Skip to content

Improving facial scars: comparing two fat grafting techniques using a nanofat graft

The management of facial scars by using unfiltered nanofat graft mixed with platelet-rich fibrin or conventional nanofat graft

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ISRCTN
Registry ID
ISRCTN64292493
Enrollment
20
Registered
2024-04-22
Start date
2022-03-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-05-06

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Improving the appearance of atrophic facial scars in patients Skin and Connective Tissue Diseases

Interventions

This study is a randomized controlled trial, including 2 groups of patients with atrophic facial scars - the control group will receive nanofat grafting. In contrast, the experimental group will rece

Sponsors

Damascus University
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Patients with atrophic linear facial scars 2. The length of the scar is more than 2 centimeters 3. Patients older than 18 years old 4. No systemic disease and syndromes 5. Previously untreated scars

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Patients with acute skin disease 2. Patients with bleeding disorder 3. Patients has gone through severe weight gain/loss during the past few months 4. Skinny patients (does not have enough fat tissue in the donor sites)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Scar quality from the perspectives of the patient and the clinician measured using the Patient And Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) at baseline (T0: preoperative), 3 (T1) and 6 (T2) months postoperative

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
The following secondary outcome measures will be assessed at baseline (T0: preoperative), 3 (T1) and 6 (T2) months postoperative: 1. Scar appearance measured in 4 grades (Level 1: Macular Scar; Level 2: Mild Scar; Level 3: Moderate Scar; and, Level 4: Severe Scar) by 3 observers using the Goodman and Baron Scale 2. Aesthetic improvement measured using the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (7 levels: -3 = Very Much Worse; -2 = Much Worse; -1 = Worse; 0 = No Change; 1 = Improved; 2 = Much Improved; and, 3 = Very Much Improved)

Countries

Syria

Contacts

Public ContactMhd Anas ;Mhd Anas Alnemr;Alnemr

;

anas1.alnmer@damascusuniversity.edu.sy;anas.alnmer@gmail.com+963957432950;+963957432950

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026