Collagen Induction Therapy (CIT) and Fraxel Laser treatments seem to work in a similar manner: they create micro injuries to the skin to stimulate collagen production. Is this correct? It would seem CIT would be the preferred treatment because it does not destroy cells like the Fraxel treatment. I'm interested in knowing CIT effects on acne scars, which I assume are mostly localized collagen loss? Please comment on these assumptions.
Collagen Induction Therapy (CIT) Vs. Fraxel Laser for Acne Scars?
Doctor Answers 2
Fraxel Repair is superior in acne scar treatment
The CIT treatment is a roller with tiny sharp needles that put small holes into the patient’s skin. No skin is removed so there is not any immediate contraction of the skin. In many treatments, a solution with vitamins and other skin stimulants are then applied to the skin. The treatment is liked aerating a lawn, only more bloody.
Fraxel re:pair uses carbon dioxide laser. Wherever the laser column strikes the skin, the skin is immediately vaporized, and a micro-column of air is created for a millisecond until the surrounding "normal" skin collapses into the micro wound. Skin is removed and there is noticeable shrinkage of the skin immediately. Secondly, the surrounding skin that is not vaporized is heated. This heating causes new collagen formation for the next 4 to 6 months.
There is no technology currently available that is superior to Fraxel Re:pair for the treatment of acne scarring.
Be well, and get some rest.
Difference is controlled heating
Now, for acne scars, it not the device, but method of treatment that gives the best results.
Dr Davin Lim
These answers are for educational purposes and should not be relied upon as a substitute for medical advice you may receive from your physician. If you have a medical emergency, please call 911. These answers do not constitute or initiate a patient/doctor relationship.