| Kim8) (2025) | SBSES (Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale) - 5 items(pigmentation, vascularity, thickness, surface regularity, overall appearance), summed 0–5; lower = better.QIS(Quartile Improvement Scale) - 0 to 4, mapped to 0%, 1–25%, 26–50%, 51–75%, 76–100% improvement.Patient satisfaction - Likert 0–5(0 = very dissatisfied, 5 = very satisfied).Standardized photography/device imaging - Janus® Pro Hybrid used for objective pre/post documentation. | Clear clinical improvement over 2 months:- SBSES: 3 → 1- QIS: 3 → 4- Patient satisfaction: 4 → 5. | None observed during the course. |
| Rho9) (2018) | Serial clinical photography at baseline, after interim sessions(after three), and 2-month post–sixth session to document change.No standardized scar or QoL scale reported. | Significant improvement of the surgical scar documented 2 months after the 6th session (serial photos and narrative). | N/R |
| Ahn10) (2021) | Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) - pigmentation(0–3), vascularity(0–3), pliability(0–5), height(0–3); total reported pre/post.Patient-reported satisfaction - 0(unsatisfied) to 3 (very satisfied) at final visit.Standardized photography under identical camera/lighting/positioning at each visit, including 1 month after final treatment. | Most lesions improved by 2 weeks and further with additional sessions;- median VSS: 6 → 3(IQR 6–7 → 2–4).- Patient satisfaction rated “satisfactory.” | No major adverse events were reported in any patient. |
| Shin11) (2023) | Clinical photographs before treatment and after the 6-session course(4-week intervals).Qualitative clinical assessment of improvement and patient satisfaction noted; no named scoring instrument reported. | After six sessions at 4-week intervals, the atrophic scar showed remarkable improvement, with high patient satisfaction. | N/R |
| Jung12) (2023) | Serial clinical photography to track atrophy and hyperpigmentation changes across sessions.Descriptive clinical judgment of improvement (marked improvement; mild residual atrophy); no standardized outcome scale specified. | Case 1: After 10 treatments, atrophy and hyperpigmentation improved markedly with no aggravation for >6 months.Case 2: After seven treatments, the lesion improved with mild residual atrophy. | N/R |
| Wang13) (2023) | Clinical efficacy categories per Chinese clinical criteria, defined separately by indication:- Wrinkles: resolution of fine lines/skin tightening (effective/ineffective categories).- Post-acne scars: graded by improvement percentage bands(51–75% = "markedly effective", 26–50% = "effective", ≤25% = "ineffective").- Enlarged pores: divide into three grades according to the degree of pore shrinkage(Shrinking pores clearly, no skin damage = "markedly effective", slightly reduced pores, no skin damage = "effective", no improvement = "ineffective").- Melasma: categorical improvement thresholds(>60% = “markedly effective”, 30–60% = “effective”, <30% = “ineffective”).Patient satisfaction scale - hospital-devised 0–100 scale categorized as very satisfied(≥90), basically satisfied(70–89), satisfied(60–69), not satisfied(<60); overall satisfaction rate computed. | 1. Total effective rateE(PDRN + laser group): 95.92%(47/49)C(laser only): 83.67%(41/49) (χ2=4.009, p=0.045)2. Patient satisfactionE: 93.88%C: 79.59% (p<0.05) | E: 14.29%C: 10.20%No significant difference(p>0.05). |