@Article{
AUTHOR = {Lee, Kar Wai Alvin Lee and Chan, Kwin Wah Lisa Chan and Lee, Cheuk Hung Lee and Wong, Tin Hau Sky Wong},
TITLE = {Laser Treatment for Scar: An Update and Literature Review},
JOURNAL = {Journal of Cosmetic and Regenerative Medicine},
VOLUME = {1},
YEAR = {2026},
NUMBER = {2},
PAGES = {0--0},
URL = {https://jcrm.jams.pub/article/1/2/25},
ISSN = {3107-2933},
ABSTRACT = {Background: Scar formation remains a major therapeutic challenge because scars are biologically heterogeneous and clinically diverse, ranging from atrophic acne scars to hypertrophic burn scars, keloids, post-surgical linear scars, and pigmentary scar sequelae. Over the past decade, laser- and light-based technologies have become central to modern scar management because they can selectively target vascularity, collagen architecture, surface texture, pigmentation, and contracture while also enabling transdermal drug delivery and biologic augmentation. Recent literature published from 2024 to 2026 has expanded the evidence base for ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser, pulsed dye laser, erbium:YAG laser, picosecond fractional laser, intense pulsed light, and multimodal protocols involving platelet-rich plasma, stromal vascular fraction, exosomes, botulinum toxin, fillers, and laser-assisted subcision. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted covering publications from 2024 to 2026 on laser treatment for scars. The source framework was based on MEDLINE, PubMed, and Ovid database retrieval. The included literature comprised randomized controlled trials, comparative studies, retrospective cohort studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, case series, narrative reviews, and mechanistic reviews. All studies were classified according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2009 Levels of Evidence. Results: Current evidence supports laser therapy as an effective and generally safe modality for multiple scar phenotypes. Ablative fractional CO2 laser remains the most frequently studied modality, particularly for acne scars, hypertrophic scars, and surgical scars. Pulsed dye laser shows consistent benefit for immature, erythematous, and vascular scars, especially burn and early post-surgical scars. Combination strategies appear increasingly favorable, including pulsed dye laser plus fractional CO2 laser, fractional CO2 laser plus platelet-rich plasma, and laser-assisted delivery of regenerative agents. Early intervention, especially within weeks to months of wound healing, appears advantageous for many surgical and traumatic scars. However, heterogeneity in laser parameters, timing, scar subtype definitions, outcome scales, and follow-up duration continues to limit cross-study comparison. Conclusions: Laser therapy has become a major pillar of contemporary scar management. The strongest recent evidence favors phenotype-directed and time-sensitive treatment, with early vascular targeting for erythematous scars and fractional resurfacing for textural remodeling. Combination regimens may improve outcomes beyond monotherapy in selected patients. Future studies should prioritize standardized endpoints, longer follow-up, scar subtype stratification, cost-effectiveness analysis, and high-quality comparative trials in broader skin phototypes.},
DOI = {10.65381/jcrm.2026.01010015}
}