Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Efficacy and safety of CO2 fractional laser versus Er:YAG fractional laser in the treatment of atrophic acne scar: A meta‐analysis and systematic review
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Efficacy and safety of CO2 fractional laser versus Er:YAG fractional laser in the treatment of atrophic acne scar: A meta‐analysis and systematic review
Do you wish to request the book?
Efficacy and safety of CO2 fractional laser versus Er:YAG fractional laser in the treatment of atrophic acne scar: A meta‐analysis and systematic review
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Efficacy and safety of CO2 fractional laser versus Er:YAG fractional laser in the treatment of atrophic acne scar: A meta‐analysis and systematic review
2024
Overview
Background To date, a consensus on the relative efficacy and safety of CO2 fractional laser versus erbium‐doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) fractional laser treatments for atrophic acne scars has not been reached. This meta‐analysis aims to systematically assess and compare their effectiveness and safety in clinical practice. Methods For this meta‐analysis, we conducted comprehensive searches in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases, covering publications from their inception up to August 2023. Our focus was on studies comparing fractional CO2 laser with Er:YAG fractional laser treatments for atrophic acne scars. We excluded duplicate publications, research lacking full‐text access, incomplete data, or cases where data extraction was not feasible. Additionally, animal experiments, reviews, and systematic reviews were not considered. Data analysis was performed using STATA 15.1. Results Eight studies (seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a retrospective study) were included in this meta‐analysis. The sample size ranged from 28 to 106 with a total of 418 patients, including 210 in the CO2 fractional group and 208 in Er:YAG fractional group. The pooled results showed that the effective rate of CO2 fractional laser in treating atrophic acne scar was significantly higher than that of Er:YAG fractional laser (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.08–3.01) and the downtime of CO2 fractional laser in treating atrophic acne scar was significantly shorter than that of Er:YAG fractional laser (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) = −2.11, 95% CI: −3.11 to −1.10). In addition, VAS of CO2 fractional laser in treating atrophic acne scar was significantly higher than that of Er:YAG fractional laser (WMD = 1.77, 95% CI: 1.32–2.21) and the duration of erythema of CO2 fractional laser in treating atrophic acne scar was significantly longer than that of Er:YAG fractional laser (WMD = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.63–2.07). However, there was no significant difference in the duration of pain and incidence of PIHbetween CO2 fractional laser and of Er:YAG fractional laser. Conclusion When it comes to treating atrophic acne scars, CO2 fractional laser demonstrates superior efficacy and leads to shorter downtime. However, it is important to note that CO2 fractional laser treatments tend to result in higher pain intensity and may carry a higher risk of post‐treatment pigmentation compared to Er:YAG fractional laser procedures.
