SynthesisLasers in medical science2025
Evaluating CO2 laser and micro-needling therapies for striae distensae: a comprehensive meta-analysis and 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. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Striae distensae (SD), commonly known as stretch marks, are a prevalent cosmetic concern, particularly among women, with potential psychological impact. This meta-analysis aims to compare the effectiveness, safety, and patient satisfaction of two common SD treatments: Fractional CO2 10,064 nm (Fr CO2) laser and micro-needling. The primary focus is on clinical improvement, post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH) incidence, and morphological changes, specifically the cross-sectional area of the largest striae. Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including 166 patients were analyzed. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase. Systematic statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 to gauge the comparative effectiveness and safety of Fr CO2 laser and micro-needling. Meticulous Cochrane risk-of-bias assessments were conducted to ascertain the quality of included RCTs. Both Fr CO2 laser and micro-needling treatments demonstrated significant clinical improvements in SD appearance, benefiting over 70% of patients. However, no significant difference in clinical improvements (Relative Risk (RR) = 0.97 [0.74, 1.28], p = 0.85, I2 = 17%) and patient satisfaction scores (RR = 0.91 [0.52, 1.58], p = 0.10, I2 = 39%). A comparison of the cross-sectional area of the largest striae between the groups revealed no significant disparity (Mean Difference = 0.22 [-0.15, 0.58], p = 0.24, I2 = 0%). However, the CO2 group experienced significantly higher post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation (RR = 8.37 [1.42, 49.44], p = 0.02, I2 = 68%). Both treatments are effective for SD, with similar clinical improvements and patient satisfaction. Micro-needling emerges as the safer option due to its lower risk of PIH. Treatment choice should be tailored to individual patient needs and preferences. Future research should focus on long-term outcomes and patient-reported measures in aesthetic dermatology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40131559What 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.