilation/constriction, and modulate fibroblast function via the non-neuronal cholinergic system, providing multi-target theoretical support. The clinical evidence level is low to moderate for atrophic scars, with a focus on combination therapies (microneedling, lasers, radiofrequency, etc), but most do not quantify dermal penetration; thus, the specific contribution of botulinum toxin is uncertain. For post-acne erythema, only one small RCT and one case series exist, with low to moderate evidence. Enlarged pore studies rely on before-after or retrospective designs, with low to very low evidence. Computer modeling offers quantitative references for formulation conversion and parameter optimization, but its conclusions derive from glabellar or muscle-targeted data and require prospective validation for acne applications. In summary, botulinum toxin shows theoretical potential for post-acne sequelae, but the current evidence is weak. Clinical use should be limited to investigational settings or exploratory options after conventional treatment failure.
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.