The Journal of dermatological treatment · 2015
A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of an ablative fractional 2940-nm erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet laser with a nonablative fractional 1550-nm erbium-doped glass laser for the treatment of photoaged Asian skin.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Moon Hye-Rim, Yun Woo-Jin, Lee Ye Jin, Lee Mi-Woo, Chang SungEun
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: As compared with ablative fractional CO2 laser, ablative fractional erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser is considered to be a more suitable treatment option for photoaged skin in Asians due to the lower incidence of postinflammatory hyperpigmentation.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of ablative fractional Er:YAG laser (ablative fractional resurfacing [AFR]) and nonablative fractional 1550-nm Er:glass laser (non-AFR [NAFR]) in the treatment of photoaging.
METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded comparative study. In three sessions, at four-week intervals, 19 patients received Er:YAG AFR, and 15 patients received Er:glass NAFR. Pigmentation, uneven tone/erythema, wrinkles and overall features of photoaging were scored. Patient satisfaction, adverse effects and pain scores were recorded. Melanin and erythema indexes were measured.
RESULTS: Reductions in pigmentation and uneven tone/erythema scores were significantly greater after Er:YAG AFR, while wrinkle score reduction was significantly greater after Er:glass NAFR. Physician and patient assessments for the overall features showed greater improvement in the Er:glass NAFR. Treatment-related pain or adverse events were less in the Er:YAG AFR.
CONCLUSION: Both Er:YAG AFR and Er:glass NAFR are effective and safe and could be used in a complementary manner for treating photoaged Asian skin.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of ablative fractional Er:YAG laser (ablative fractional resurfacing [AFR]) and nonablative fractional 1550-nm Er:glass laser (non-AFR [NAFR]) in the treatment of photoaging.
METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded comparative study. In three sessions, at four-week intervals, 19 patients received Er:YAG AFR, and 15 patients received Er:glass NAFR. Pigmentation, uneven tone/erythema, wrinkles and overall features of photoaging were scored. Patient satisfaction, adverse effects and pain scores were recorded. Melanin and erythema indexes were measured.
RESULTS: Reductions in pigmentation and uneven tone/erythema scores were significantly greater after Er:YAG AFR, while wrinkle score reduction was significantly greater after Er:glass NAFR. Physician and patient assessments for the overall features showed greater improvement in the Er:glass NAFR. Treatment-related pain or adverse events were less in the Er:YAG AFR.
CONCLUSION: Both Er:YAG AFR and Er:glass NAFR are effective and safe and could be used in a complementary manner for treating photoaged Asian skin.