Trial reportLasers in medical science2022
Efficacy and safety of non-thermal nitrogen plasma versus long-pulsed Nd:YAG laser for hand rejuvenation.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the comparison between lasers and other therapeutic modalities in skin rejuvenation and resurfacing with a focus on RCTs.Lasers in medical science · 2025Pooled it
- Er:YAG and Nd:YAG-based low-level laser therapy (LLLT) with medical collagen improve third-molar extraction wound healing: a randomized controlled trial.Lasers in medical science · 2025Trial
- Split-face comparison of hydroquinone 4% plus nitrogen plasma vs. hydroquinone 4% alone in the treatment of melasma.Lasers in medical science · 2023Trial
- Penetration depth of cold atmospheric plasma into biological tissue: a review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Integrating VYC-12L With Energy-Based Devices for Skin-Quality Improvement: Global Expert Considerations for Safe and Effective Outcomes.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
- Nonthermal Atmospheric Pressure Plasma Treatment of Endosteal Implants for Osseointegration and Antimicrobial Efficacy: A Comprehensive Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Cold atmospheric plasma treatment enhances recombinant model protein production in yeast Pichia pastoris.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- An evaluation of mechanical and biophysical skin parameters at different body locations.Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2023Article
- In vivo study of the effects of a portable cold plasma device and vitamin C for skin rejuvenation.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This randomized controlled study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of multiple treatment sessions of pulsed non-thermal atmospheric pressure nitrogen plasma compared with long-pulsed Nd:YAG laser for hand rejuvenation. To optimize the nitrogen plasma mode for rejuvenation, the relative intensity of reactive species and skin temperature was compared at different input powers and time periods. Twenty-five patients with mild-moderate photodamaged skin were recruited; one hand was randomly selected for eight weekly treatment sessions with plasma (two passes), while the other was subjected to three monthly treatments with laser (until erythema became obvious). A blinded dermatologist scored the mean wrinkle and dyschromia improvement at 1 and 2 months after the first treatment and 1 and 3 months after the last treatment. The patients' satisfaction and the biomechanical characteristics of the skin including cutaneous resonance running time (CRRT), melanin, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), and hydration were evaluated. Clinically, both methods gave rise to a similar, significant improvement in wrinkles (49.09 ± 19.18% and 39.32 ± 18.21% after plasma and laser, respectively) and dyschromia (45.00 ± 26.32% and 30.62% ± 24.99% after plasma and laser, respectively) (P < 0.05). A significant decrease in CRRT and melanin was seen following treatment with either method (P < 0.05). Notably, plasma therapy led to a significant decrease in TEWL and boosted skin hydration. This is while laser therapy augmented the TEWL and reduced skin hydration. Our findings corroborate that cold plasma is as effective and safe as long-pulsed Nd:YAG laser, with less discomfort and dryness during treatment. The protocol was approved by the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials. IRCT20160320027109N4. Registered 9 April 2019 (This manuscript is only a part of this registered project.).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.