ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2025
Comparison of the effects of hemoporfin-mediated photodynamic and Vbeam pulsed dye laser in the treatment of port-wine stains: a retrospective analysis.
Article in European journal of medical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Port-wine stains: molecular drivers, translational models, and emerging theragnostic directions.Lasers in medical science · 2026Review
- Adaptive Optimization of Vascular-Targeted Photodynamic Therapy Efficiency Based on Hyperspectral-Photoacoustic Dual-Modality Imaging Feedback.BME frontiers · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe pulsed dye laser (PDL) is widely regarded as the gold standard treatment for port wine stain (PWS); however, its therapeutic efficacy exhibits considerable variability. Recent research indicates that hemoglobin-mediated photodynamic therapy (HMME-PDT) is emerging as a highly promising treatment modality for PWS. This retrospective study aims to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy and safety profiles of HMME-PDT and 595 nm-PDL in the management of PWS.
methodsThis study retrospectively analyzed a total of 850 patients with PWS treated with 595 nm-PDL and 279 patients with PWS treated with HMME-PDT at the Skin Laser Beauty Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University from January 2015 to December 2024.
resultsIn total, the cure rate, the total significant response rate, and the total response rate were 22.22%, 54.12%, and 88.89%, respectively, in the HMME-PDT group, which were obviously higher than those in the 595 nm PDL group (9.65%, 31.29%, and 68.94%, respectively) with the P values as 0.001, 0.001, and 0.001. After total treatments, the different subtype and location had different responses to 595 nm-PDL, the different age and locations had different responses to HMME-PDT. Generally speaking, the therapeutic effect of HMME-PDT was better than that of PDL therapy under the different number of treatments.
conclusionsBoth 595 nm-PDL and HMME-PDT demonstrate significant efficacy in the treatment of PWS. Our single-center retrospective study indicated that HMME-PDT may offer superior efficacy compared to 595 nm-PDL treatment. Further research is warranted to fully elucidate the true value of HMME-PDT and 595 nm-PDL for PWS.
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.