Abstract:Introduction Acne vulgaris is a common skin condition that affects a significant percentage of adolescents, with scarring being one of its permanent complications. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of using botulinum toxin type A (BTA) in combination with cross‐linked and non‐cross‐linked hyaluronic acid (HA) for the treatment of atrophic acne scars. Method Our study is a randomized, double‐blind clinical trial conducted on 16 patients with atrophic acne scars. The patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: one group received a single session of BTA and crossed link HA combination, while the other group received two sessions of BTA and non‐crossed link HA, 1 month apart. The patients were followed up at 3 and 6 months after baseline to evaluate the number and area of fine and large pores and spots, scar grading, patient satisfaction, and complications. Results The mean age of individuals in both the cross‐linked HA and non‐cross‐linked HA groups was 32.75 ± 4.26 and 31.50 ± 8.48 years, respectively (p = 0.71). In terms of gender, three (37.5%) and seven (87.5%) individuals in the cross‐linked and non‐cross‐linked HA groups were female, respectively (p = 0.11). There were no significant differences in the count and area of fine and large pores and spots between the two groups at baseline and the first follow‐up session. However, in the second follow‐up session, the non‐cross‐linked HA group had significantly better results than the cross‐linked HA group in terms of large pores count and area (p = 0.01). In terms of changes over time, the non‐cross‐linked HA group showed significantly better improvements in the count and area of large pores compared to the cross‐linked HA group (p = 0.03). Additionally, both groups experienced a significant decrease in the count and area of fine pores over time (p = 0.001), but the amount of changes was not statistically significant between the two groups (p = 0.06). Concerning acne grade, initially, 62.5% and 12.5% of cases in the cross‐linked HA and non‐cross‐linked HA groups, respectively, had severe grades. However, in the last session, these percentages significantly decreased to 0% for both groups (p = 0.002 and 0.005, respectively). In terms of treatment complications, none of the patients experienced any adverse effects. Conclusion The study demonstrated that both cross‐linked HA and non‐cross‐linked HA were effective in reducing acne severity and improving the appearance of pores and spots. The treatments had similar effects on fine pores, spots, and overall acne severity. However, non‐cross‐linked HA appeared to have a better result on large pores compared to cross‐linked HA.

Microneedling With Topical Insulin Versus Microneedling With Non-Cross-Linked Hyaluronic Acid for Atrophic Post-Acne Scars: A Split-Face Study

Efficacy of dermapen combined with topical insulin versus dermapen combined with topical hyaluronic acid in treatment of stretch marks: comparative study

Comparisons of the Effects of Topical Anti-Scar Drugs on Post-Surgical Facial Scar Formation: a Clinical Investigation.

Split-face comparative study of efficacy of platelet-rich plasma combined with microneedling versus microneedling alone in treatment of post-acne scars

Evaluation of microneedling depth of penetration in management of atrophic acne scars: a split‐face comparative study

Microbotox (Mesobotox) versus microneedling as a new therapeutic modality in the treatment of atrophic post-acne scars

Fractional CO2 Laser with Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Fractional CO2 Laser with Topical Insulin in The Treatment of Postacne Atrophic Scars

Efficacy of autologous platelet rich plasma with subcision vs platelet rich plasma with microneedling in atrophic acne scars: A single-center, prospective, intra-individual split-face comparative study

A combined subcision approach with either fractional CO2 laser (10,600 nm) or cross-linked hyaluronic acid versus subcision alone in atrophic post-acne scar treatment

Microneedling by dermapen and glycolic acid peel for the treatment of acne scars: Comparative study

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections With and Without Microneedling for Managing Atrophic Facial Acne Scars: A Prospective Comparative Study

Atrophic facial acne scars; bilateral comparison of two microneedle devices

Treatment of Atrophic Facial Acne Scars With Microneedling Followed by Polymethylmethacrylate-Collagen Gel Dermal Filler

Evaluation of Clinical and Ultrasound Changes With the Use of Microneedling Versus Fractional CO2 Laser in Atrophic Acne Scars

Effect of microneedling by dermaroller on acne scars: an observational study at tertiary care hospital

Fractional CO2 Laser Combined With Autologous Nanofat Injection Versus Fractional CO2 Laser Combined With Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Atrophic Acne Scars: A Split-Face Comparative Study With Optical Skin Imaging

A Comparative Study to Assess the Efficacy of Fractional Carbon Dioxide Laser and Combination of Fractional Carbon Dioxide Laser with Topical Autologous Platelet-rich Plasma in Post-acne Atrophic Scars

Evaluation and comparison of the efficacy and safety of the combination of topical phenytoin and microneedling with microneedling alone in the treatment of atrophic acne scars: A controlled blinded randomized clinical trial

Evaluation and comparison of the efficacy and safety of cross‐linked and non‐cross‐linked hyaluronic acid in combination with botulinum toxin type A in the treatment of atrophic acne scars: A double‐blind randomized clinical trial

A split face study to compare the efficacy of platelet rich plasma versus normal saline injections in acne scars and to assess the utility of ultrabiomicroscopic sonography in evaluation of treatment response

Treatment of Acne Scars with Microneedling and Chemical Reconstruction of Scarred Skin Therapy (CROSS) Using Penol/Croton Oil Combination