ArticleThe Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology2024
Efficacy of Fractional 2940-nm Erbium:YAG Laser Combined with Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus its Combination with Low-Level Laser Therapy for Scar Revision.
Article in The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Effectiveness of the Er:YAG Laser in Snoring Treatment Based on Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Results.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We sought to compare the safety and efficacy of combining fractional 2940-nm Erbium:YAG (Er:YAG) laser with autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus its combination with low-level laser therapy (LLLT) for enhancing the outcome of postsurgical and post-traumatic scars. Methods: Fourty-five individuals with post-surgical or post-traumatic scars were randomly divided into three groups: Group A received four fractional Er:YAG laser sessions spaced four weeks apart along with eight sessions of intradermal PRP injections spaced two weeks apart; Group B received four fractional Er:YAG laser sessions spaced four weeks apart along with two sessions of light emitting diode (LED) weekly; and Group C received four fractional Er:YAG laser sessions spaced four weeks apart. Treatment efficacy was evaluated using clinical photographs, Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), patient satisfaction and histopathology. Results: Regarding vascularity following treatment and the total VSS score, there were significant differences between the studied groups, with scoring was the lowest in Group A compared to Group B and C. Patient satisfaction was the highest in Group A compared to Group B and C. Limitations: A limitation of the current study is the short follow-up period. Conclusion: Scar revision therapy using combined fractional Er:YAG laser with either PRP or LLLT were found to be more efficient and superior to fractional Er:YAG laser alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39758221PMC11694643What 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.