In the 2026 split-face subcision trial — subcision releases bands that tether depressed scars — impression scores favored added suction over subcision alone. If you have atrophic scars — depressed scars below surrounding skin — avoid overreading headlines by checking which measure they cite.
The trial compared subcision alone on one cheek with subcision plus suction on the other cheek for atrophic acne scars, according to the U.S. National Library of Medicine PubMed record. Dermatologic Surgery reports both sides improved significantly from baseline, so the comparison tests added benefit rather than whether subcision works.
Medical information disclaimer: This article is for general educational purposes only and does not provide medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always consult a physician or other qualified health professional about symptoms, medications, tests, or treatment decisions.
Table of Contents
- What the 2026 scores showed
- Why ratings and scar counts can disagree
- What the earlier blinded trial found
- How to read the next headline
What the 2026 scores showed
Physician-rated and patient-rated Acne Scar Improvement Grading Scale scores were higher on the suction side. The gap reached p=.002 for physician ratings and p=.026 for patient ratings, according to the U.S.
National Library of Medicine PubMed record. The trial authors read this as support for suction-assisted subcision on subjective assessment. They suggested the benefit was clinically perceptible even when objective scar-counting captured less change.
Why ratings and scar counts can disagree
An impression scale asks how scars look and feel overall. A scar count tallies individual lesions. Swelling, redness, lighting, makeup, mood, and expectation can shift an overall rating.
Counts miss texture, shadowing, and how noticeable scars are in daily life. That split matters because you live with appearance, not a tally. A higher rating can still mean real satisfaction even without fewer counted scars.
What the earlier blinded trial found
The earlier Northwestern split-face trial used blinded dermatologist raters. Those raters detected no difference between subcision and subcision-suction at 1 or 4 months, according to ResearchSquare in its preprint report. Subjects reported 37% improvement with suction versus 24% without it at 1 month, p=0.04, according to Springer Medicine in its trial summary.
By 4 months the gap was no longer significant, p=0.37, although subjects still preferred combination treatment. The preprint authors described only transient redness and swelling, with no added sustained harm from suction. They listed modest sample size and subjective assessment as limits.
How to read the next headline
Ask what sits behind a headline before you pay for suction. Use these checks at consultation: Bring the scale name and follow-up date to your visit and ask how the clinic tracks your own scars.
- Was it a blinded scar count or a patient or physician impression scale?
- How large was the absolute change from baseline?
- How long was follow-up, and did early gains last?
You Might Also Like
- Subcision With Suction for Acne Scars in a 2026 Split-Face Trial: How People With Atrophic Acne Scars Can Avoid Overreading the Headline
- Objective vs Patient-Rated Results in the 2026 Subcision Trial: Cost, Sessions, and Downtime Questions for People With Atrophic Acne Scars
- The 160-Participant Acne Scar Combination Trial Published in 2026: How People With Atrophic Acne Scars Can Avoid Overreading the Headline