-
Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology Apr 2022Post-acne erythema (PAE) is a common sequela of acne inflammation, and it refers to telangiectasia and erythematous lesions remaining after the acne treatment. Although... (Review)
Review
Post-acne erythema (PAE) is a common sequela of acne inflammation, and it refers to telangiectasia and erythematous lesions remaining after the acne treatment. Although some PAE lesions may improve over time, persisting PAE might be esthetically undesirable for patients. The efficacy of various treatment options for PAE has been investigated in many studies but there exists no gold standard treatment modality. In this study, we aimed to give a systematic literature review on various treatment options for PAE, the advantage of each modality, and compare their efficacy, safety, and feasibility. By using the selected keywords, we carried out a systematic search for articles published from the inception to 28 April 2021 in PubMed/Medline and Embase databases. Of the 5796 initially retrieved articles, 18 of them were fully eligible to be enrolled in our study. In this study, we found that light and laser-based devices were the most frequently used treatments for PAE. Generally, pulsed-dye lasers were the most commonly used laser devices for PAE. Neodymium:yttrium aluminum-garnet lasers were the second most commonly used modalities in treating PAE. Topical treatments such as oxymetazoline, tranexamic acid, and brimonidine tartrate are promising treatments in reducing PAE lesions. In our study, no severe side effects were found. In conclusion, both laser devices and topical agents seem to be effective for PAE lesions; however, further randomized clinical trials are needed in this field.
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Brimonidine Tartrate; Erythema; Humans; Lasers, Dye; Lasers, Solid-State; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35076997
DOI: 10.1111/jocd.14804 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022Hypertrophic and keloid scars are common skin conditions resulting from abnormal wound healing. They can cause itching, pain and have a negative physical and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hypertrophic and keloid scars are common skin conditions resulting from abnormal wound healing. They can cause itching, pain and have a negative physical and psychological impact on patients' lives. Different approaches are used aiming to improve these scars, including intralesional corticosteroids, surgery and more recently, laser therapy. Since laser therapy is expensive and may have adverse effects, it is critical to evaluate the potential benefits and harms of this therapy for treating hypertrophic and keloid scars.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of laser therapy for treating hypertrophic and keloid scars.
SEARCH METHODS
In March 2021 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL EBSCO Plus and LILACS. To identify additional studies, we also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology reports. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication, or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for treating hypertrophic or keloid scars (or both), comparing laser therapy with placebo, no intervention or another intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted the data, assessed the risk of bias of included studies and carried out GRADE assessments to assess the certainty of evidence. A third review author arbitrated if there were disagreements.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 15 RCTs, involving 604 participants (children and adults) with study sample sizes ranging from 10 to 120 participants (mean 40.27). Where studies randomised different parts of the same scar, each scar segment was the unit of analysis (906 scar segments). The length of participant follow-up varied from 12 weeks to 12 months. All included trials had a high risk of bias for at least one domain: all studies were deemed at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding of participants and personnel. The variability of intervention types, controls, follow-up periods and limitations with report data meant we pooled data for one comparison (and only two outcomes within this). Several review secondary outcomes - cosmesis, tolerance, preference for different modes of treatment, adherence, and change in quality of life - were not reported in any of the included studies. Laser versus no treatment: We found low-certainty evidence suggesting there may be more hypertrophic and keloid scar improvement (that is scars are less severe) in 585-nm pulsed-dye laser (PDL) -treated scars compared with no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.96; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11 to 3.45; two studies, 60 scar segments). It is unclear whether non-ablative fractional laser (NAFL) impacts on hypertrophic scar severity when compared with no treatment (very low-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether fractional carbon dioxide (CO) laser impacts on hypertrophic and keloid scar severity compared with no treatment (very low-certainty evidence). Eight studies reported treatment-related adverse effects but did not provide enough data for further analyses. Laser versus other treatments: We are uncertain whether treatment with 585-nm PDL impacts on hypertrophic and keloid scar severity compared with intralesional corticosteroid triamcinolone acetonide (TAC), intralesional Fluorouracil (5-FU) or combined use of TAC plus 5-FU (very low-certainty evidence). It is also uncertain whether erbium laser impacts on hypertrophic scar severity when compared with TAC (very low-certainty evidence). Other comparisons included 585-nm PDL versus silicone gel sheeting, fractional CO laser versus TAC and fractional CO laser versus verapamil. However, the authors did not report enough data regarding the severity of scars to compare the interventions. As only very low-certainty evidence is available on treatment-related adverse effects, including pain, charring (skin burning so that the surface becomes blackened), telangiectasia (a condition in which tiny blood vessels cause thread-like red lines on the skin), skin atrophy (skin thinning), purpuric discolorations, hypopigmentation (skin colour becomes lighter), and erosion (loss of part of the top layer of skin, leaving a denuded surface) secondary to blistering, we are not able to draw conclusions as to how these treatments compare. Laser plus other treatment versus other treatment: It is unclear whether 585-nm PDL plus TAC plus 5-FU leads to a higher percentage of good to excellent improvement in hypertrophic and keloid scar severity compared with TAC plus 5-FU, as the certainty of evidence has been assessed as very low. Due to very low-certainty evidence, it is also uncertain whether CO laser plus TAC impacts on keloid scar severity compared with cryosurgery plus TAC. The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of neodymium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet (Nd:YAG) laser plus intralesional corticosteroid diprospan plus 5-FU on scar severity compared with diprospan plus 5-FU and about the effect of helium-neon (He-Ne) laser plus decamethyltetrasiloxane, polydimethylsiloxane and cyclopentasiloxane cream on scar severity compared with decamethyltetrasiloxane, polydimethylsiloxane and cyclopentasiloxane cream. Only very low-certainty evidence is available on treatment-related adverse effects, including pain, atrophy, erythema, telangiectasia, hypopigmentation, regrowth, hyperpigmentation (skin colour becomes darker), and depigmentation (loss of colour from the skin). Therefore, we are not able to draw conclusions as to how these treatments compare. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the effectiveness of laser therapy for treating hypertrophic and keloid scars. The available information is also insufficient to perform a more accurate analysis on treatment-related adverse effects related to laser therapy. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, conflicting results, study design issues and small sample sizes, further high-quality trials, with validated scales and core outcome sets should be developed. These trials should take into consideration the consumers' opinion and values, the need for long-term follow-up and the necessity of reporting the rate of recurrence of scars to determine whether lasers may achieve superior results when compared with other therapies for treating hypertrophic and keloid scars.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Aluminum; Atrophy; Carbon Dioxide; Child; Cicatrix, Hypertrophic; Dimethylpolysiloxanes; Erbium; Fluorouracil; Helium; Humans; Hypertrophy; Hypopigmentation; Keloid; Laser Therapy; Neodymium; Neon; Pain; Silicone Gels; Telangiectasis; Triamcinolone Acetonide; Verapamil; Wound Healing; Yttrium
PubMed: 36161591
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011642.pub2 -
Expert Review of Clinical Immunology 2023Phototherapy has been one of the first and still frequently used treatment modality for psoriasis. In the last decades, different types of lasers have been used for the...
INTRODUCTION
Phototherapy has been one of the first and still frequently used treatment modality for psoriasis. In the last decades, different types of lasers have been used for the treatment of psoriasis and other inflammatory skin diseases with variable success.
AREAS COVERED
Efficacy and safety of laser devices and intense pulsed light for the treatment of psoriasis. The literature search was conducted using the bibliographic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane. Search terms included 'laser' AND 'psoriasis,' 'IPL' AND 'psoriasis,' 'intense pulsed light' AND 'psoriasis.'
EXPERT OPINION
Due to its high efficacy and safety profile, 308-nm Excimer laser retains its specific place in the treatment of plaque psoriasis as a first- or second-line therapy in mild disease or as an adjuvant treatment in case of partial response to systemic treatments in moderate-to-severe disease. Vascular lasers remain a last line therapy that can be tried in patients with recalcitrant limited plaques or nail affection. They are easy to apply and have a very good safety profile and tolerability, but the efficacy is limited. Fractional ablative lasers for application of laser-assisted drug delivery appear interesting and a topic for further research. When using lasers for psoriasis, a good pre-treatment is mandatory.
Topics: Humans; Phototherapy; Psoriasis; Dermatitis; Administration, Cutaneous; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37079360
DOI: 10.1080/1744666X.2023.2205640 -
International Journal of Dermatology Jun 2024This systematic review assesses the evidence concerning laser treatments for nail psoriasis (NP), a prevalent condition among individuals with cutaneous psoriasis that... (Review)
Review
This systematic review assesses the evidence concerning laser treatments for nail psoriasis (NP), a prevalent condition among individuals with cutaneous psoriasis that notably affects their quality of life. Traditional treatments have limitations in terms of drug delivery and poor patient adherence, leading to interest in laser therapies for their targeted approach, extended treatment intervals, and the potential to enhance topical medication effectiveness. The MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. English-language randomized and non-randomized controlled trials with full-text availability were included. Data on the laser type, treatment protocol, Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) outcomes, and adverse events were extracted, and nail bed and matrix features and patient satisfaction were assessed. The primary effect measure was a percentage reduction in NAPSI scores from baseline. Nineteen studies involving the pulse dye laser (PDL), long-pulsed neodymium:yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser and fractional carbon dioxide laser (FCL) were identified. Lasers, particularly those used in conjunction with topical agents, have shown favorable results. PDL effectively lowered NAPSI scores, and the Nd:YAG laser had comparable effectiveness but more discomfort. FCL also shows promise, particularly for topical drug delivery. PDL and Nd:YAG laser treatment were more effective at reducing nail bed features, whereas FCL was effective at reducing both nail bed and matrix features. Overall, lasers are promising treatment alternatives for NP, with similar NAPSI outcomes to topical therapies and intralesional injections.
PubMed: 38858829
DOI: 10.1111/ijd.17304 -
Journal of Lasers in Medical Sciences 2021Currently, lasers are used to treat many diseases and their complications. However, the use of lasers in pregnant patients is still controversial. In this review, the... (Review)
Review
Currently, lasers are used to treat many diseases and their complications. However, the use of lasers in pregnant patients is still controversial. In this review, the application of lasers in the fields of urology, surgery, obstetrics, dermatology, and musculoskeletal disorders is evaluated. The following keywords were used to search through PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus: pregnancy, laser, urolithiasis, endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) or treatment, leg edema, varicose vein, venous insufficiencies, hair removal, pigmentation, telangiectasia, vascular lesions, Q switch laser, diode laser, holmium, holmium-YAG laser, erbium laser and Pulsed dye laser, low-level laser therapy, high-intensity laser therapy, pain, musculoskeletal disorders, twin to twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS), amnioreduction, and safety. Totally, 147 articles were found, and their abstracts were evaluated; out of 53 articles extracted, 14 articles were about dermatology, 24 articles were about urology, 12 articles were about obstetrics and gynecology, 10 articles were about musculoskeletal disorders and three articles were related to surgery. Laser therapy can be used as a safe treatment for urolithiasis, skin diseases, TTTS and varicose veins of the lower extremities. However, the use of laser therapy for musculoskeletal disorders during pregnancy is not recommended due to lack of evidence, and also we cannot recommend endovenous ablation.
PubMed: 34733773
DOI: 10.34172/jlms.2021.50 -
Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy Jun 2022To systematically review the efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) in the treatment of rosacea. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) in the treatment of rosacea.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published by February 5, 2022, using "photodynamic therapy" and "rosacea" as the keywords.
RESULTS
Nine studies were included in the review. The number of patients varied from 1 to 30 in each study, with ages ranging from 18 to 76 years. Methyl aminolevulinate (MAL) and aminolevulinic acid (ALA) were used as the photosensitizer, and red light, blue light, intense pulsed light (IPL), long-pulsed dye laser (LPDL), pulsed dye laser (PDL), and tungsten lamp were used as the light or laser source. The follow-up time ranged from one month to 25 months. Most of the studies showed a satisfactory clinical response, and the side effects were tolerant and temporary.
CONCLUSION
Current studies have provided preliminary evidence that PDT is an efficient and safe therapy in treating rosacea. However, rigorous randomized control trials (RCTs) with a larger sample size and longer follow-up time are warranted to verify the curative effects of PDT in treating rosacea and explore the most appropriate treatment schedule.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aminolevulinic Acid; Humans; Lasers, Dye; Light; Middle Aged; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Rosacea; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 35470124
DOI: 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2022.102875 -
Lasers in Medical Science Dec 2022Scarring is one of the most esthetically challenging and psychologically burdening aspects following inflammatory acne. While "macular" disease is the scar subtype with... (Review)
Review
Scarring is one of the most esthetically challenging and psychologically burdening aspects following inflammatory acne. While "macular" disease is the scar subtype with the least complicated outcome, its phase can be regarded as the most defining in the ultimate scar appearance. Moreover, with lasers recently gaining much popularity in the scientific community for managing several dermatologic conditions, we aimed to evaluate whether they would lead to significant benefits. For this systematic review, four databases consisting of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science were searched using a comprehensive string, with the data from the relevant yet eligible identified records qualitatively synthesized. After investigating the data obtained from the nine included studies, we found the utilized lasers, namely neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet, fractional carbon dioxide, pulsed dye, erbium:glass, pro-yellow, and high-power optically pumped semiconductor, to be highly effective in managing the erythematous or dyspigmented appearance with the reduced elasticity also significantly improving. Moreover, the adverse events were both bearable and minimal, and transient. However, the degree of improvement each type of scar demonstrated following laser therapy varied based on the laser used. Neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet, fractional carbon dioxide, and pulsed dye are the most commonly investigated lasers for managing macular acne scars, demonstrating eye-catching capabilities in managing either erythema or dyspigmentation. However, we still recommend that further comparative interventional studies be carried out, while the intended outcomes also assessed with objective measures for further clarification.
Topics: Humans; Cicatrix; Aluminum; Lasers, Solid-State; Carbon Dioxide; Neodymium; Treatment Outcome; Acne Vulgaris; Erythema; Yttrium; Elasticity
PubMed: 35918567
DOI: 10.1007/s10103-022-03621-0 -
Lasers in Surgery and Medicine Jan 2024The current gold standard treatment for port-wine stains (PWS) is pulsed dye laser (PDL). However, multiple treatment sessions may be necessary and complete resolution...
OBJECTIVES
The current gold standard treatment for port-wine stains (PWS) is pulsed dye laser (PDL). However, multiple treatment sessions may be necessary and complete resolution is often not achieved. Neoangiogenesis can occur soon after treatment and is thought to be a major factor contributing to treatment failure. Adjuvant antiangiogenic topical therapies may therefore improve the efficacy of pulsed dye laser treatment of port-wine stains.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and clinicaltrials.gov using "port-wine stain," "nevus flammeus," "capillary malformation," "sturge weber," and "pulsed dye laser" as keywords and medical subject heading (MeSH) terms. Articles were included if they (1) were a randomized controlled trial (RCT); (2) studied patients with PWS; and (3) investigated topical adjuvant therapies with PDL. Bias was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Randomized Controlled Trial Standard Checklist.
RESULTS
1835 studies were identified, with six studies meeting inclusion criteria. The total number of patients studied was 103 (range: 9-23), with 8-36 week follow-up. The average age ranged from 11 to 33.5 years old. Three studies examined adjuvant topical sirolimus (n = 52), two examined timolol (n = 29), and one studied imiquimod (n = 22). Two of three RCTs reported no improvement through colorimetric analysis with topical sirolimus; however, one of these studies did show a significant improvement through Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) score. The last sirolimus study showed significant improvement through digital photographic image scoring (DPIA). Studies examining topical timolol reported no change in PWS appearance compared to placebo. The addition of 5% adjuvant imiquimod cream did lead to significant improvement. A variety of outcome measures were used. Imiquimod and sirolimus led to mild cutaneous adverse events, while timolol caused no side effects. None of the adverse events led to treatment discontinuation. Study quality was moderate in three, high in two, and low in one.
CONCLUSION
The efficacy of adjuvant topical therapy was unclear. Limitations included variation in concentration and duration of adjuvant therapies, differences in follow-up time, and inconsistent outcome measure reporting. Given their potential clinical promise, larger prospective studies examining topical adjuvant therapies should be considered.
Topics: Humans; Child; Adolescent; Young Adult; Adult; Port-Wine Stain; Imiquimod; Timolol; Lasers, Dye; Sirolimus; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37431532
DOI: 10.1002/lsm.23706 -
Lasers in Medical Science Dec 2023Pulsed dye laser (PDL) is the most commonly used method for port-wine stain (PWS); however, no studies have reported the safety of PDL. This review aimed to collect and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Pulsed dye laser (PDL) is the most commonly used method for port-wine stain (PWS); however, no studies have reported the safety of PDL. This review aimed to collect and summarize complications reported in relevant literature, assess complication rates in treating PWS with PDL, and explore the relevant influencing factors. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to search for related studies in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library until August 2022. Two reviewers independently evaluated the risk of bias of included studies. Stata Software version 17.0 was used for the analysis. All complications reported in the literature are divided into acute phase complications and long-term complications. Overall pooled purpura, edema, crusting, blistering, hyperpigmentation, hypopigmentation, and scarring rates were 98.3%, 97.6%, 21.5%, 8.7%, 12.8%, 0.9%, and 0.2%, respectively. Although the acute adverse reactions were found to be common, the long-term permanent complications clearly have a lower frequency, and the occurrence of scarring is much lower than that initially thought. This indicates that effective protective measures after treatment are very important for preventing scar formation. Overall, PDL treatment for PWS shows a high level of safety and low chances of causing long-term complications.
Topics: Humans; Port-Wine Stain; Treatment Outcome; Lasers, Dye; Cicatrix; Combined Modality Therapy
PubMed: 38141129
DOI: 10.1007/s10103-023-03961-5 -
Acta Dermato-venereologica Jan 2024Utilization of lasers and energy-based devices for surgical scar minimization has been substantially evaluated in placebo-controlled trials. The aim of this study was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Utilization of lasers and energy-based devices for surgical scar minimization has been substantially evaluated in placebo-controlled trials. The aim of this study was to compare reported measures of efficacy of lasers and energy-based devices in clinical trials in preventing surgical scar formation in a systematic review and network meta-analyses. Five electronic databases, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library, were searched to retrieve relevant articles. The search was limited to randomized controlled trials that reported on clinical outcomes of surgical scars with treatment initiation no later than 6 months after surgery and a follow-up period of at least 3 months. A total of 18 randomized controlled trials involving 482 participants and 671 postsurgical wounds were included in the network meta-analyses. The results showed that the most efficacious treatments were achieved using low-level laser therapy) (weighted mean difference -3.78; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) -6.32, -1.24) and pulsed dye laser (weighted mean difference -2.46; 95% CI -4.53, -0.38). Nevertheless, low-level laser therapy and pulsed dye laser demonstrated comparable outcomes in surgical scar minimization (weighted mean difference -1.32, 95% CI -3.53, 0.89). The findings of this network meta-analyses suggest that low-level laser therapy and pulsed dye laser are both effective treatments for minimization of scar formation following primary closure of surgical wounds with comparable treatment outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Cicatrix; Lasers, Dye; Databases, Factual; Low-Level Light Therapy
PubMed: 38189223
DOI: 10.2340/actadv.v104.18477