A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, safety, and satisfaction rates of laser combination treatments vs laser monotherapy in skin rejuvenation resurfacing
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature..
Laser therapies have been well-established in ameliorating skin-aging consequences. This systematic review aims to determine the efficacy, safety profile, and satisfaction rates of laser combination therapies on skin rejuvenation resurfacing. A systematic search was performed in four major databases up to September 2022. Skin rejuvenation studies were eligible comprising at least one laser combination arm, inclusive of all laser types (ablative or non-ablatives), and one monotherapy arm selected from one of the combined modalities. Studies combining one laser modality with radiofrequency (RF) or intense pulse light (IPL) were also assessed. Trials that did not encompass a monotherapy control arm were evaluated independently as single-arm studies. Eighteen clinical trials recruiting 448 cases were included after screening. A total of 532 nm KTP + 1064 nm Nd:YAG and 2940 nm Er:YAG + Nd:YAG were the two most utilized laser combinations and exerted higher improvements and milder adverse events, compared to their monotherapy in most studies. Combining CO2 with rhodamine-IPL or gallium arsenide laser increased efficacy and satisfaction and brings about faster skin recovery time. Augmenting CO2 + RF did not increase improvement vs CO2 laser alone but prolonged skin erythema. Our meta-analysis revealed the pooled prevalence of quartile improvement rates as 0%, 28%, 40%, 27% in laser combination group, and 0%, 9%, 31%, 17% in laser monotherapy group, respectively. The satisfaction within each quartile category was 39%, 25%, 15%, 7% in laser combination and 20%, 25%, 16%, 17% in laser monotherapy, respectively, suggestive of the higher efficacy and satisfaction of laser combination group. The pain scores were lower in laser combination group than monotherapy (4.8 ± 1.18 vs 7.18 ± 0.7, converted on a scale of 0 to 10). Post-laser skin erythema lasted less longer in the combination group (12.8 vs 15.24 days). Laser combination therapies were discovered to be superior to their monotherapies in terms of clinical improvement rates, diminished adverse events such as pain and erythema and patients satisfaction rates. Due to paucity of high-quality reportings, additional trials are warranted to corroborate these results.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:38 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Lasers in medical science - 38(2023), 1 vom: 30. Sept., Seite 228 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Pour Mohammad, Arash [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
142M471B3J |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 23.10.2023 Date Revised 22.12.2023 published: Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1007/s10103-023-03856-5 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM362722978 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM362722978 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231227135904.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s10103-023-03856-5 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1235.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM362722978 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)37776370 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Pour Mohammad, Arash |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 2 | |a A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, safety, and satisfaction rates of laser combination treatments vs laser monotherapy in skin rejuvenation resurfacing |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 23.10.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 22.12.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature. | ||
| 520 | |a Laser therapies have been well-established in ameliorating skin-aging consequences. This systematic review aims to determine the efficacy, safety profile, and satisfaction rates of laser combination therapies on skin rejuvenation resurfacing. A systematic search was performed in four major databases up to September 2022. Skin rejuvenation studies were eligible comprising at least one laser combination arm, inclusive of all laser types (ablative or non-ablatives), and one monotherapy arm selected from one of the combined modalities. Studies combining one laser modality with radiofrequency (RF) or intense pulse light (IPL) were also assessed. Trials that did not encompass a monotherapy control arm were evaluated independently as single-arm studies. Eighteen clinical trials recruiting 448 cases were included after screening. A total of 532 nm KTP + 1064 nm Nd:YAG and 2940 nm Er:YAG + Nd:YAG were the two most utilized laser combinations and exerted higher improvements and milder adverse events, compared to their monotherapy in most studies. Combining CO2 with rhodamine-IPL or gallium arsenide laser increased efficacy and satisfaction and brings about faster skin recovery time. Augmenting CO2 + RF did not increase improvement vs CO2 laser alone but prolonged skin erythema. Our meta-analysis revealed the pooled prevalence of quartile improvement rates as 0%, 28%, 40%, 27% in laser combination group, and 0%, 9%, 31%, 17% in laser monotherapy group, respectively. The satisfaction within each quartile category was 39%, 25%, 15%, 7% in laser combination and 20%, 25%, 16%, 17% in laser monotherapy, respectively, suggestive of the higher efficacy and satisfaction of laser combination group. The pain scores were lower in laser combination group than monotherapy (4.8 ± 1.18 vs 7.18 ± 0.7, converted on a scale of 0 to 10). Post-laser skin erythema lasted less longer in the combination group (12.8 vs 15.24 days). Laser combination therapies were discovered to be superior to their monotherapies in terms of clinical improvement rates, diminished adverse events such as pain and erythema and patients satisfaction rates. Due to paucity of high-quality reportings, additional trials are warranted to corroborate these results | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Meta-Analysis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Systematic Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Combination | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Efficacy | |
| 650 | 4 | |a KTP | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Laser | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Nd:YAG | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Rejuvenation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Safety | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Skin aging | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Systematic review | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Carbon Dioxide |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 142M471B3J |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gholizadeh Mesgarha, Milad |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Seirafianpour, Farnoosh |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Karimi, Yeganeh |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Sodagar, Sogand |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Afraie, Maryam |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Goodarzi, Azadeh |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Lasers in medical science |d 1996 |g 38(2023), 1 vom: 30. Sept., Seite 228 |w (DE-627)NLM085855936 |x 1435-604X |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:38 |g year:2023 |g number:1 |g day:30 |g month:09 |g pages:228 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10103-023-03856-5 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 38 |j 2023 |e 1 |b 30 |c 09 |h 228 | ||