An interventional study of Subcision and Human Adipose-Derived Stem Cell Exosomes and Powdered Polydioxanone in Atrophic Acne Scars, sponsored by COSMEDICIAN AP SDN BHD. Completed at 1 site in Malaysia. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 55 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-11-03.
Sponsored by COSMEDICIAN AP SDN BHD · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
This pilot study compared two treatments for depressed acne scars: subcision alone and subcision followed by injections containing exosomes derived from human fat-derived stem cells and powdered polydioxanone (PDO). Subcision is a procedure that releases bands of tissue beneath the skin that pull acne scars downward.
Twelve adults with acne scars on both sides of the face participated at one clinic in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Each participant received subcision alone on the left side and subcision with the additional injections on the right side. Three treatment sessions were performed four weeks apart, with a final assessment at Week 12.
The study examined whether adding the injections improved acne scar severity and overall appearance compared with subcision alone. Skin quality, treatment discomfort, recovery time, and unwanted effects were also assessed. A dermatologist who did not know which treatment each side received evaluated standardized photographs. This small study was intended to provide preliminary information to help plan larger studies.
This prospective, single-centre, non-randomised, assessor-blinded, split-face comparative pilot study evaluated the addition of human adipose-derived stem cell exosomes (hADSC-Exos) and powdered polydioxanone (PDO) to subcision for atrophic acne scars.
The split-face design allowed comparison of the treatments within the same participant. Treatment allocation was fixed: the left side received subcision alone, and the right side received the same subcision procedure followed by injection of the combined hADSC-Exos/PDO formulation. Participants were aware of treatment allocation.
Twelve participants were enrolled through convenience sampling at FFIMT Clinic, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. No formal efficacy sample-size calculation was performed because prior treatment-effect and variability estimates were unavailable. The pilot sample was selected to provide preliminary estimates of treatment effects, variability, and feasibility for subsequent studies.
Treatment sessions took place at Weeks 0, 4, and 8. On the combination-treatment side, 2.5 mL of the prepared hADSC-Exos/PDO suspension was injected into the subdermal plane after scar release. The final clinical assessment occurred at Week 12, four weeks after the third treatment.
Standardized facial photographs were obtained at baseline and Week 12 under consistent lighting, positioning, and camera settings. An independent dermatologist, blinded to treatment allocation and assessment time point, performed the photographic assessments. Participant assessments, treatment diaries, and investigator clinical assessments provided additional information on perceived improvement, skin quality, procedural pain, recovery, and treatment-emergent adverse effects.
The study received UCSI University Institutional Review Board approval before recruitment, and all participants provided written informed consent before study procedures.
611 studies on the registry are indexed under Cicatrix; 114 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 12 is below the median of 40 across 512 interventional studies indexed under Cicatrix.
Browse Cicatrix studies →COSMEDICIAN AP SDN BHD is the lead sponsor of 2 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
The human immunodeficiency virus, which weakens the immune system.
Many studies now accept people whose HIV is controlled on treatment, judged by the viral load and the CD4 count. Check the limits this study sets.
Hepatitis B is a virus that infects the liver. These are separate tests: HBsAg positive usually means a current infection (a recent vaccination can briefly cause it too); total anti-HBc (HBcAb) positive means an infection now or in the past; HBV DNA measures how much virus is in the blood.
Some studies accept a past infection if HBV DNA is undetectable, sometimes with antiviral medicine during the study. Check what this study allows.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
HIV
The human immunodeficiency virus, which weakens the immune system.
Many studies now accept people whose HIV is controlled on treatment, judged by the viral load and the CD4 count. Check the limits this study sets.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Hepatitis B tests
Hepatitis B is a virus that infects the liver. These are separate tests: HBsAg positive usually means a current infection (a recent vaccination can briefly cause it too); total anti-HBc (HBcAb) positive means an infection now or in the past; HBV DNA measures how much virus is in the blood.
Some studies accept a past infection if HBV DNA is undetectable, sometimes with antiviral medicine during the study. Check what this study allows.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
The left facial side of each participant received subcision alone using a blunt-tip cannula to release fibrotic adhesions beneath atrophic acne scars. Three sessions were performed at Weeks 0, 4, and 8.
Procedure: Subcision
The right facial side of each participant received subcision followed by subdermal injection of 2.5 mL of a suspension containing human adipose-derived stem cell exosomes and powdered polydioxanone. Three sessions were performed at Weeks 0, 4, and 8.
Procedure: Subcision · Other: Human Adipose-Derived Stem Cell Exosomes and Powdered Polydioxanone
Subdermal release of fibrotic scar adhesions using a 25-gauge, 50-mm blunt-tip cannula, with linear lancing and side-to-side fanning movements. Performed at Weeks 0, 4, and 8.
A suspension prepared by mixing 5 mL of human adipose-derived stem cell exosomes, containing approximately 15 billion particles, with 150 mg of powdered polydioxanone. A 2.5-mL volume of the prepared suspension was injected subdermally into the right facial side after subcision at each treatment session.
Change in Atrophic Acne Scar Severity Using the Goodman and Baron Qualitative Acne Scar Grading System
Change from baseline to Week 16 in acne scar severity, assessed separately for each facial side by an independent blinded dermatologist using standardized photographs. The Goodman and Baron Qualitative Acne Scar Grading System grades severity from 1 to 4: grade 1 = macular scarring, grade 2 = mild scarring, grade 3 = moderate scarring, and grade 4 = severe scarring. Lower grades indicate less severe scarring. Changes will be compared between the combination-treatment side and the subcision-only side.
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0) and Week 16
Dermatologist-Rated Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale
Overall aesthetic improvement of each facial side, assessed by the blinded dermatologist using the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale: 1 = exceptional improvement, 2 = very improved, 3 = improved, 4 = unaltered, and 5 = worsened. Lower scores indicate greater improvement.
Time frame: Week 16
Change in Participant-Rated Satisfaction With Facial Appearance
Participant-rated satisfaction with facial appearance before and after treatment, using a four-category self-satisfaction scale: 1 = poor (0-24%), 2 = good (25-49%), 3 = very good (50-74%), and 4 = excellent (75-100%). Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction.
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0) and Week 16
Procedural Pain
Participant-rated pain immediately after each treatment, measured using a Numeric Rating Scale from 0 = no pain to 10 = worst imaginable pain. Higher scores indicate greater pain.
Time frame: Immediately after treatment at Weeks 0, 4, 8, 12 and through week 16
Duration of Post-Procedural Downtime
Duration of post-procedural downtime in days after each treatment session, recorded using participant treatment diaries and investigator assessments.
Time frame: Following treatments at Weeks 0, 4, 8, 12 and through week 16
Change in Skin Colour Unevenness
Change from baseline to Week 16 in skin colour unevenness, assessed using the corresponding item of the Galderma Facial Skin Quality Assessment Scale. Severity is rated from 0 to 3: 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, and 3 = severe. Lower scores indicate more even skin colour.
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0) and Week 16
Plan to share: Undecided — The team has not decided
Ran from Dec 2023 to primary completion in Sep 2024, 9 months.
Of 33 industry-sponsored interventional studies with no phase under Cicatrix, half reached primary completion within 9 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 8 and three quarters within 20. This study's 9 months is close to that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 206 studies reached it within 18 months; a quarter within 8 and three quarters within 36.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
COSMEDICIAN AP SDN BHD