Cannula-based Versus Needle-based Subcision for Posttraumatic Atrophic Facial Scars

Cannula-based Versus Common Needle-based Subcision in the Treatment of Posttraumatic Atrophic Facial Scars: A Clinical Trial

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of cannula- based subcision versus common needle subcision in treatment of posttraumatic atrophic facial scars

In addition to cosmetic issues, atrophic scars can lead to psychological issues like social isolation, low self-esteem, and embarrassment. Subcision (Subcutaneous incision-less surgery) has been used for years to treat a variety of skin depressions, including atrophic acne scars and other depressed scars. Numerous modifications have been made throughout time to this surgical method to make it easier and more efficient. Although needle subcision is a straightforward, simple, useful, and practical procedure, it has many side effects and the overall success in this procedure is mild to moderate. So, in this study we evaluated the effectiveness of cannula- based subcision versus common needle subcision in treatment of posttraumatic atrophic facial scars.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Adult Patients (> 20-years old) with posttraumatic facial scar

Exclusion Criteria:

• other types of scars (e.g; postacne scars), pregnancy, lactation, bleeding or coagulation disorders, liability for keloid formation, history of kobnerization, and patients with systemic diseases (cardiac, chronic renal diseases, chronic liver diseases, asthma and hypertension) at the time of recruitment.