: This research aims to synthesize existing data on the evidence gap in scar treatment and evaluate the effectiveness of acupuncture and dry needling in treating scars and related symptoms. : The article adhered to the PRISMA 2020 statement for recommended reporting elements in systematic reviews. The inclusion criteria followed the PICO methodology. The literature search was conducted using databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Semantic Scholar, Europe PubMed Central, and Google Scholar. Studies on acupuncture and dry needling for scar treatment were included. Because of the diversity of the studies' results and methodologies, a systematic review was conducted to organize and describe the findings without attempting a numerical synthesis. : Nineteen studies relevant to the article's theme were identified, with eleven selected for detailed review. The studies included two case reports on dry needling, one case series on dry needling, five case reports on acupuncture, two randomized controlled trials on acupuncture, and one case report on Fu's subcutaneous needling. A quality assessment was conducted using the JBI CAT and PEDro scales. Four case reports scored 7 points, one case scored 8 points, three cases were rated 6 points or lower, the case series was rated 6 points, and the randomized controlled trials scored 8 and 5 points. Most studies demonstrated a desired therapeutic effect in scar treatment with acupuncture and dry needling, but the level of evidence varied across studies. The analysis does not conclusively support the use of acupuncture and dry needling to improve scar conditions. : Although dry-needling and acupuncture techniques are popular in physiotherapy, adequate scientific evidence is currently not available to support their effectiveness in scar treatment. There are gaps in the research methodology, a lack of randomized trials, and significant heterogeneity in the assessment of effects.