Trial reportLasers in medical science2021
Comparison of carboxy therapy and fractional Q-switched ND:YAG laser on periorbital dark circles treatment: a clinical trial.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of Carboxytherapy and Treatments Combining Carboxytherapy and Selected Chemical Peels on Vascular and Pigmentary Components of the Dark Circles.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2024Article
- Treatment of periorbital hyperpigmentation using sublative fractional radiofrequency (SFR).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
- COLasers in medical science · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Efficacy and Safety of Low-Fluence Q-Switched 1064-nm Laser in Infra-orbital Hyperpigmentation Based on Biometric Parameters.Journal of lasers in medical sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Treatment of the periorbital dark circles (PDCs) is a current challenge, with most treatment methods failing to yield promising results. The effectiveness of two common methods for periorbital dark circle treatment was compared in 28 patients with PDC. The patients were randomly divided into two groups of equal numbers: the first group received carboxy therapy, and the second group fractional 10,64 nm Q-switched Nd:YAG laser. In the carboxy therapy group, the treatment was performed six times, with 1-week intervals between sessions. In the group treated by Nd:YAG laser, the treatment was conducted in four sessions, with 1-month intervals between sessions. The results were evaluated through biometric evaluation, scoring on the visual analog scale (VAS) by both physicians and patients, and patients' satisfaction. Side effects of the treatments were also evaluated. The results showed that both carboxy therapy and Nd:YAG laser are effective in the treatment of periorbital dark circles, but carboxy therapy is significantly more effective. An increase in the skin lightness and a decrease in the melanin content of the periorbital skin was observed in the group receiving carboxy therapy, and these changes were more pronounced in this group compared to the group of Nd:YAG laser. In addition, side effects, such as erythema and post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation, were less in carboxy therapy than in Nd:YAG laser. Furthermore, the procedure was less expensive and easier to perform compared to Nd:YAG laser. Carboxy therapy is significantly more effective than Nd:YAG laser in PDC treatment.Trial registration: IRCT20080901001159N24.
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.