ArticleAME case reports2025
Successful treatment of ulerythema ophryogenes with pulsed dye laser: a case report.
Article in AME case reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ulerythema ophryogenes (UO) is a rare cutaneous disorder characterized by inflammatory keratotic papules that primarily affect the face. This clinical case may enrich and provide an interesting literature overview on the laser therapy for UO, which represents a rare skin illness difficult to treat. Case Description: A 25-year-old female patient having an UO family history and who presented a progressive erythema and confluent horny follicular erythematous papules with areas of alopecia around the lateral third of eyebrows without signs of pitted or atrophic scars, which has been evident since childhood, underwent to a single session of dye laser. She was complaining of discomfort in the involved skin areas. The patient had not been taking any medications prior to laser therapy. The use of anaesthetic was avoided. After only one therapy session of dye laser the result was clinically optimal. A visible reduction in roughness and a partial hair regrowth in the treated area were observed at 2 months follow-up after treatment. The horn plugs were no longer evident, and the erythema had subsided. The hairs had become thicker, darker, and more numerous, covering most of the underlying dermatitis. Following the laser procedure, the patient didn't experience complications or severe adverse reactions. Conclusions: Pulsed dye laser treatment appears to be a safe and effective treatment for the erythema and alopecia symptoms associated with this refractory condition.
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.