Acne scar treatment using combination therapy: Subcision and human autologous fibroblast injection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acne scar treatment is a problem for both the dermatologist and the dermatologic surgeon. Many therapies have been advanced to improve acne scars over the past years. Nevertheless, they were often related to adverse side effects like hyperpigmentation. These combination therapy using subcision and autologous fibroblast injection can provide a better technique for the acne scar treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this study, we describe nine patients with the age of 25 to 48 and rolling acne scars (moderate to severe) that were treated with combination therapy using subcision (cannula, 18 gauge) and autologous fibroblast injection. Finally, before and 6 months after the final injection, the patients' biometric characteristics were evaluated by Visioface 1000D and Mexameter and a skin ultrasound imaging system. RESULTS: The results show a significant improvement in the acne scars in the patients. The Visioface results showed that the size and number of skin pores and spots were reduced after combination therapy. Also, the results of skin ultrasonography exhibited denser skin layers both in the epidermis and dermis. CONCLUSION: In summary, the combination therapy of autologous fibroblast injection and subcision can be considered as a new alternative, safe, and useful method for acne scar treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".