A comparison of efficacy and safety of picosecond alexandrite laser versus ultrapulsed fractional CO 2 laser for the treatment of facial atrophic acne scars
- VernacularTitle:皮秒翠绿宝石激光与超脉冲CO 2点阵激光治疗面部萎缩性痤疮瘢痕的疗效与安全性比较
- Author:
Mengli ZHANG
1
;
Jing FANG
;
Qiuju WU
;
Tong LIN
Author Information
- From: Chinese Journal of Dermatology 2020;53(8):602-606
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
- Abstract: Objective:To compare the efficacy and safety of picosecond alexandrite laser and ultrapulsed fractional CO 2 laser for the treatment of facial atrophic acne scars in a prospective, split-face clinical trial. Methods:From October 2015 to October 2017, patients with facial symmetrical atrophic acne scars were enrolled from Department of Cosmetic Laser Surgery, Hospital for Skin Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College. The left side of the face of the patients was treated with ultrapulsed fractional CO 2 laser, and the right side of the face was treated with a 755-nm picosecond alexandrite laser with a diffractive lens array. All patients received 3 sessions of laser treatment at a 2-month interval. The severity of scars was evaluated by 2 dermatologists before and after the treatment according to the ECCA grading scale (échelle d′évaluation clinique des cicatrices d′acné) , and clinical efficacy was self-assessed by the patients according to a 4-point scale. Pain scores and adverse reactions were recorded. Paired t test was used to compare ECCA scores and pain scores between the 2 sides of the face, as well as between pre- and post-treatment values, and Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to compare the 4-point scores between the 2 groups. Results:There was no significant difference in the ECCA score between the picosecond laser side and the fractional laser side before the treatment ( t = 1.06, P = 0.300) , while the ECCA score was significantly higher in the picosecond laser side than in the fractional laser side after 3 sessions of treatment (70.98 ± 21.48 vs. 58.04 ± 17.63, t = 3.76, P = 0.001) . Compared with the pre-treatment severity score of scars, the improvement in severity score was significantly less in the picosecond laser side than in the fractional laser side (2.21 ± 1.09 vs. 2.83 ± 1.11, z = 2.70, P = 0.007) . Compared with the fractional laser side, the picosecond laser side showed significantly lower pain scores (3.71 ± 0.62 vs. 6.23 ± 1.06, t = 11.93, P < 0.001) and less adverse reactions, which mainly manifested as transient erythema and edema. Conclusions:Both picosecond alexandrite laser and fractional CO 2 laser can effectively improve atrophic acne scars. Fractional CO 2 laser is more effective, but picosecond alexandrite laser has less adverse effects.
