Rosehip oil for scars: what the evidence says and what it is given too much credit for

The only published systematic review on rosehip oil and wound healing ends by saying, in those words, that it cannot recommend its use. Not because it did badly in the studies —the two it found were favourable— but because it only found two, and two will not support a recommendation.

That does not mean it is a fraud or that you should throw the bottle away. It means something else, more uncomfortable and more useful: that almost nothing you put on a scar has the evidence behind it that its reputation suggests, including the silicone we ourselves recommend. This page puts each thing in its place, with the study in front of it.

This piece belongs to the scar cluster and deals only with the products people buy for themselves. The treatment timetable for an operated scar —when silicone starts, when pressure, when laser— belongs to the post-surgical scar protocol.

What the review actually says

In January 2024, the Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology published the first review to gather what has been studied on rosehip extract and wound healing. It searched PubMed and MEDLINE for everything published up to December 2022.

Of 20 articles identified, 2 reached the final analysis. Both favourable: the treated groups healed faster and with less erythema than the controls. In one of them the difference was 7.53 days against 11.83.

And even so, the authors’ conclusion is this:

While promising, there are insufficient data to confirm its efficacy and optimal dosage. Therefore, we cannot recommend the use of rosehip oil for the treatment of wounds.

🔑 It is worth understanding why a review with two favourable results ends like that. Two small studies do not tell you who benefits, how much is needed, for how long, or whether the effect is down to the oil or to the fact of massaging the area twice a day. Recommending something means committing to those answers, and they are not there.

The natural retinoic argument, taken apart

It is the one most often repeated: rosehip oil contains retinoic acid —the active substance in tretinoin— so it would be a natural retinoid.

The first part is true: all-trans retinoic acid has been detected in the seed oil, and in greater quantity in the cold-pressed form than in the solvent-extracted one. The second part is where it breaks down, for three reasons.

1. The published figures do not agree with one another. The available analyses give values that differ by several orders of magnitude depending on the extraction method and the paper consulted. 🚨 That is why you will not find a percentage on this page: giving one would mean picking whichever figure suits best from several that contradict each other.

2. And there is a regulatory reason that settles the matter. Retinoic acid (tretinoin) is a prescription-only medicine in Spain: it is authorised in AEMPS product information at 0.25 and 0.5 mg per gram, with specific indications. A cosmetic containing retinoic acid in a pharmacologically active amount would not be a cosmetic.

🔑 Put the other way round, which is how it makes sense: if rosehip oil contained enough tretinoin to do what tretinoin does, it could not be sold without a prescription. That it is sold without one is, in itself, the proof that it does not contain it in that amount.

3. And even if it did, tretinoin is not a scar treatment. Its authorised indications are mild to moderate acne and, as an adjuvant, fine wrinkles and mottled hyperpigmentation. Scars are not on that list.

What does have backing — and how strong it is

This is where this page becomes uncomfortable, because it touches what we recommend ourselves.

Silicone is first line. The international clinical recommendations on scar management place it as the first option in linear hypertrophic scars, which are the surgical and traumatic ones. It is what this clinic’s protocol uses.

⚠️ And its Cochrane review, from 2021, says this: it gathered 13 randomised trials with 468 people and rated all the evidence as low or very low certainty, because of small sample sizes and poorly described methods. Its stated conclusion is that the rigorous evidence available is limited and that more trials are needed.

🔑 Both things are true at once, and they do not contradict each other. Silicone is first line because it is the best there is, it is cheap, it is harmless and there is professional consensus — not because a definitive trial exists. In medicine that happens more often than it seems, and saying so does not weaken the recommendation: it makes it honest.

One figure from that same review that sets the map out well: silicone came out slightly better than onion extract, which is the other major pharmacy product for scars.

Exactly what is done and when is in the post-surgical scar protocol, and the options once the scar is established are in scar revision.

And what is advised against: vitamin E

It is the product with the greatest popular reputation for scars and it has a classic trial against it, published in Dermatologic Surgery in 1999.

Fifteen patients who had undergone Mohs surgery applied vitamin E ointment to one half of their scar and an ordinary emollient to the other, twice a day. The result:

• In 90% of cases, vitamin E did not improve the appearance of the scar or made it worse.
• 33% developed contact dermatitis from the vitamin E itself.

⚠️ It is a small, old study, and that should be said. But it is the one there is, it has not been contradicted, and it points in a clear direction.

So, should I use it or not?

The honest answer is that you can, if you like, as long as you know what you are buying.

What reasonably counts in its favour:

• It is an emollient, and a moisturised scar itches less and pulls less. That is no small thing when you have to live with it.
• The daily massage it obliges you to do makes sense in itself, whatever is in the bottle.
• It is cheap and low risk on closed, intact skin.
• The two trials that exist came out in favour. A little is more than nothing.

What has to be clear:

• 🚫 It is not a substitute for silicone if your scar has an indication for silicone. There you would be swapping what has consensus for what does not.
• It does not do what a retinoid does. That argument does not hold.
• Low risk is not no risk: any vegetable oil can sensitise, and if itching, redness or a flare-up appears, it is stopped.
• 🚨 Never on an open wound, a scab or stitches. That is not a scar yet.

Pregnancy and breastfeeding

This section matters more than it seems, because a large share of the scars treated are caesarean scars, and they are treated while breastfeeding.

This clinic’s criterion is deliberately strict: a product is used in pregnancy or breastfeeding if there is evidence that there is no transfer to the foetus or to the milk. If that evidence does not exist, it is left out. Not because harm is on record —for most cosmetics nothing is on record— but because the absence of data is not a piece of safety data.

⚠️ Applied to rosehip oil, that means we are not going to recommend it during that period, and the reason is not that we are suspicious of it: it is that there are no studies answering that question, as there are none for almost any cosmetic. Postponing an oil for a few months costs nothing.

The full criterion and what is set aside during those months is in cosmetics in pregnancy and breastfeeding. What is specific to the caesarean scar is in the scar after surgery for caesarean sequelae.

What really moves a scar

It is worth putting the bottle to scale. What most changes the outcome of a scar is not in any jar:

• The sun. An immature scar that is exposed becomes pigmented, and that pigmentation can stay.
• Smoking, which compromises the blood supply exactly when it is most needed.
• Tension on the scar: where it sits, and straining the area too soon.
• Time. A scar is not judged before a year. The worst point visually is usually between the second and the fourth month, and that is normal evolution.
• Your own way of healing, which you do not choose.

When this stops being a question of creams

🚨 It is worth having someone look at the scar if it:

• grows, becomes raised or spreads beyond the line of the original incision;
• itches or hurts persistently months later;
• opens up, weeps or changes colour strikingly;
• pulls, limits movement or feels tethered to the deeper tissue;
• or if a lump appears that changes size.

None of those things is fixed with an oil, and some have treatments with a time window.

Frequently asked questions

Does rosehip oil work for scars?

The only published systematic review, from 2024, concludes that there are not enough data to recommend it. The two trials it included were favourable —faster healing and less erythema— but two small trials do not tell you who benefits or at what dose. As an emollient to keep the scar moisturised it is a reasonable option; as a treatment, it does not have the backing attributed to it.

Is it true that rosehip oil contains natural retinoic acid?

It contains traces of all-trans retinoic acid, and that is published. But the amounts measured vary enormously between studies, and there is one argument that settles the matter: retinoic acid is a prescription medicine. If the oil contained it in an active amount, it could not be sold without one.

Is rosehip oil better than silicone?

For a surgical scar, silicone, because that is what the international recommendations place as first line. That said, it is worth knowing that its evidence is not strong either: the Cochrane review rates it as low or very low certainty. The difference lies in accumulated professional consensus, not in a definitive trial.

And vitamin E?

It comes off worst. The reference trial found that in 90% of cases it did not improve the scar or made it worse, and that 33% developed contact dermatitis. We do not recommend it.

Can I use it on my caesarean scar while breastfeeding?

Our criterion is not to use it during that period. Not because it is known to be dangerous, but because there are no studies ruling out transfer into breast milk, and during those months we prefer to postpone what has not been studied. It is prudence, not alarm.

When can I start putting something on the scar?

Once the wound has closed completely, with no scab and no stitches, and always according to what your surgeon advises at the follow-up. The timetable is in the scar protocol.

Does it work for stretch marks?

That is a different matter and we are not answering it here: a stretch mark is not a surgical scar and its evidence is its own. Ask about it at your assessment.

Sources

• Belkhelladi M, Bougrine A. Rosehip extract and wound healing: A review. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, January 2024;23(1):62-67. PMID 37605366 · DOI 10.1111/jocd.15971. — A search of PubMed and MEDLINE for everything published up to December 2022. 20 articles identified, 2 included. The treated groups healed faster and with less erythema; in one study, 7.53 ± 2.28 days against 11.83 ± 2.32. The authors’ conclusion, verbatim: While promising, there are insufficient data to confirm its efficacy and optimal dosage. Therefore, we cannot recommend the use of RO for the treatment of wounds. Verified on 16-09-2026.
• Jiang Q, Chen J, Tian F, Liu Z. Silicone gel sheeting for treating hypertrophic scars. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2021, issue 9, art. CD013357. Cochrane. — 13 randomised trials, 468 people (425 completed). All the evidence of low or very low certainty. Silicone may slightly improve the scar compared with onion extract and reduce pain compared with pressure garments or no treatment. Conclusion: the rigorous evidence available is limited and more trials are needed. Verified on 16-09-2026.
• Baumann LS, Spencer J. The effects of topical vitamin E on the cosmetic appearance of scars. Dermatologic Surgery, 1999;25(4). PMID 10417589. — 15 patients operated on with Mohs surgery; vitamin E ointment on half the scar and an emollient on the other half, twice a day. In 90% it did not improve the appearance or made it worse; 33% developed contact dermatitis. ⚠️ Small sample and an old study; it is the reference trial on the subject and it has not been contradicted. Verified on 16-09-2026.
• Mustoe TA, et al. International clinical recommendations on scar management. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2002. PMID 12142678. — International panel; places silicone sheeting as first line in linear hypertrophic scars, with intralesional corticosteroid alongside it in the cases that require it. Verified on 16-09-2026.
• AEMPS — CIMA. Product information for Retirides 0.25 mg/g and 0.5 mg/g cream (tretinoin). cima.aemps.es. — Medicine subject to medical prescription. Authorised indications: mild to moderate acne vulgaris and, as an adjuvant, fine wrinkles, mottled hyperpigmentation and roughness of the facial skin. Scars are not among them. Source already verified in-house on 27-08-2026 for the piece on retinol concentrations.
• Commission Regulation (EU) No 655/2013, laying down common criteria for claims used in relation to cosmetic products. Text in the BOE. — Criteria of truthfulness and evidential support: every claim must be supported by adequate and verifiable evidence. It is the framework under which a claim of efficacy on scars needs backing. Source already verified in-house.

⚠️ On the retinoic acid content of the oil: published analyses quantifying it do exist, but their figures differ by several orders of magnitude depending on the extraction method and the paper consulted. That is why this page states that the oil contains it and gives no percentage at all. To publish a figure, the primary analysis would have to be traced and read, not a secondary source.

Clinical confirmation by the surgeon

Validated. What the surgeon signs off on this page: that silicone is the first line of this clinic’s protocol in surgical scars and that rosehip oil does not replace it; that no topical product is recommended on a wound that has not closed; that in pregnancy and breastfeeding the clinic’s strict criterion applies; and the warning signs in the section on when a scar needs looking at. Dr Elena García Vilariño, registration no. 46/4624503 · Dr Enrique Salmerón González, registration no. 46/4624077 Last reviewed: 20 September 2026

Book your consultation

If you have a scar and you are deciding what to put on it, what most changes the outcome is usually not the bottle: it is whether that scar needs something more than a topical product. And that can only be known by looking at it. At the consultation we assess how it is evolving and how long it has been there, which is what decides whether to wait, to treat or to review.

Dr Enrique Salmerón González

Specialist in Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Surgery
Registration no. 46/4624077

Dr Elena García Vilariño

Specialist in Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Surgery
Registration no. 46/4624503