Trial reportArchives of dermatological research2025
A randomized prospective study to compare the efficacy of 308-nm light-emitting diode and 308-nm excimer lamp in the treatment of facial vitiligo.
Trial report in Archives of dermatological research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have proven that 308-nm light-emitting diode(308-nm LED)and 308-nm excimer lamp(308-nm MEL) are effective in treating vitiligo, but there is a lack of comparison of their efficacy for facial lesions.
objectiveTo evaluate and contrast the treatment success rates of 308-nm LED versus 308-nm excimer lamp in managing facial lesions among patients suffering from stable non-segmental vitiligo.
methodsThe enrolled 119 patients with 145 lesions were randomly assigned to receive 308-nm LED or 308-nm MEL for two months. Two independent investigators graded repigmentation at the end of the 2-month treatment period.
resultsThere were 76 lesions in the 308-nm LED group and 69 in the 308-nm MEL group. After 1 month, the average repigmentation grade of the 308-nm LED group was 1.34, with an efficacy rate of 11.84%, and the average repigmentation grade of the 308-nm MEL group was 1.17, with an efficacy rate of 7.24%.After two months of phototherapy, the average repigmentation grade of the 308-nm LED group was 2.38, and the effective rate was 42.1%. The average repigmentation grade in the 308-nm MEL group was 2.19, and the effective rate was 39.12%. The two light sources had similar effects on facial vitiligo lesions after 1 month and 2 months of treatment(P =.349, P =.416), and the incidence of side effects was also comparable between the two groups (P =.332).
conclusionThe 308-nm LED is as effective and safe as 308-nm MEL in treating stable non-segmental facial vitiligo lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39786635What 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.