Treatment of Post-Surgical Scars With Traditional Ablative Er:YAG Versus Fractional Ablative Er:YAG (Er:YAG)

The investigators will compare the efficacy of Traditional Ablative Er:YAG Versus Fractional Ablative Er:YAG in a split scar study. The patient will receive a month treatment for 3 months. Then follow up for the next 2 months.

Background: Scars are a common complaint of patients at presentation to a dermatology office. To optimize cosmetic results, the investigators propose to compare erbium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet (Er:YAG) laser therapy on two different settings: traditional ablative versus fractional ablative. A side to side comparison of split scars will be done to evaluate the two settings. Fractionated photothermolysis (fractional setting) has improved the field of laser surgery by allowing the surgery to target microscopic treatment zones (MTZ). MTZ's allow for cylinders of damage created by laser surgery to be surrounded by normal, unaffected skin. This acts as a reservoir for healing and allows for the microwounds created by laser treatment to heal quickly and with minimal discomfort. Objective: To compare efficacy and cosmetic appearance of scars treated with Er:YAG ablative laser on traditional ablative resurfacing setting versus fractional ablative resurfacing setting. Methods: Enroll 20 patients for nonsurgical treatment of surgical scars. Half of each scar will be treated with the Er:YAG laser on the traditional ablative setting and the other half of the scar will receive Er:YAG treatment with the fractional ablative setting. The patients will receive 3 treatments at monthly intervals. They will follow up at 1 and 2 months after the treatment. Pictures of the scar will be taken at a 45 degree and 90 degree angle at baseline, before each treatment, after each treatment, and at all follow up appointments. The patients will be blinded as to which side is treated with which laser setting. At the end of the trial, they will be offered the chance to have the side they felt had less improvement treated with the laser device that had been used on the contralateral side of the scar. Results: A panel of three blinded dermatologists will evaluate the scar on a well-established five point grading scale for erythema, height and texture, and overall cosmetic outcome. The mean, standard deviation, and kappa values will be calculated. Patients will be asked the same scar evaluation questions as the panel as well as their overall satisfaction, how much pain was associated with the procedure, which laser they preferred, and would they recommend treatment to a friend or family member.

Enroll 20 patients for nonsurgical treatment of surgical scars. Half of each scar will be treated with the Er:YAG laser on the traditional ablative setting and the other half of the scar will receive Er:YAG treatment with the fractional ablative setting. The patients will receive 3 treatments at monthly intervals. They will follow up at 1 and 2 months after the treatment.

Half the scar will be treated with traditional ablative setting and the other half will be treated with the fractional ablative setting

It uses a 10-point scoring system with a score of 1 representing a normal-appearing skin and a score of 10 representing the worst possible scar. Total scores range from 6 to 60 with the lower score indicate a better outcome.

Inclusion Criteria: over 8 weeks s/p scar linear closure visibly symmetric scar over 18 years old Exclusion Criteria: concomitant treatment of involved skin propensity for keloid scarring use of oral retinoids for the past 1 year pregnancy immunosuppression prior laser to the area