Postoperative facial scars frequently remain aesthetically problematic despite advances in laser-based treatments, as residual inflammation and disorganized dermal remodeling often limit clinical outcomes. Exosome-based formulations have gained attention as biologically active adjuncts capable of influencing key wound-healing pathways, including inflammatory regulation, neovascularization, and extracellular matrix modulation. This randomized, controlled clinical study aimed to evaluate the short-term clinical effect of laser-assisted delivery of exosome skin boosters for postoperative facial scars and facial rejuvenation. Seventy-five patients with postoperative facial scars were randomly allocated to receive fractional non-ablative Nd:YAG laser treatment alone or in combination with either human-derived or plant-derived exosome skin boosters. All participants completed five treatment sessions at two-week intervals. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using validated scar assessment tools, including the modified Vancouver Scar Scale and the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale, along with objective imaging analyses using Mark-Vu and ImageJ software. Compared with laser monotherapy, adjunctive exosome treatment was associated with numerically greater short-term improvements in scar appearance and reductions in grayscale intensity. Improvements in additional skin quality parameters, such as pigmentation uniformity, erythema, pore size, and fine wrinkles, were also observed in the exosome-treated groups. Clinical responses were comparable between human- and plant-derived exosome formulations, and no serious adverse events were reported. These findings indicate that exosome-based skin boosters may serve as a safe and well-tolerated biological complement to laser therapy for short-term improvement of postoperative facial scars and skin quality. Larger studies with longer follow-up are warranted to determine long-term efficacy and clinical durability.
Park et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: