SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
Efficacy and safety of Q-switched laser combined with intense pulsed light in treating melasma: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Melasma is a common dermatological disorder characterized by hyperpigmented facial patches, which significantly impacting patients' quality of life and imposing substantial economic burdens. Given the multifaceted impact of melasma, there is a pressing need for effective therapeutic strategies. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of combining Q-switched (QS) laser with intense pulsed light (IPL) vs. monotherapy for melasma. Methods: A systematic literature search of relevant databases was conducted to identify controlled trials comparing the combination therapy with monotherapy. Primary outcomes included changes in the Melasma Area and Severity Index (MASI) score and adverse reactions. Secondary outcomes comprised clinical efficacy rate, recurrence rate, and patient satisfaction rate. Data were pooled using a fixed-effects model. Results: A total of 31 studies involving 2,801 patients were included. Results showed that the combination therapy demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in MASI scores than monotherapy (standardized mean difference: 1.20, 95% CI: -1.36 to -1.05; Conclusion: This meta-analysis indicates that Q-switched laser combined with intense pulsed light results in greater objective improvement in melasma than monotherapy, without an increased risk of adverse events. In contrast, patient satisfaction shows no significant improvement, suggesting that patient-reported outcomes should be considered alongside clinician-assessed measures. Additional longitudinal studies are needed to establish sustained efficacy and clarify patient-perceived benefits to further refine clinical protocols. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD420251170319, identifier: CRD420251170319.
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.