ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2025
A Clinical Safety Assessment of Hybrid Fractional Laser Use at Increased Depths for Facial Skin Rejuvenation in Patients Undergoing Rhytidectomy.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hybrid fractional lasers (HFLs) have revolutionized facial laser resurfacing treatments with their dual ablative and non-ablative wavelength technology. Although HFL therapy shows promising results, safety at skin depths beyond 150 μm is debated, particularly for its non-ablative wavelength. Some suggest deeper HFL delivery can enhance skin remodeling. Objectives: To assess the clinical safety of delivering HFL therapy at increased dermal depths up to 425 μm to induce collagen production and improve skin quality in patients undergoing rhytidectomy, and to determine whether this combination increases postoperative complications. Methods: A retrospective review (2017-2022) was conducted on patients undergoing rhytidectomy with or without concurrent intraoperative HFL therapy. Data on demographics, HFL parameters, and postoperative complications were collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Of 169 patients (94.7% female, 97.0% Caucasian, average age: 63.3 years, Fitzpatrick score: 2.7), 62.1% received HFL treatment and 37.9% were controls. Patient characteristics were similar between groups. The average non-ablative laser depth was 355 μm ± 25, with a maximum of 425 μm. In the 12 months post-rhytidectomy, 7.6% of the HFL group experienced complications vs 3.0% in the control group, a non-significant difference ( Conclusions: HFL therapy at depths up to 425 μm may be safe for facial photorejuvenation. Patients with Fitzpatrick skin Types I to IV experienced no adverse effects. Combining HFL with rhytidectomy did not increase complication rates compared to rhytidectomy alone. These findings expand safety parameters for HFL use, optimizing clinical outcomes and long-term success of laser skin resurfacing. Level of Evidence: 3 (Therapeutic).
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.