Trial reportLasers in medical science2025
730-nm, 532-nm and 694-nm laser in the treatment of freckles and solar lentigines (A randomized clinical trial).
Trial report 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of the 730-nm picosecond laser, the 532-nm picosecond laser, and the Q-switched 694-nm nanosecond laser in treating freckles and solar lentigines.
methodsThe randomized clinical trial included 42 participants who met the specific eligibility criteria for freckles and solar lentigines. On each participant's face, three distinct skin areas affected by these conditions were identified and randomly assigned to receive treatment with the 730-nm picosecond laser, the 532-nm picosecond laser, or the Q-switched 694-nm nanosecond laser. Treatments were administered at one-month intervals, with follow-up assessments at 1, 3, and 6 months post-treatment. Evaluation criteria encompassed: (1) the Researchers' Global Aesthetic Improvement Scale (GAIS) scores, (2) the Subjects' Self-Rated Satisfaction (SSS) scores, (3) the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores for pain severity, (4) the Lesion Clearance Rate, (5) numerical analysis of Individual Type Angle (ITA°), and (6) histological analysis. Adverse reactions, including skin edema, erythema, scab formation, pigmentation changes, were meticulously documented throughout the study.
resultsAll 42 subjects completed the treatment and follow-up phases. Significant improvements in skin clearance rates and individual type angle were observed following the three distinct laser treatments (P < 0.05). However, no significant difference were found in the global aesthetic improvement, participant satisfaction, or individual type angle scores across the three laser types (P < 0.05). Notably, there were substantial differences in pain severity scores as measured by the VAS among the three laser treatments (P < 0.05). Additionally, the duration of erythema, edema, and scab resolution varied significantly among the three laser treatments (P < 0.05). Histological analysis revealed minimal vacuolar degeneration in basal cells post 730-nm picosecond laser treatment, moderate vacuolar degeneration following the 532-nm picosecond laser, and extensive continuous vacuolar degeneration in basal cells after Q-switched 694-nm nanosecond laser treatment.
conclusionThe 730-nm picosecond laser, 532-nm picosecond laser, and Q-switched 694-nm nanosecond laser all demonstrate efficacy in treating freckles and solar lentigines. In terms of safety, the 730-nm picosecond laser stands out with less histological damage, suggesting it may be a preferable treatment option for pigmentary conditions in future clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40616673What 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.