Background
Percutaneous collagen stimulation has been used for many years for the treatment of atrophic acne scars. Until now, Dermaroller used to be the most effective treatment for this type of scars. It is a purely mechanical device, which consists of a roller filled with micro-needles that are made of surgical steel. It is scrolled back and forth over the area of the skin to be treated.
The needle depth used for this purpose is typically 1.5 mm and the skin is treated 4 times in 3 different directions. This technique has been used over the years to treat thousands of patients with good results. The treatment itself is unfortunately painful and leaves the patients with very red skin for 4 days after the treatment.
Skinpen uses the same principle to the treatment, but instead of rolling over the skin, Skinpen has needles that move vertically up and down at a high speed. This way you can avoid the damage to the skin caused by the use of Dermaroller.
Method
In a comparative study between Dermaroller and Skinpen, a group of 60 patients with atrophic acne scars was treated to clarify the ease of use, effectiveness and the preference of the treated patients. The patients were randomly assigned to be treated with either Dermaroller or Skinpen.
All patients had previously received treatment with Dermaroller, none of them having acne breakouts. The treatments were carried out by 3 dermatologists. Patients and dermatologists completed a questionnaire about the ease of use, discomfort of the treatment and the duration of side effects.
The depth of the selected scars was measured with a Visioscan VC98 both before the treatment and 3 months after.
Results
The patients treated with Skinpen agreed that the treatment was less painful and the regeneration ohase after the treatment was significantly shorter than with Dermaroller.
In addition, patients that had been treated with Skinpen assessed that their acne scars got much better than those of the patients treated with Dermaroller.
Visioscan also confirmed that the depth of the scars of the patients who had been treated with Skinpen was significantly more reduced than the depth of the scars of the patients treated with Dermaroller.
Conclusion
The treatment with Dermaroller was a major advance in the treatment of acne scars when it started, but new Skinpen provides several benefits to the treatment and the disposable needle heads are cheaper than a Dermaroller.
Patients found out that the treatment with Skinpen is less painful and has fewer side-effects. Dermatologists stated that Skinpen was easier to use in hard-to-reach areas such as above the upper lip and nose.
Additionally, Skinpen reduces the depth of acne scars significantly better, even after a single treatment.