Trial reportJournal of cosmetic dermatology2025
Nonablative Fractional 1927-nm Laser for Periorbital Rejuvenation: A Prospective, Double-Arm, Open-Label Trial.
Trial report in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dermocosmetics for Periocular Aging: Evidence, Mechanisms, and Integration with Aesthetic Procedures. A Narrative Review.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Review
- Influence of Periorbital Dynamic Rhytides on Surgical Outcomes of Lower Eyelid Blepharoplasty: A Clinical Efficacy Assessment.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Non-ablative Erbium-YAG 2940-nm Fractional Laser Treats Periorbital Static Wrinkles Safely in Fitzpatrick Skin Types III-IV.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundThe 1927-nm nonablative fractional laser is widely used for skin rejuvenation and hyperpigmentation. However, its efficacy and safety for periorbital rejuvenation remain uncertain.
aimsTo assess the effects of the 1927-nm nonablative fractional diode laser on periorbital rejuvenation. PATIENTS/
methodsTwenty participants were randomized into two groups and received three treatments at 2-week (Group A) or 4-week (Group B) intervals. Clinical efficacy was assessed using ANTERA 3D, blinded investigator-rated scores, and subject self-assessments.
resultsBoth group A and group B exhibited statistically significant improvements in L* (color measurement which indicates lightness) and pigmentation score at the end-of-study visit compared to baseline, with group B also achieving statistically significant enhancement in the pores' index and wrinkles' score. Group B showed greater improvement in wrinkles' score compared to group A at the end-of-study visit. The median of Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale assessed by both the physicians and subjects showed improvement, ranging from "improved" to "much improved" at the end-of-study visit. Transient side effects including tenderness, erythema, swelling, and scaling were observed, with the majority resolving within 7 days.
conclusionsThe 1927-nm diode laser is an effective and safe option for periorbital rejuvenation. The 4-week interval treatment appears to be the preferable option due to its superior improvement in the wrinkles' score at the end of the study. The positive changes in skin brightness and the reduction of brown spots represented additional benefits, setting it apart as a notable alternative to other ablative and nonablative fractional lasers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.