Trial reportPhotodermatology, photoimmunology & photomedicine2026
Clinical Efficacy Study of 755 nm Picosecond Laser Combined With 595 nm Pulsed Dye Laser in the Treatment of Port-Wine Stain.
Trial report in Photodermatology, photoimmunology & photomedicine, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPort-wine stain (PWS) is a disfiguring vascular anomaly characterized by persistent cutaneous erythema and progressive tissue hyperplasia. Although pulsed dye laser (PDL) is the first-line treatment and alleviates certain clinical manifestations, incomplete lesion clearance and high recurrence rates persist in some patients, posing significant therapeutic challenges.
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of sequential therapy with a 755 nm picosecond laser (PSL) combined with 595 nm PDL versus 595 nm PDL alone in treating PWS.
methodsThirty-four patients with PWS were enrolled. Lesions were randomly divided into paired subregions (PDL and PDL + PSL) using a subregional control design. Efficacy was assessed through objective and subjective measures: standardized clinical and dermoscopic images were used to quantify visual scores and clearance rates; reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) quantitatively analyzed changes in vascular density and diameter; patient satisfaction and adverse reactions were also evaluated.
resultsThe PSL + PDL group showed significantly greater improvement in visual assessment scores, lesion area clearance, vascular density, vascular diameter, and patient satisfaction compared to the PDL group (all p < 0.05). While no statistically significant difference was observed in adverse event incidence rates between the two treatment modalities (p > 0.05), both regimens exhibited favorable safety profiles.
conclusionThe PSL + PDL regimen shows significantly superior efficacy over PDL alone, thus presenting a promising and advanced therapeutic alternative for PWS treatment.
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.