Blog
Feedback
schliessen

Filtern

 

Bibliotheken

Logo der Bibliothek

Logo FID Pharmazie PubPharm Discovery System Universitätsbibliothek Braunschweig Institut für Informationssysteme

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of CO2 Laser-Assisted Blepharoplasty Using Two Different Methods

PURPOSE: Numerous methods have been developed for blepharoplasty, including carbon dioxide (CO2) laser-assisted blepharoplasty. Although the superiority of CO2 laser compared with the scalpel for blepharoplasty has been proposed, to the best of our knowledge, no study has compared the clinical outcomes of blepharoplasty with the CO2 laser alone versus the combined use of a scalpel and CO2 laser

PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the present randomized clinical trial, 21 healthy patients underwent bilateral upper eyelid blepharoplasty. For each patient, an initial skin incision was made using the CO2 laser (setting, continuous emission; ultrapulse mode; 3 W of power) on 1 side and a scalpel on the other side. The remaining blepharoplasty steps were conducted using the CO2 laser (setting, continuous emission; 9 W of power) in both groups. The patients were evaluated on postoperative days 1, 3, 7, 14, and 30 using the postoperative repair criteria, including edema and ecchymosis. The Manchester scar scale was used to evaluate the results at 60 days after surgery

RESULTS: Our comparison of the 2 methods showed no significant differences at 1 month after surgery using the evaluation criteria. The scar index was not significantly different after 60 days, despite lower scores in the scalpel group

CONCLUSIONS: In upper eyelid blepharoplasty, making an initial incision with a scalpel, followed by use of a laser provides advantages similar to those found by performing the entire procedure with a CO2 laser alone

Year of Publication: 2020
Contained in: Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons Vol. 78, No. 6 (2020), p. 1006-1012
All journal articles: Search for all articles in this journal
Language: English
Contributors: Fallahi, Hamid Reza | Author
Keyhan, Seied Omid
Niamtu, Joe
Alikazemi, Milad
Habibagahi, Raha
Full text access:
Electronic availability is being checked...
Links: Full Text (dx.doi.org)
Keywords: Journal Article
ISSN: 1531-5053
Note: Copyright: From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Notes: Date Revised 02.06.2020
published: Print-Electronic
Citation Status In-Data-Review
Copyright: From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
PMID:
    32081690
Physical Description: Online-Ressource
ID (e.g. DOI, URN): 10.1016/j.joms.2020.01.015
more publication details ...

Associated Publications

  • Associated records are being queried...
more (+)
Internes Format
LEADER 03164nma a2200445 c 4500
001 NLM307526984
003 DE-601
005 20200602214511.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 200302s2020 000 0 eng d
024 7 |a 10.1016/j.joms.2020.01.015  |2 doi 
028 5 2 |a pubmed20n1219.xml 
035 |a S0278-2391(20)30085-9 
035 |a (DE-599)NLM32081690 
040 |b ger  |c GBVCP 
041 0 |a eng 
100 1 |a Fallahi, Hamid Reza 
245 1 0 |a Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of CO2 Laser-Assisted Blepharoplasty Using Two Different Methods  |h Elektronische Ressource 
300 |a Online-Ressource 
500 |a Date Revised 02.06.2020 
500 |a published: Print-Electronic 
500 |a Citation Status In-Data-Review 
500 |a Copyright: From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine 
520 |a Copyright © 2020 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 
520 |a PURPOSE: Numerous methods have been developed for blepharoplasty, including carbon dioxide (CO2) laser-assisted blepharoplasty. Although the superiority of CO2 laser compared with the scalpel for blepharoplasty has been proposed, to the best of our knowledge, no study has compared the clinical outcomes of blepharoplasty with the CO2 laser alone versus the combined use of a scalpel and CO2 laser 
520 |a PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the present randomized clinical trial, 21 healthy patients underwent bilateral upper eyelid blepharoplasty. For each patient, an initial skin incision was made using the CO2 laser (setting, continuous emission; ultrapulse mode; 3 W of power) on 1 side and a scalpel on the other side. The remaining blepharoplasty steps were conducted using the CO2 laser (setting, continuous emission; 9 W of power) in both groups. The patients were evaluated on postoperative days 1, 3, 7, 14, and 30 using the postoperative repair criteria, including edema and ecchymosis. The Manchester scar scale was used to evaluate the results at 60 days after surgery 
520 |a RESULTS: Our comparison of the 2 methods showed no significant differences at 1 month after surgery using the evaluation criteria. The scar index was not significantly different after 60 days, despite lower scores in the scalpel group 
520 |a CONCLUSIONS: In upper eyelid blepharoplasty, making an initial incision with a scalpel, followed by use of a laser provides advantages similar to those found by performing the entire procedure with a CO2 laser alone 
611 2 7 |a Journal Article  |2 gnd 
689 0 0 |A f  |a Journal Article 
689 0 |5 DE-601 
700 1 |a Keyhan, Seied Omid 
700 1 |a Niamtu, Joe 
700 1 |a Alikazemi, Milad 
700 1 |a Habibagahi, Raha 
773 0 8 |i in  |t Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons  |g Vol. 78, No. 6 (2020), p. 1006-1012  |q 78:6<1006-1012  |w (DE-601)NLM012902268  |x 1531-5053 
856 4 1 |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2020.01.015  |3 Volltext 
912 |a GBV_NLM 
951 |a AR 
952 |d 78  |j 2020  |e 6  |b 01  |c 06  |h 1006-1012