Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al.] · 1998
Laser scar revision: comparison of CO2 laser vaporization with and without simultaneous pulsed dye laser treatment.
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Alster T S, Lewis A B, Rosenbach A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, the 585-nm pulsed dye laser (PDL) has been used successfully to treat a variety of cutaneous vascular lesions as well as hypertrophic scars. Laser scar revision has been revolutionized by the recent development of high-energy, pulsed carbon dioxide (CO2) laser systems. These new CO2 lasers allow controlled vaporization of thin layers of skin while minimizing damage to surrounding dermal structures.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a high-energy, pulsed CO2 laser alone and in combination with a 585-nm PDL on nonerythematous hypertrophic scars.
METHODS: Twenty patients with nonerythematous hypertrophic scars were treated with a high-energy, pulsed CO2 laser. One-half of each scar was additionally treated with the 585-nm PDL laser. Sequential clinical and photographic analyses were performed independently by two blinded assessors. In addition, erythema reflectance spectrometry measurements were obtained from the scars before and at regular postoperative intervals.
RESULTS: Global assessment scores and erythema spectrometry measurements were significantly improved after laser treatment. Combination CO2 and PDL laser treatment resulted in more significant improvement than CO2 laser irradiation alone.
CONCLUSION: Concomitant use of the high-energy, pulsed CO2 and PDL laser systems was superior to CO2 laser vaporization alone for revision of nonerythematous hypertrophic scars. Once again, the vascular specificity of the 585-nm PDL has been linked to improvement in hypertrophic scar tissue.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a high-energy, pulsed CO2 laser alone and in combination with a 585-nm PDL on nonerythematous hypertrophic scars.
METHODS: Twenty patients with nonerythematous hypertrophic scars were treated with a high-energy, pulsed CO2 laser. One-half of each scar was additionally treated with the 585-nm PDL laser. Sequential clinical and photographic analyses were performed independently by two blinded assessors. In addition, erythema reflectance spectrometry measurements were obtained from the scars before and at regular postoperative intervals.
RESULTS: Global assessment scores and erythema spectrometry measurements were significantly improved after laser treatment. Combination CO2 and PDL laser treatment resulted in more significant improvement than CO2 laser irradiation alone.
CONCLUSION: Concomitant use of the high-energy, pulsed CO2 and PDL laser systems was superior to CO2 laser vaporization alone for revision of nonerythematous hypertrophic scars. Once again, the vascular specificity of the 585-nm PDL has been linked to improvement in hypertrophic scar tissue.