ReviewThe Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology2024
Treatment of Xanthelasma Palpebrarum Using Trichloroacetic Acid 80.
Review 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A comparative study of the efficacy of an ultra-picosecond laser versus an ultra-pulsed COAmerican journal of translational research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We sought to analyze the effectiveness, recurrence, safety, and patient satisfaction rates following xanthelasma palpebrarum (XP) treatment with trichloroacetic acid (TCA) 80%. Methods: This was a retrospective review of patients treated with TCA 80% for XP between January 2012 and August 2022. A prospective telephone questionnaire was administered to the same patient population to evaluate recurrence, patient satisfaction, and side effects. Results: In total, 77 patients were included in this retrospective review. Most patients received one treatment (n=38; 49.4%) and had XP located bilaterally (n=59; 76.6%) on either the lower eyelids only (n=18; 23.4%) or both the upper and lower eyelids (n=18; 23.4%). Following treatment, 94.2 percent (n=49) of patients expressed satisfaction and 97.2 percent (n=70) displayed a clinician-reported improvement in XP. In the prospective patient questionnaire, the reoccurrence of XP was self-reported in 24.7 percent (n=19) of all patients. The adverse events, reported by the clinician during the retrospective review and the patient during the prospective questionnaire, included erythema (n=2; 2.6%), hyperpigmentation (n=4; 5.2%), hypopigmentation (n=3; 3.9%), and scarring (n=2; 2.6%). Limitations: Limitations may exist due to the retrospective nature of the chart review, missing data, and lack of a comparator cohort. Thus, further studies are required to validate this study's preliminary results. Conclusion: XP has a strong likelihood of recurrence. However, TCA 80% for XP management should be considered as a treatment option due to high patient satisfaction, mild side effects, low cost, and long-term cosmetic results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39758222PMC11694642What 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.