A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Four Ablative Fractionated Lasers for Photoaging: A Quadrant Study
Background Fractionated technology has revolutionized laser therapy. With the success of initial devices, several fractionated lasers have appeared on the market. Claims of superiority have made device choice difficult for physicians and patients. Materials and Methods Twelve subjects were treated w...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Dermatologic surgery 2012-09, Vol.38 (9), p.1477-1489 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1489 |
---|---|
container_issue | 9 |
container_start_page | 1477 |
container_title | Dermatologic surgery |
container_volume | 38 |
creator | LaTowsky, Brenda C. Abbasi, Naheed Dover, Jeffrey S. Arndt, Kenneth A. Kaminer, Michael S. Rohrer, Thomas E. MacGregor, Jennifer L. Wesley, Naissan O. Durfee, Melissa A. Tahan, Steven R. |
description | Background
Fractionated technology has revolutionized laser therapy. With the success of initial devices, several fractionated lasers have appeared on the market. Claims of superiority have made device choice difficult for physicians and patients.
Materials and Methods
Twelve subjects were treated with fractionated ablative lasers (10,600‐nm carbon dioxide and 2790‐nm yttrium scandium gallium garnet) in this institutional review board–approved trial. Each face was divided into four quadrants, and each quadrant was randomly treated using one of four lasers. Clinical experience was used to optimize settings. Two patients submitted biopsies from each quadrant immediately after treatment. Patients and blinded investigators assessed pain during treatment and post‐treatment improvement in photoaging (measured by rhytides, lentigines, texture, and pore size) using a five‐point scale.
Results
All devices resulted in statistical improvement in photoaging in all patients, but no device was statistically significantly superior. No statistically significant difference was found in pain scores. All patients reported satisfaction 1 month after treatment. Three patients experienced adverse reactions. Histologically, there were no statistically significant differences between devices.
Conclusions
Fractionated ablative lasers reliably result in improvement in photoaging. Despite marketing claims, no statistically significant differences were found in outcomes, pain during treatment, or histologic findings. Even with experienced users, significant adverse reactions are possible. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1524-4725.2012.02500.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1039883751</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1039883751</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3990-f5563e756c32c3ff7dec93400694b3d43f682f460567ebdcbb94fe953b47b9693</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkEtv1DAQgC0Eog_4C8gXJA4k9TsxEofV0oVKKxVoe7YcP4pX2bi1E-jy63HYpVw7lxlpvnnoAwBiVOMSZ5sac8Iq1hBeE4RJjQhHqH54Bo4fG89LjRpRIY7JETjJeYMKKSl6CY4IabFgDB8Du4Df9WDjNvx29j1cxmFMse-dhdcp6B5GD1dxSnDR9XoMPx1cJW3GEAc9Fmats0sZ-pjg1x9xjPo2DLcf4AJ-m7RNehjh1TjZ3Svwwus-u9eHfApuVufXyy_V-vLzxXKxrgyVElWec0Fdw4WhxFDvG-uMpAwhIVlHLaNetMQzgbhoXGdN10nmneS0Y00nhaSn4N1-712K95PLo9qGbFzf68HFKSuMqGxb2nBc0HaPmhRzTs6ruxS2Ou0KpGbHaqNmlWpWqWbH6q9j9VBG3xyuTN3W2cfBf1IL8PYA6Gx074sIE_J_TlCJUEsK93HP_Qq92z35AfXp6mau6B_popZW</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1039883751</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Four Ablative Fractionated Lasers for Photoaging: A Quadrant Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>LaTowsky, Brenda C. ; Abbasi, Naheed ; Dover, Jeffrey S. ; Arndt, Kenneth A. ; Kaminer, Michael S. ; Rohrer, Thomas E. ; MacGregor, Jennifer L. ; Wesley, Naissan O. ; Durfee, Melissa A. ; Tahan, Steven R.</creator><creatorcontrib>LaTowsky, Brenda C. ; Abbasi, Naheed ; Dover, Jeffrey S. ; Arndt, Kenneth A. ; Kaminer, Michael S. ; Rohrer, Thomas E. ; MacGregor, Jennifer L. ; Wesley, Naissan O. ; Durfee, Melissa A. ; Tahan, Steven R.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Fractionated technology has revolutionized laser therapy. With the success of initial devices, several fractionated lasers have appeared on the market. Claims of superiority have made device choice difficult for physicians and patients.
Materials and Methods
Twelve subjects were treated with fractionated ablative lasers (10,600‐nm carbon dioxide and 2790‐nm yttrium scandium gallium garnet) in this institutional review board–approved trial. Each face was divided into four quadrants, and each quadrant was randomly treated using one of four lasers. Clinical experience was used to optimize settings. Two patients submitted biopsies from each quadrant immediately after treatment. Patients and blinded investigators assessed pain during treatment and post‐treatment improvement in photoaging (measured by rhytides, lentigines, texture, and pore size) using a five‐point scale.
Results
All devices resulted in statistical improvement in photoaging in all patients, but no device was statistically significantly superior. No statistically significant difference was found in pain scores. All patients reported satisfaction 1 month after treatment. Three patients experienced adverse reactions. Histologically, there were no statistically significant differences between devices.
Conclusions
Fractionated ablative lasers reliably result in improvement in photoaging. Despite marketing claims, no statistically significant differences were found in outcomes, pain during treatment, or histologic findings. Even with experienced users, significant adverse reactions are possible.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1076-0512</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1524-4725</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4725.2012.02500.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22816441</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden, MA: Wiley</publisher><subject>Adult ; Analysis of Variance ; Biological and medical sciences ; Dermatology ; Face - surgery ; Female ; Humans ; Laser Therapy - adverse effects ; Laser Therapy - instrumentation ; Lasers, Gas - adverse effects ; Lasers, Gas - therapeutic use ; Lasers, Solid-State - adverse effects ; Lasers, Solid-State - therapeutic use ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Pain - etiology ; Patient Satisfaction ; Photography ; Single-Blind Method ; Skin Aging - pathology ; Skin plastic surgery ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Dermatologic surgery, 2012-09, Vol.38 (9), p.1477-1489</ispartof><rights>2012 by the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery, Inc. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3990-f5563e756c32c3ff7dec93400694b3d43f682f460567ebdcbb94fe953b47b9693</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3990-f5563e756c32c3ff7dec93400694b3d43f682f460567ebdcbb94fe953b47b9693</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1524-4725.2012.02500.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1524-4725.2012.02500.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1416,27923,27924,45573,45574</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=26390082$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22816441$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>LaTowsky, Brenda C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abbasi, Naheed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dover, Jeffrey S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arndt, Kenneth A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaminer, Michael S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rohrer, Thomas E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacGregor, Jennifer L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wesley, Naissan O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Durfee, Melissa A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tahan, Steven R.</creatorcontrib><title>A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Four Ablative Fractionated Lasers for Photoaging: A Quadrant Study</title><title>Dermatologic surgery</title><addtitle>Dermatol Surg</addtitle><description>Background
Fractionated technology has revolutionized laser therapy. With the success of initial devices, several fractionated lasers have appeared on the market. Claims of superiority have made device choice difficult for physicians and patients.
Materials and Methods
Twelve subjects were treated with fractionated ablative lasers (10,600‐nm carbon dioxide and 2790‐nm yttrium scandium gallium garnet) in this institutional review board–approved trial. Each face was divided into four quadrants, and each quadrant was randomly treated using one of four lasers. Clinical experience was used to optimize settings. Two patients submitted biopsies from each quadrant immediately after treatment. Patients and blinded investigators assessed pain during treatment and post‐treatment improvement in photoaging (measured by rhytides, lentigines, texture, and pore size) using a five‐point scale.
Results
All devices resulted in statistical improvement in photoaging in all patients, but no device was statistically significantly superior. No statistically significant difference was found in pain scores. All patients reported satisfaction 1 month after treatment. Three patients experienced adverse reactions. Histologically, there were no statistically significant differences between devices.
Conclusions
Fractionated ablative lasers reliably result in improvement in photoaging. Despite marketing claims, no statistically significant differences were found in outcomes, pain during treatment, or histologic findings. Even with experienced users, significant adverse reactions are possible.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Dermatology</subject><subject>Face - surgery</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laser Therapy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Laser Therapy - instrumentation</subject><subject>Lasers, Gas - adverse effects</subject><subject>Lasers, Gas - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Lasers, Solid-State - adverse effects</subject><subject>Lasers, Solid-State - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Pain - etiology</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction</subject><subject>Photography</subject><subject>Single-Blind Method</subject><subject>Skin Aging - pathology</subject><subject>Skin plastic surgery</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1076-0512</issn><issn>1524-4725</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkEtv1DAQgC0Eog_4C8gXJA4k9TsxEofV0oVKKxVoe7YcP4pX2bi1E-jy63HYpVw7lxlpvnnoAwBiVOMSZ5sac8Iq1hBeE4RJjQhHqH54Bo4fG89LjRpRIY7JETjJeYMKKSl6CY4IabFgDB8Du4Df9WDjNvx29j1cxmFMse-dhdcp6B5GD1dxSnDR9XoMPx1cJW3GEAc9Fmats0sZ-pjg1x9xjPo2DLcf4AJ-m7RNehjh1TjZ3Svwwus-u9eHfApuVufXyy_V-vLzxXKxrgyVElWec0Fdw4WhxFDvG-uMpAwhIVlHLaNetMQzgbhoXGdN10nmneS0Y00nhaSn4N1-712K95PLo9qGbFzf68HFKSuMqGxb2nBc0HaPmhRzTs6ruxS2Ou0KpGbHaqNmlWpWqWbH6q9j9VBG3xyuTN3W2cfBf1IL8PYA6Gx074sIE_J_TlCJUEsK93HP_Qq92z35AfXp6mau6B_popZW</recordid><startdate>201209</startdate><enddate>201209</enddate><creator>LaTowsky, Brenda C.</creator><creator>Abbasi, Naheed</creator><creator>Dover, Jeffrey S.</creator><creator>Arndt, Kenneth A.</creator><creator>Kaminer, Michael S.</creator><creator>Rohrer, Thomas E.</creator><creator>MacGregor, Jennifer L.</creator><creator>Wesley, Naissan O.</creator><creator>Durfee, Melissa A.</creator><creator>Tahan, Steven R.</creator><general>Wiley</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201209</creationdate><title>A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Four Ablative Fractionated Lasers for Photoaging: A Quadrant Study</title><author>LaTowsky, Brenda C. ; Abbasi, Naheed ; Dover, Jeffrey S. ; Arndt, Kenneth A. ; Kaminer, Michael S. ; Rohrer, Thomas E. ; MacGregor, Jennifer L. ; Wesley, Naissan O. ; Durfee, Melissa A. ; Tahan, Steven R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3990-f5563e756c32c3ff7dec93400694b3d43f682f460567ebdcbb94fe953b47b9693</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Dermatology</topic><topic>Face - surgery</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laser Therapy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Laser Therapy - instrumentation</topic><topic>Lasers, Gas - adverse effects</topic><topic>Lasers, Gas - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Lasers, Solid-State - adverse effects</topic><topic>Lasers, Solid-State - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Pain - etiology</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction</topic><topic>Photography</topic><topic>Single-Blind Method</topic><topic>Skin Aging - pathology</topic><topic>Skin plastic surgery</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>LaTowsky, Brenda C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abbasi, Naheed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dover, Jeffrey S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arndt, Kenneth A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaminer, Michael S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rohrer, Thomas E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacGregor, Jennifer L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wesley, Naissan O.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Durfee, Melissa A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tahan, Steven R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Dermatologic surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>LaTowsky, Brenda C.</au><au>Abbasi, Naheed</au><au>Dover, Jeffrey S.</au><au>Arndt, Kenneth A.</au><au>Kaminer, Michael S.</au><au>Rohrer, Thomas E.</au><au>MacGregor, Jennifer L.</au><au>Wesley, Naissan O.</au><au>Durfee, Melissa A.</au><au>Tahan, Steven R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Four Ablative Fractionated Lasers for Photoaging: A Quadrant Study</atitle><jtitle>Dermatologic surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Dermatol Surg</addtitle><date>2012-09</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1477</spage><epage>1489</epage><pages>1477-1489</pages><issn>1076-0512</issn><eissn>1524-4725</eissn><abstract>Background
Fractionated technology has revolutionized laser therapy. With the success of initial devices, several fractionated lasers have appeared on the market. Claims of superiority have made device choice difficult for physicians and patients.
Materials and Methods
Twelve subjects were treated with fractionated ablative lasers (10,600‐nm carbon dioxide and 2790‐nm yttrium scandium gallium garnet) in this institutional review board–approved trial. Each face was divided into four quadrants, and each quadrant was randomly treated using one of four lasers. Clinical experience was used to optimize settings. Two patients submitted biopsies from each quadrant immediately after treatment. Patients and blinded investigators assessed pain during treatment and post‐treatment improvement in photoaging (measured by rhytides, lentigines, texture, and pore size) using a five‐point scale.
Results
All devices resulted in statistical improvement in photoaging in all patients, but no device was statistically significantly superior. No statistically significant difference was found in pain scores. All patients reported satisfaction 1 month after treatment. Three patients experienced adverse reactions. Histologically, there were no statistically significant differences between devices.
Conclusions
Fractionated ablative lasers reliably result in improvement in photoaging. Despite marketing claims, no statistically significant differences were found in outcomes, pain during treatment, or histologic findings. Even with experienced users, significant adverse reactions are possible.</abstract><cop>Malden, MA</cop><pub>Wiley</pub><pmid>22816441</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1524-4725.2012.02500.x</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1076-0512 |
ispartof | Dermatologic surgery, 2012-09, Vol.38 (9), p.1477-1489 |
issn | 1076-0512 1524-4725 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1039883751 |
source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Journals@Ovid Complete |
subjects | Adult Analysis of Variance Biological and medical sciences Dermatology Face - surgery Female Humans Laser Therapy - adverse effects Laser Therapy - instrumentation Lasers, Gas - adverse effects Lasers, Gas - therapeutic use Lasers, Solid-State - adverse effects Lasers, Solid-State - therapeutic use Medical sciences Middle Aged Pain - etiology Patient Satisfaction Photography Single-Blind Method Skin Aging - pathology Skin plastic surgery Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Treatment Outcome |
title | A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Four Ablative Fractionated Lasers for Photoaging: A Quadrant Study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T00%3A46%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Randomized,%20Controlled%20Trial%20of%20Four%20Ablative%20Fractionated%20Lasers%20for%20Photoaging:%20A%20Quadrant%20Study&rft.jtitle=Dermatologic%20surgery&rft.au=LaTowsky,%20Brenda%20C.&rft.date=2012-09&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1477&rft.epage=1489&rft.pages=1477-1489&rft.issn=1076-0512&rft.eissn=1524-4725&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1524-4725.2012.02500.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1039883751%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1039883751&rft_id=info:pmid/22816441&rfr_iscdi=true |