SynthesisLasers in medical science2025
Combination therapy of pulsed dye laser and ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser for the treatment of pediatric postburn scar: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of early application of a skin surface closure device combined with pulsed dye laser on the morphologic characteristics and clinical symptoms of tension scars on the backs of children.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Article
- Hypertrophic Scarring and Keloids: Epidemiology, Molecular Pathogenesis, and Therapeutic Interventions.MedComm · 2025Review
- Investigating the Efficacy of Layered Moderate Tension Reduction Suturing in Facial Aesthetic Surgery.Cureus · 2025Article
- Investigating the efficacy of the application of tension-reducing suture technique in maxillofacial plastic and cosmetic surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Clinical efficacy of mechanically activated tissue retractor combined with vacuum sealing drainage for treating deep soft tissue defects: a prospective study.American 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to determine the effectiveness of combining pulsed dye laser (PDL) and ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser (AFCL) in the treatment of scars in pediatric patients, as well as to identify appropriate treatment parameters, initial treatment timing, and treatment intervals through a systematic literature review. A literature search was conducted between April 6, 2014 and April 6, 2024 in four databases to select studies on the effects of the combination of carbon dioxide fractional laser and pulsed dye laser therapy in children hypertrophic burn scars. This systematic literature review included 497 participants across 8 studies, with individual study sample sizes ranging from 17 to 125 participants. 7 studies reported the gender distribution of participants, with a higher proportion of males (60%, n = 264) than females (40%, n = 170). The average age of the patients was 7.18 years, and scald (62%, n = 235) were identified as the primary cause of scar. The combination therapy of 595 nm PDL and 10,600 nm AFCL significantly improved Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) / Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) score. Study treatment intervals were approximately 1-2 months for simultaneous treatment and 1 month for PDL and 3 months for AFCL for sequential treatment. Two studies investigated the efficacy of early laser therapy (< 3 months), the AFCL laser energy parameters ranged from 30 mJ-50 mJ, significantly lower than the rest of the studies of laser energy parameters, which ranged from 50 mJ-120 mJ. The PDL energy density parameters showed little difference from study to study and were in the range of 5-12 J/cm
Indexed as
Identifiers
39918788What 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.