ArticleLasers in surgery and medicine2026
Comparative Evaluation of R134a and HFO-1234ze Cryogen Spray Cooling Using a Mouse Model With Controllable Epidermal Pigmentation.
Article in Lasers in surgery and medicine, 2026. 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesCryogen spray cooling (CSC) is critical for protecting the epidermis during laser dermatologic procedures. The widely used cryogen, R134a, has a high global warming potential (GWP), motivating interest in environmentally favorable alternatives such as HFO-1234ze. This study evaluated whether HFO-1234ze provides epidermal protection comparable to R134a during laser exposure and investigated the mechanistic basis underlying any differences in cooling performance.
methodsLaser-induced epidermal injury in conjunction with two cryogens was assessed in K14-SCF Mc1r
resultsMean hypopigmentation scores did not differ significantly between R134a- and HFO-1234ze-cooled sites across the full range of pigmentation and fluence studied (p = 0.46). Heat-map analysis and regression modeling confirmed that hypopigmentation increased with fluence and darker pigmentation but was independent of cryogen type. Surface temperature measurements using skin phantom revealed that R134a produced more aggressive transient cooling than HFO-1234ze, reaching approximately 10°C lower minimum temperatures. However, numerical modeling of skin cooling using heat flux inferred from phantom measurement showed that this surface advantage decayed rapidly with depth, resulting in ≤ 2°C-3°C differences within the viable epidermis.
conclusionsDespite differences in surface cooling magnitude, R134a and HFO-1234ze provided equivalent epidermal protection under clinically relevant conditions. These findings support HFO-1234ze as an effective, lower-GWP alternative to R134a for CSC in laser dermatologic applications.
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.