Explore the vast range of titles available.

Previous clinical studies have shown that pulsed dye laser (PDL) and intense pulsed light (IPL) are effective for treating erythematotelangiectatic rosacea(ETR). This article aims to compare the efficacy and safety of PDL and IPL at three different wavelength bands (broad-band, single-narrow-band, and dual-narrow-band) in treating ETR. Sixty subjects with ETR were randomly categorized into four groups and received one of the following laser treatments: PDL (595 nm), IPL with Delicate Pulse Light (DPL, 500–600 nm), IPL with M22 590 (590–1200 nm), or IPL with M22 vascular filter (530–650 nm and 900–1200 nm). Four treatment sessions were administered at 4-week intervals, with one follow-up session 4 weeks after the final treatment. The efficacy of the four lasers was evaluated by comparing the clinical symptom score, total effective rate, VISIA red area absolute score, and RosaQoL score before and after treatment. The safety was evaluated by comparing adverse reactions such as pain, purpura, erythematous edema, and blister. All 60 subjects completed the study. Within-group effects showed that the clinical symptom score, VISIA red area absolute score, and RosaQoL score of all four groups were significantly reduced compared to before treatment (p < 0.001). Between-group effects showed no statistically significant difference among the four laser groups. Safety analysis showed that all four lasers were safe, but the incidence of blister was higher in the M22 vascular group. Nonpurpurogenic PDL, DPL, M22 590, and M22 vascular were equally effective in treating ETR and were well-tolerated. ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT05360251.

Background Previous studies have proven that 308-nm light-emitting diode(308-nm LED)and 308-nm excimer lamp(308-nm MEL) are effective in treating vitiligo, but there is a lack of comparison of their efficacy for facial lesions. Objective To evaluate and contrast the treatment success rates of 308-nm LED versus 308-nm excimer lamp in managing facial lesions among patients suffering from stable non-segmental vitiligo. Methods The enrolled 119 patients with 145 lesions were randomly assigned to receive 308-nm LED or 308-nm MEL for two months. Two independent investigators graded repigmentation at the end of the 2-month treatment period. Results There were 76 lesions in the 308-nm LED group and 69 in the 308-nm MEL group. After 1 month, the average repigmentation grade of the 308-nm LED group was 1.34, with an efficacy rate of 11.84%, and the average repigmentation grade of the 308-nm MEL group was 1.17, with an efficacy rate of 7.24%.After two months of phototherapy, the average repigmentation grade of the 308-nm LED group was 2.38, and the effective rate was 42.1%. The average repigmentation grade in the 308-nm MEL group was 2.19, and the effective rate was 39.12%. The two light sources had similar effects on facial vitiligo lesions after 1 month and 2 months of treatment( P  =.349, P  =.416), and the incidence of side effects was also comparable between the two groups ( P  =.332). Conclusion The 308-nm LED is as effective and safe as 308-nm MEL in treating stable non-segmental facial vitiligo lesions.

Skin aging and photoaging is a process that may appear at a relatively early age, causing an aesthetic problem. Common signs of skin aging include wrinkles, dyspigmentation, and decreased elasticity. Aim of this article is to study the effectiveness and safety of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) for skin rejuvenation. Thirty Syrian female patients aged 25-50 participated in this study and were diagnosed with moderate to severe melasma and wrinkles. The patients were divided into two groups and received LLLT with a wavelength of 660 nm emitting a continuous wave. The power density and dose used were 15.6 mW/cm , and 3 J/cm respectively, and the laser effective area was 32 cm . The evaluation was done before, during, and after 12 treatment sessions, based on photographs, in addition to the modified Melasma Area Severity Index (MASI), Pinch test, and Fitzpatrick's classification of facial wrinkling at baseline. Comparing before, and after treatment, and between the two groups, revealed a significant improvement in skin rejuvenation, with a statistical significance (p < 0.05). Additional outcome measures included assessments of patient satisfaction scores, and no adverse effects or re-pigmentation were reported. Our results suggest that LLLT may be a useful and safe therapeutic option in treating melasma, skin elasticity, and wrinkle improvement, which we advised to be integrated into treatment, and follow-up programs in cosmetics and dermatology.

Melasma significantly impacts life quality, and while various laser therapies show promise, rigorous comparative studies, especially between the novel Picosecond Alexandrite Laser (PSAL) and the traditional combined modality of Q-switched and Long-pulse Nd: YAG Lasers (QLNYL), are notably lacking. This study aims to fill this gap by evaluating the efficacy and safety of these modalities, providing insights into their comparative advantages for clinical practice. In a prospective, evaluator-blinded study, 40 participants with Fitzpatrick Skin Types (FST) III and IV underwent three treatment sessions at four-week intervals with either PSAL or QLNYL. Efficacy was primarily assessed by changes in Melasma Area and Severity Index (MASI) scores at baseline, 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks, along with patient satisfaction evaluations at the 12- and 24-week marks, and safety assessments conducted throughout the study. Both groups experienced significant reductions in MASI scores post-treatment. Overall, the improvement in MASI scores in the QLNYL group significantly surpassed that in the PSAL group ( P  = 0.010). Patient satisfaction was comparably high between groups, and no significant differences were noted in safety profiles. The PSAL group showed a slightly higher incidence of adverse reactions (not significant) and significantly higher pain scores ( P  = 0.018). Recurrence rates at the 24-week follow-up were 10.5% for PSAL and 0% for QLNYL, with no significant difference. Both PSAL and QLNYL proved effective in treating melasma, with the traditional combined modality of QLNYL demonstrating superior efficacy in FST III-IV. Safety profiles were similar comparable.

Androgenetic alopecia (AGA) is the most common form of hair loss characterized by miniaturization of hair follicles. Low-level light therapy (LLLT) and microneedling have shown potential in promoting hair regrowth. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of an innovative light-emitting diode (LED) helmet cooperated with a novel light-guiding microneedle patch (LMNP) for stimulating hair growth in AGA. In this randomized clinical trial, 16 AGA patients received treatments using light-guiding microneedle patches (LMNPs) illuminated by a LED helmet equipped with green (522 nm) and red (633 nm) LEDs, delivering 50 mW/cm2 power and 40 J/cm2 energy. Treatments were applied weekly for 24 weeks, targeting the frontal recession area. The right side of the scalp was treated with green light and the left with red light, each combined with a LMNP featuring 900 µm height needles at a density of 105 per square centimeter. Hair density and diameter, along with patient and physician satisfaction scores, were assessed monthly. Both red and green LED treatments with LMNP, significantly enhanced hair density and diameter. Satisfaction scores, as reported by both physicians and participants, increased over time. Comparative analyses revealed no statistically significant differences in average satisfaction scores or in changes in hair density and diameter between the groups by the end of the study. Additionally, no serious adverse effects were reported, highlighting the safety of the treatments. The combined Light sources which is portable LED helmet and LMNPs shows promise as a non-invasive, effective treatment for AGA, with similar efficacy between red and green wavelengths.

Background Facial photoaging is a complex biological process influenced by both internal and external factors. It is characterized by wrinkles, enlarged pores, and rough skin. Despite various clinical treatments, they often have limited effectiveness, significant side effects, and extended recovery times. There is a need for more effective and safer treatment options. Preliminary evidence suggests significant differences in mechanisms between fractional 1064 nm Nd:YAG picosecond laser (FxPico) and fractional Q‐switched 1064‐nm Nd:YAG laser (QSF‐Nd:YAG). Photothermal tissue modulation is achieved in the QSF‐Nd:YAG platform through holographic beam splitting, whereas the FxPico system's microlens arrays (MLA) enable dual‐mode action through concurrent photothermal and laser‐induced optical breakdown (LIOB) mechanisms. The purpose of this study was to conduct a split‐face controlled trial on the same subject, observing the therapeutic effects of both modalities. Methods Thirty patients with photoaging underwent five treatment sessions at weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8. Each patient received FxPico on one side of the face and QSF‐Nd:YAG on the other. Follow‐up evaluations were conducted at 1 and 3 months post‐treatment. Efficacy was assessed using VISIA quantitative analysis, reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM), and histological examination. Safety was evaluated based on adverse events and patient‐reported pain. Results Among the patients following the completion of five treatment sessions exhibited remarkable improvement in terms of facial wrinkles, pores and skin texture from VISIA quantitative numerical assessment (p < 0.001). Semi‐quantitative assessments from reflectance confocal microscopy analysis also demonstrated a significant decrease (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences observed in the reduction rates of wrinkles, pores, skin texture counts, semi‐quantitative scores, and the Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale scores (p > 0.05) between the FxPico and QSF‐Nd:YAG sides. Histological analysis revealed increased collagen formation and improved elastic fiber alignment in both treatment groups, which objectively validates the therapeutic efficacy of both laser modalities for photoaging. Adverse events were mild, with FxPico causing more pain (p < 0.0001). Conclusion Both FxPico and QSF‐Nd:YAG lasers are effective and safe for improving photoaging, with no significant differences in clinical outcomes. FxPico may offer superior collagen stimulation, albeit with higher pain levels. Trial Registration China Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2200058566

Background Comedone extraction provides greater satisfaction for acne treatment than conventional treatment alone; however, post‐comedone extraction erythema (PCEE) remains a concern for patients. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy of pulsed‐dye laser (PDL) in PCEE and comedone reduction. Methods Mild‐to‐moderate acne patients were randomly allocated in split‐face fashion. Three comedones were extracted on each facial side. On the PDL‐treated side, 595‐nm PDL was delivered to the entire side with an additional shot on three comedone‐extracted sites. Erythema index (EI) and total acne lesion counts (TALC) were evaluated at baseline, week 2 and 4. The comprehensive acne severity scale (CASS) was assessed by three blinded independent pediatric dermatologists. Participant satisfaction surveys were completed at the end of the study. Results Thirty‐five participants (age 12.9–24.2 years) showed no differences in the EI and TALC at baseline on both sides. At weeks 2 and 4, the EI on the PDL‐treated side was significantly lower (p < 0.001) with a greater EI reduction (p < 0.001) when compared to the control side regardless of gender and menstruation. There was significantly lower TALC on the PDL‐treated side at week 2 (p < 0.001) and week 4 (p = 0.02). No complications were noted with high participant satisfaction reported (median 8; IQR 7–9). PDL remained significantly associated with EI improvements after controlling for gender, menstruation cycle, and examination stress. Conclusion PDL can be an adjunctive intervention for the treatment of PCEE and comedone reduction due to its effectiveness and high participant satisfaction.

Purpose There is a large body of evidence supporting the efficacy of low level laser therapy (LLLT), more recently termed photobiomodulation (PBM), for the management of oral mucositis (OM) in patients undergoing radiotherapy for head and neck cancer (HNC). Recent advances in PBM technology, together with a better understanding of mechanisms involved, may expand the applications for PBM in the management of other complications associated with HNC treatment. This article (part 1) describes PBM mechanisms of action, dosimetry, and safety aspects and, in doing so, provides a basis for a companion paper (part 2) which describes the potential breadth of potential applications of PBM in the management of side-effects of (chemo)radiation therapy in patients being treated for HNC and proposes PBM parameters. Methods This study is a narrative non-systematic review. Results We review PBM mechanisms of action and dosimetric considerations. Virtually, all conditions modulated by PBM (e.g., ulceration, inflammation, lymphedema, pain, fibrosis, neurological and muscular injury) are thought to be involved in the pathogenesis of (chemo)radiation therapy-induced complications in patients treated for HNC. The impact of PBM on tumor behavior and tumor response to treatment has been insufficiently studied. In vitro studies assessing the effect of PBM on tumor cells report conflicting results, perhaps attributable to inconsistencies of PBM power and dose. Nonetheless, the biological bases for the broad clinical activities ascribed to PBM have also been noted to be similar to those activities and pathways associated with negative tumor behaviors and impeded response to treatment. While there are no anecdotal descriptions of poor tumor outcomes in patients treated with PBM, confirming its neutrality with respect to cancer responsiveness is a critical priority. Conclusion Based on its therapeutic effects, PBM may have utility in a broad range of oral, oropharyngeal, facial, and neck complications of HNC treatment. Although evidence suggests that PBM using LLLT is safe in HNC patients, more research is imperative and vigilance remains warranted to detect any potential adverse effects of PBM on cancer treatment outcomes and survival.

Background The picosecond neodymium yttrium aluminum garnet laser (PNYL) has been successfully used in treating acquired bilateral nevus of Ota‐like macules (ABNOM). The 730‐nm picosecond titanium sapphire laser (PTSL) is an emerging tool for pigmentary disorders. However, no studies have compared two different wavelengths of picosecond laser for the treatment of ABNOM. Aims To compare the efficacy and safety of the 730‐nm PTSL with the 1064‐nm PNYL in the treatment of ABNOM. Methods Fifteen participants with ABNOM were randomized to undergo a single session of either the 730‐nm PTSL on one side of the face and 1064‐nm PNYL on the other side. Efficacy and safety assessments were performed by blinded visual evaluations at baseline, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks posttreatment. Participants' satisfaction and adverse effects were recorded. Results Compared to baseline, The 730‐nm PTSL‐treated side showed better improvement than that of the 1064‐nm PNYL‐treated side at 24 weeks posttreatment (1.67 ± 1.047 vs. 0.87 ± 0.640, p = 0.027). There were no significant differences in pain sensation and participants' satisfaction between the two laser treatments. Conclusions The 730‐nm PTSL is more effective than the 1064‐nm PNYL in the treatment of ABNOM.

Background The picosecond 755‐nm alexandrite laser and topical tranexamic acid (TA) have shown promise in treating melasma. Aim This aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combining to a picosecond 755‐nm alexandrite laser combined with topical TA for melasma treatment. Patients and Methods Forty‐eight patients’ facial halves with bilateral symmetrical melasma were randomized to receive either topical TA and picosecond laser treatment or laser monotherapy. All patients received three consecutive picosecond laser treatment sessions at 4‐week intervals, and additional one side facial received topical TA treatment twice daily until 4 weeks after the third treatments. Efficacy was assessed using the Modified Melasma Area and Severity Index (mMASI) score, VISIA (Canfield, USA) red area feature counts, and average pore volume as measured by Antera 3D®. Patient satisfaction was evaluated through questionnaires. Results Thirty‐five patients completed the study. Post‐treatment, mMASI scores and VISIA red area feature counts were lower in combination therapy halves and laser monotherapy halves, and average melanin level was lower in the combination therapy halves (p < 0.05). Comparisons between the combination therapy halves and laser monotherapy halves after the third treatment revealed significant differences in mMASI scores, melanin levels, and VISIA red area feature counts (p < 0.05). After treatment, patient satisfaction rates in the combination therapy halves and monotherapy halves was 71.4% and 54.3%, respectively (p < 0.05). No obvious adverse effects were observed in the combination therapy halves; whereas, 10.42% (5/48) of participants in the laser monotherapy halves experienced temporary pigmentation, which resolved within 3 months. Conclusion The picosecond 755‐nm alexandrite laser, when used independently and in combination with topical TA, has been proven to be effective in the improvement of melasma. However, the combined treatment approach showed a more pronounced improvement in melasma symptoms, with higher patient satisfaction, and was associated with a lower incidence of adverse effects. These findings strongly support that integrating topical TA with picosecond laser therapy as a superior therapeutic strategy for melasma management. Clinical Trial Registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2200057771.