Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35971017›Full record

Trial reportLasers in medical science2022

Efficacy and safety of 1565-nm non-ablative fractional laser versus long-pulsed 1064-nm Nd:YAG laser in treating enlarged facial pores.

Ying Wang, Yuxin Zheng, Suiqing Cai

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

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. It is linked to trial NCT05360043 (Efficacy and Safety of 1565-nm Non-ablative Fractional Laser Versus Long-pulsed 1064-nm Nd), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05360043 naunknown statusnot on this map

Efficacy and Safety of 1565-nm Non-ablative Fractional Laser Versus Long-pulsed 1064-nm Nd:YAG Laser in the Treatment of Enlarged Facial Pores

TypeinterventionalSponsorSecond Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, School of MedicineRan2018 to 2022Enrolled27ConditionsEnlarged Facial PoresArmslaser treatment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Fractional COLasers in medical science · 2023
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. High-powered 675-nm laser: Safety and efficacy in clinical evaluation and in vitro evidence for different skin disorders.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) · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ying WangDepartment of Dermatology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, People's Republic of China.
Yuxin ZhengDepartment of Dermatology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, People's Republic of China.
Suiqing CaiDepartment of Dermatology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, People's Republic of China. 2191008@zju.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7543-9013
Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Facial pores are visible openings of pilosebaceous follicles, and they are one of the major factors influencing facial skin appearance. This article aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of 1565-nm non-ablative fractional laser (NAFL) and long-pulsed 1064-nm Nd:YAG laser (LPNY) in treating enlarged facial pores. All subjects were treated with NAFL on their left faces and LPNY on their right. Five treatments were administered at 2-week intervals, with one follow-up session 2 months after the final treatment. Treatment efficacy was evaluated by subjective (pore improvement and subject satisfaction ratings) assessments and objective (pore number) assessments. At each appointment, any side effects or complications were recorded to evaluate the safety of the two lasers. A total of 18 individuals participated in this study. At the 2-month follow-up, NAFL and LPNY sides had significant reduction in pores (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, respectively). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the mean number of pore reductions on either side (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in pore improvement ratings and satisfaction ratings between the two sides (p > 0.05 and p > 0.05, respectively). Both lasers showed minimal side effects. Both lasers effectively treated enlarged facial pores and were well tolerated. The side effects of the 1064-nm LPNY were less severe than those of the 1565-nm NAFL. ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT05360043.

Indexed as

Lasers, Solid-StateSkin AgingFaceHumansSkinTreatment OutcomeEnlarged facial poresLong-pulsed Nd:YAG laserNon-ablative fractional laser

Identifiers

PMID35971017
PMCPMC9525434
OpenAlexW4291690414

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.