Den här översättningen är inte klar ännu. Den här sidan är just nu på engelska.

Gå till den engelska sidan

Laser vs radiofrequency: which zaps acne scars better?

NCT ID NCT01976260

What the study statuses mean

This study's is highlighted.

Recruitment status, easiest to join first

Recruiting now
This trial is taking on new participants right now.
Not yet recruiting
Registered, but not yet taking participants.
By invitation only
Not open to general applications. Only people the study team invites can take part.
Paused
Paused for now. It may or may not start again.
Ongoing This study
Running, but no longer taking on new participants.
Completed
The trial has finished. Results may not be published yet.
Stopped early
Stopped early, before it reached the end. That can be for many reasons, including safety.
Cancelled
Cancelled before anyone took part.

Expanded access (not trials)

Expanded access
Not a trial. This treatment can be requested outside a study, case by case, for people who qualify.
Expanded access (paused)
Not a trial. The treatment can normally be requested outside a study, but is unavailable right now.
Expanded access (ended)
Not a trial. The treatment could once be requested outside a study, but no longer can.
Approved
The treatment has been approved, so it is available normally rather than through this programme.

When the status isn't known

Details not published
The full record has not been published yet, so there is little to show here.
Status unknown
This status has not been confirmed recently, so it may be out of date.

First seen Jul 01, 2026 · Last updated Jul 02, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This study compares two devices—ePrime (radiofrequency) and Fraxel (laser)—to see which improves acne scars more. Each participant gets both treatments on different sides of their face, and a blinded dermatologist rates the results. The goal is to find a more effective way to reduce ice pick and boxcar scars.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance
bipolar fractional radiofrequency (ePrime) and 1550-nm fractional photothermolysis (Fraxel)
What this could lead to
If one device proves more effective, it could offer a better option for reducing acne scars with fewer side effects.
What could go wrong
This is a small pilot study with only 16 participants, so results may not apply to everyone. Both treatments may cause temporary redness or swelling.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Study facts

What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.

Phase

Phase 2

Tests whether the treatment actually works, and watches for side effects, in a larger group.

Participants

16 people

The number who actually took part.

Start date

Oct 2013

Expected to finish

Dec 2027

An estimate. End dates often move.

Lead sponsor

Other sponsor

The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.

Who can take part

This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.

Ages

18 to 65 years

Sex

Anyone

Healthy volunteers

Accepted

You do not need to have the condition being studied to take part.

Show the full entry requirements

Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.

Inclusion Criteria: 1. Subjects age 18 years and older. 2. Subjects with bilateral 2x2 cm areas of ice pick and/or boxcar acne scars on their face. 3. Subjects are in good health. 4. Subjects have the willingness and the ability to understand and provide informed consent and communicate with the investigator. Exclusion Criteria: 1. Subjects who have received injectable soft-tissue augmentation materials to the face, or facial ablative resurfacing, within the past 6 months. 2. Subjects who have received injectable botulinum toxin to the face, or any nonablative laser treatment to the face, within the past 3 months. 3. Subjects who have local infections, open facial wounds, or other significant local skin disease that would interfere with acne scar treatment with energy devices. 4. Subjects who are allergic to lidocaine or prilocaine. 5. Subjects who have a history of abnormal scarring in the treatment area, such as keloid scar formation. 6. Subjects who have ectropion or or other eyelid disfigurement. 7. Subjects who have a history of isotretinoin use in the preceding year. 8. Pregnant or lactating individuals.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Cicatrix are added.

Vår säkerhetsrekommendation!

Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • Northwestern University Department of Dermatology

    Chicago, Illinois, 60611, United States

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.