falnhart 0 Posted August 3, 2004 I'm having dermabrasion done sometime soon and would like some comments on this: 1) For soft scars that are deeper, is it wise to first have the dermabrasion and see if these scars will fill up completely and level with surrounding skin. 2) Have these deeper scars filled by an injectable filler, like Isolagen, then have the dermabrasion and see if the scar is level with healthy skin. 3) Have the scar punch elevated, excised, or punch grafted, then do the dermabrasion, making the depressed scar history and focusing instead on the surgical scar left from one of the three techniques mentioned? Again, these are pretty much soft, but deep scars, and are somewhat reddish (the redness has been there for years). I want the best possible outcome. How do you know when a scar has to be punch elevated or excised vs. filled in with injectable filler to completely (100%) level the scar with surrounding skin? Do you measure the depth or?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
agua2004 0 Posted August 3, 2004 Dude, just an opinion: do excision, get rid of thoses scars for good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GoldRex 1 Posted August 3, 2004 Falnhart, the theory is that the line scars left from excision will disappear if the dermabrasion is done soon enough after. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LoveGreenSmoothies 32 Posted August 3, 2004 Personally, I would opt for #3. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johnchlebeck 1 Posted August 3, 2004 These other people might have more experience than I, but personally I think No. 3 sounds more invasive than No. 2, and therefore might carry more risk of permanent damage. I might hold out for the isologen. I've also been communicating with a woman on another message board that had FAMI (a type of fat transfer) and is happy with the results so far. I guess it could be temporary, though. Maybe find a doctor that has a good success record with grafting and excision techniques, since it seems like sometimes the results are great for people and sometimes it gets worse. I guess I would definitely not go for No. 1 since it seems that the most extreme dermabrasion would need to be done and maybe the skin would end up uneven and some deep scars may end up wider and flatter than before but not gone. Dr. Y. must perform grafting techniques also in conjunction with the dermabrasion, and maybe you can trust your skin to him???? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johnchlebeck 1 Posted August 3, 2004 What about subcision and smoothbeam perhaps followed by needling or tca CROSS? Have you seen the results that can be achieved by these methods? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
animegirle 1 Posted August 3, 2004 I have done 1 and 3. For ice pick scars, 3 is the way to go if you are set on punch graft/excision. Look into TCA Cross for your deeper scars. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
leopolda 1 Posted August 4, 2004 Hey Animegirl! Love you new sig! --Leo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sharpeye 0 Posted August 4, 2004 Had subcision and excision. Subcision/ nlite didnt do much maybe 5% improvement and this was from Dr. Rapaport in nyc who is one of the best. #3 might be your best bet for deep scars but there are risks: Excision was a disaster for me because the stitches broke open twice making the scar larger. This could be attributed to the run of the mill derm I had. However if excision works it seems to produce the best results. I suggest you do the research and find the best possible doctor. Its your face, money shouldn't be an issue. I still may look into excision but past experience makes me very nervous. Even if it does work i am not keen on having a red linear hyperpigmentation mark on my face . . . those things can last for a while. Also still looking into fillers, unfortunately the most promising ones aren't legal in the U.S. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
