I came across this great paper on subcision which shows some great results. What I find really interesting is how a lot of these studies on the effectiveness of subcision are coming out of non-Western medical journals. It seems like in other parts of the world, the emphasis has been on minor surgical procedures like subcision that can greatly improve acne scars. Here in the West all we tend to see are studies on lasers and technology based approaches. It goes to show that fancier technology does not mean better results, and frankly for the right scars, it seems the simpler approaches are far more effective.

I really believe that the laser or resurfacing approach to treating acne scars fail most of the time because they don't address the main cause of why acne scars are visible-- shadowing. Most doctors nowadays laser the skin in a uniform fashion, meaning they remove the same amount of skin from the high points and the low points on the face. This means that the depth of the scars remains the same. This is why it's imperative that you raise the depressions before even attempting resurfacing. It frustrates me when doctors just say "Lasers" for everything. Any kind of resurfacing is pointless if you have deep holes. They need to be elevated as close as possible to the level of the normal skin before lasers, dermabrasion, or any kind of resurfacing can be of any use.

http://file.scirp.org/Html/9-1050288_57165.htm