Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology

JUN 2017

An evidence-based, peer-reviewed journal for practicing clinicians in the field of dermatology

Issue link: http://jcadonline.epubxp.com/i/839245

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 52 of 63

57 JCAD journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology June 2017 • volume 10 • Number 6 r E v I E w table 4: nonablative fractional lasers for acne scar resurfacing in spt iv–vi autHors, yEar sKin t ypEs no. oF patiEnts spt Hiv, v, vii trEatmEnt modalit y postinFlammatory HypErpigmEntation HpiH %i lee et al, 2008 17 IV–V 27 Not mentioned 1550nm Erbium doped fractional laser No PIH observed Kim et al, 2009 18 IV–V 20 Not mentioned Split face: 1550 Er:Glass on one side and CROSS on other s ide Not mentioned mahmoud et al, 2010 19 IV–VI 15 4,10,1 1550nm Erbium fractionated laser Group A: 10mJ Group B: 40mJ (other parameters constant) 40% No statistically significant diOerence in PIH among two groups chan et al, 2010 20 III–V 47 36,1,0 1550nm erbium doped fractional laser Full NAFR: 3 sessions, 8 passes, 442.5 MTZ/cm 2 Mini-NAFR: 6 sessions, 4 passes, 210.5 MTZ/cm 2 Full-NAFR: 18.2% Mini-NAFR: 6% dainchi et al, 2010 2 1 acne III–V 12 Not mentioned 1540nm Er:Glass fractional laser NM cho et al, 2010 22 IV 8 8,0,0 Split face, single session: One side 1550nm Er:Glass laser, other side 10,600nm ablative fractional CO 2 laser 12.5% One patient developed PIH on both treatment sides alajlan et al, 2011 23 III–V 82 Not mentioned Retrospective study Group A: 1550nm fractional laser Group B: 10,600nm ablative fractional CO 2 laser 17%*/ 33%** 14%*/41%** moneib et al, 2014 24 acne II–V 24 12,5,0 Split face: One side 1550nm Er:YAG Laser, other side served as control No PIH observed leheta et al, 2014 25 III–IV 39 22,0,0 Randomized to 3 groups Group 1: PCI + TCA 20% Group 2: 1540nm fractional laser Group 3: 1540nm laser alternating with PCI/TCA Not mentioned rongsaard et al, 2014 26 III–V 20 2,3,0 Split face: One side 1550nm Er:Glass fractional laser and other side fractional bipolar radiofrequency Fractional laser :5% RF: No PIH you et al, 2015 27 IV 58 58,0,0 Retrospective study Comparison of ablative lasers and nonablative lasers Ablative Lasers: CO 2 : 80% ErYAG: 60% Fractional lasers: Ablative Fractional–20% Nonablative fractional–10% alexis et al, 2016 28 IV–VI 12 enrolled, 9 completed 3,4,2 Split face: same Ruence 40mJ, diOerent densities: 200MTZ/cm 2 vs. 393MTZ/cm 2 Lower density: 43% Higher density: 71% cachagero et al, 2016 29 II–V 46 10,0,0 Randomized to 2 groups: Group A – 1340 fractional laser Group B – dermaroller Laser – 13.6% Microneedling – No PIH *Incidence of PIH in patients routinely given prophylactic bleaching creams post-procedure **Incidence of PIH in patients who were not given post-procedure bleaching creams SPT: Fitzpatrick skin photo type

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology - JUN 2017